Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995-11-13 To Seneca Falls To Auburn Kit�M^ [ i`J A `i1 '� c Y`r ♦ t N -I- OWN of LANSING `F ll v "�'� -: bFaai .0 - . Ax Home of Industry, Agriculture and Scenic Beauty " ja r ':' ` *1 r v n 4f :7" ltt' . it 8C' Q ` ‘ r„ . rti. . Ser 1. rs .:^✓ .--:"?... .S . t4s1 .. V ,,r; riY l �A�t S } p S Town of Lansing v .i " E .�"mei " N pv3,` ' ORDINANCE DEPT. i 11 1 w NI W9 Box 186 t �1 r,, t Lansing, New York 14882 i '^ *` ` To Ithaca TOWN OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD DATE : 11 / 13 / 95 TIME : 00 I a 30pInf9 ® PLACE : . Lansing Town Hall - Board Room Miip AGENDA L3 7 : 30pm - Open Meeting - Approve October Minutes General Business 8 : 00pm - Public Hearing Novalane Subdivision ( 36 . - 1 - 17 ) 8 : 30pm - Anything else that may comes before the board , then Resume work on Town maps using Comprehensive Plans Maps 9 TOWN OF LANSING Planning Board Monday, November 13, 1995; 7: 30 p . m. ® PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS (* Denotes present) * Jackie Baker Cheryl Nickel * Lin Davidson * Larry Sharpsteen, Chair Brad Griffin * Robert Todd * Viola Miller Al White * Larry Tvaroha, Town Councilman * George Totman, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer PUBLIC PRESENT Albert and Patricia Brault 153 Reach Run, Ithaca, NY Ron Brucker 74 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Chien Cheng 54 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Ed Hallberg 300 East Upland Road, Ithaca, NY Leo Mahool 18 1 / 2 Ladoga Park, Lansing, NY Susan Markowitz 179 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Frances Ramin 114 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Jane Richards 89 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Steve Sangren 64 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Richard Schuler 2 Captain' s Walk, Ithaca, NY • Scott Steeber and Carol Chaplin 84 Eastlake Road, Ithaca, NY Charles Tallman 317 Richard Place, Ithaca, NY Marshall Volbrecht 46 Drake Road, Lansing, NY BOUNDARY CHANGE / FLAGLOT, Ed Hallberg, Cayuga Lake Highlands Ed Hallberg appeared before the Planning Board requesting approval of a boundary change of a parcel within the Cayuga Lake Highlands subdivision. When the entire parcel was original purchased by the developers, a small parcel ( 150 feet x 170 feet) in the south west corner on Teeter Road, was not a part of the package . The owners of that parcel negotiated with the Health Department to design a septic plan that would function on this small parcel . The adjacent property owners, Dr. and Mrs . Tuddenham, and the Cayuga Lake Highlands developers became concerned as to what would be developed on this lot. The developers, therefore, decided to purchase that corner lot. To make the best use of the parcel, they are proposing to: combine a 70-foot+ section with lot #25 (to the east); provide a 30-foot access to lot #26 (to the north); and sell the remaining 50-foot section to the Tuddenham's (to the west) . By providing road frontage access to Teeter Road, lot #26 will be better served . Lin Davidson made a motion to approve the boundary change / flaglot as presented; Cheryl Nickel seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Review of Minutes from Meeting held October 9, 1995 Jackie Baker made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted; Robert Todd seconded . o ed . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 2 Monday, November 13, 1995 Review of Minutes from Meeting held October 23, 1995 II Robert Todd made a motion to approve the minutes as submitted; Lin Davidson seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Economic Development Survey Cheryl has developed an Economic Development Survey to be mailed to Tompkins County business leaders and business owners that may be interested in what is going on in Lansing. Questions included on the survey will relate to what would make an area attractive for a business to move into. The feedback that Cheryl is hoping to gain from the survey is whether or not the Town of Lansing is moving in the right direction with the planning for future development. This information will also be relayed to the Town Board to support the planning. At this point, the survey is not in final form. Cheryl hoped to have feedback from the Planning Board members in the near future in order to complete the survey. A copy of the survey was distributed to each board member for their review and input. PUBLIC HEARING, Novalane Subdivision, East Shore Drive, Tax Map #36.4-17 Larry Sharpsteen read the public notice, opened the public hearing at 8:00 p .m., and invited questions from the public. Larry clearly explained to those present that this public hearing specifically relates to the proposed three lots at the extreme northwest edge of the Novalane Subdivision, which will be accessed from Eastlake Road. William Albern presented a drawing of the approved sketch plan for development of the entire parcel . He explained that the present development will only be the three lake-side lots to be accessed from Eastlake Road. At some point in the future, when the developers wish to proceed with the development of the upper parcel, the road from East Shore Drive and the connector road to Eastlake and Reach Run will be developed. The average size of the apprpved sketchplan lots are approximately the same size as Lake Watch lots, and just a little smaller than the Eastlake lots. If and when the owners wish to develop the upper parcel, they will need to appear before the Planning Board for final approval. How will these lots be accessed ? William Albern explained that the three lots will be flaglots accessed via private driveways off the end of Eastlake Road. There is no through road to Lake Watch. Will Eastlake Road need to be extended ? There is about 40 feet beyond the public access area which will have to be paved. Concerned about people continuing to drive to the end of the Eastlake Road "gawking " and turning around on the last parcel. Will anything be done to improve turnaround conditions there ? Larry Sharpsteen stated that this will not be a continuation of the road, instead it will be a private driveway. Larry Tvaroha stated that the Town Board can look into this concern as well. Mr. Albern stated that since the developers will have their equipment in the near vicinity, its likely that they would be willing to use their equipment to work on improving this situation. What are the restrictions for these lots ? Mr. Albern stated that the covenants were submitted with the sketch plan. These covenants are not legally binding, and the Planning Board cannot enforce them; but, the Planning Board can make strong recommendations to the developers . Mr. Albern stated that the developers have shown an intention of upholding these covenants by submitting them for review with the sketch plan proposal. Larry . - .CI ` -14.Y1c» Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 3 Monday, November 13, 1995 Sharpsteen again reminded everyone that this public hearing is to deal only with the proposed three lake-side lots. How long are the covenants valid ? Larry Sharpsteen stated that as a general rule deed restrictions and covenants are upheld for approximately 20 years . Both Cheryl and Viola disagreed stating that if the restrictions are written into the deed, they are indefinitely valid . Viola stated that developers are not required to include covenants and deed restrictions in their proposals, but most have been willing to share them with the Planning Board and the public as has Novalane . Who are the developers and where are they from ? Mr. Albern stated that the heirs to the Lane estate are the developers: Terry Hammond is a nephew from Syracuse; Jim Hammond is a nephew from Ohio; and Michael Novak. The mother of one of these nephews may move onto one of the three lots. Was that property designated as 'forever wild ? " Larry Sharpsteen stated that there is no document specifying this to be forever wild. Cheryl commented that she had been told that when she purchased the Eastlake development. Several other property owners surrounding Novalane also commented that they had heard that that land was to be forever wild . How does the Planning Board receive the information it needs in order to make sure that a development is being developed in a manner that is consistent with the neighborhood ? Larry Sharpsteen stated that that information is requested from the developer. A copy of the covenants is also requested to be submitted with the proposal . Only the subdivision or property is reviewed, not each individual home or building within that development. Once a lot is sold, what control does the Planning Board have over what is built on the lot ? George Totman stated that covenants and deed restrictions basically tell the property owner what can and can't be built on the lot. Larry Sharpsteen added that the covenants submitted for the entire Novalane sketchplan also apply to the three lots under consideration at this public hearing. What is the difference between a major and a minor subdivision ? Larry Sharpsteen stated that if there are no new roads or utilities and less than five lots, than it is considered a minor subdivision. These three lots will be hooking onto the utilities coming from Eastlake. Can this developer continue to develop this parcel three lots at a time ? Viola stated that once the developer proposes developing a fourth lot from the parcel, then a full plan needs to be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Board for the remainder of the parcel . George Totman added that in order to build a road, plans for development of the entire parcel needs to be submitted . Does that change if the property is purchased by a new owner ? Larry Sharpsteen stated that a new owner would not change the fact that a plan would need to be submitted for any future subdivision of the remaining parcel . He further stated that for this project it is possible for the developer to sell two lots with access directly onto Route 34, again because no new utilities or roads are involved . Other than that, no further development can take place without an indepth review of the development plans for the remainder of the parcel including drainage, roads, and property layout. There are controls in place for the Planning Board to use, such as : number of lots, size of the lots, whether new utilities are required, whether a new road is required, the length of the road, and whether it is to be a private or town road . What would prevent a property owner from putting in a 800 square foot home ? Mr. Albern stated that the covenants require a minimum square footage of 2,500 feet per home. What are the dimensions of the lots ? Mr. Albern responded that they are approximately 170 x 320 each . If this subdivision is approved tonight, how soon can the development begin ? George Totman Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 4 Monday, November 13, 1995 answered that the developers will need to prepare a final map for signature by the Planning Board before they receive final approval . Mr. Albern indicated that the owners were hoping • to begin some of the drainage work this winter as , well as possibly the sale of the lots. Actual building on the lots most likely won' t take place until the spring. On the map mailed out there appears to be a gap between lot #3 in Novalane and lot #64 in Lake Watch . Mr. Albern stated that that is a mistake in the way it was hand-drawn in. Those two lots abut each other; there is no gap . How long is the private road ? Mr. Albern stated that the private drive will be approximately 350 feet + / - long to get to the third lot (farthest to the north) . What was involved in the drainage study ? Mr. Albern stated that a complete drainage study was conducted for the entire parcel as per the sketch plan. This drainage study was reviewed by the Town Engineer. Larry Sharpsteen added that any new runoff that will be caused by the subdivision will be handled within that subdivision and not be dumped onto either of the two adjoining subdivisions. What is the 10 foot drainage easement between Novalane and Eastlake ? Cheryl stated that along the northern boundary of Eastlake there is an existing 10-foot drainage easement. Mr. Albern indicated that along the southern boundary of Novalane another 10-foot drainage easement will be developed . Legally the two easements could not be combined, therefore, each of the subdivisions will have their own drainage easement. Will the three lots have to maintain the drainage ways on their properties themselves ? Mr. Albern stated that since the drainage for these three lots will not be on public access, the property owners will be responsible for the maintenance of those drainage ways. This is specifically addressed in the covenants. What about the drainage onto the railroad ? Mr. Albern stated that there are culverts already in place to handle the drainage to the railroad . The developers may have to clean the culverts, but the culverts are in place. Mr. Albern commented that the original proposal for this entire parcel was for 37 lots, whereas now the entire proposal is for 31 lots. The total acreage is 39 acres . Larry Sharpsteen stated that Mr. Albern would be willing to continue discussion on the proposed future development of the remainder of the parcel after the public hearing . Cheryl commented that copies of the letters that were written concerning this proposal were given to the developers for their review. Robert Todd made a motion to close the public hearing at 8:45 p .m.; Lin Davidson seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Viola Miller made a motion to approve this three-lot subdivision as presented with the provisions for drainage for future development of the property above and with the covenants and restrictions submitted; Lin Davidson seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY EXECUTIVE SESSION Cheryl Nickel made a motion to move into Executive Session to discuss background and legal information; Viola Miller seconded. VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY The Planning Board was in Executive Session from 8:50 - 9 :20 p .m. Town of Lansing Planning Board Page 5 Monday, November 13, 1995 ® Zoning The Planning Board began discussing the option and feasibility of designating zoning for the Town Center District before completing the zoning project for the entire town. Larry Sharpsteen questioned Larry Tvaroha as to the possible timeframe for a decision from the Town Board on creating such a district. Larry Tvaroha stated that it would depend upon the response from the town. He felt the educational process would need to be initiated before any decisions could be made. Cheryl suggested the possibility of conducting neighborhood meetings rather than town meetings to inform the public. She felt that the issues specific to those neighborhoods could be better addressed using this forum. Others agreed . The Planning Board defined the specific boundaries of the Town Center District on a map, and reviewed the land use activities as previously reviewed by this board . Larry Tvaroha recommended that Tom Neiderkorn attend the joint meeting of the Town and Planning Boards to review the current Site Plan Review policy. This discussion will also cover current standards, definitions, what is working, etc. Lin Davidson made a motion to adjourn this meeting; Robert Todd seconded . VOTE: ALL IN FAVOR; MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY This meeting was closed at 10: 15 p . m. ® Submitted by Michelle Eastman The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 27, 1995, at 7:30 p. m .