Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2004-03-22 Amended 04/ 12/04 ce • Town of Lansing Monday, March 22 , 2004 7 : 15 PM PLANNING BOARD (Working ) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS (•Denotes present) * Nancy Loncto, Chairperson * Tom Ellis * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson * Viola Miller * David Hatfield * Gregg Travis * Brian Ivery (Alt.) Bud Shattuck, Deputy Town Supervisor * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer Public Present David Herrick Vince Mehringer • Barry Kasonic Steve Ruoff General Business : Nancy Loncto opened the meeting at 7 : 15 PM. IMR Public Hearing, Final Site Plan, 131 Woodsedge Drive, Tax Parcel # 37. 1 -2-53 .221 Nancy Loncto declared the Public Meeting opened at 7 : 16 PM. The Public Hearing notice published in the Ithaca Journal on March 13 , 2004 was read aloud. There were no Public comments . Nancy requested comments from the Board Members as she reviewed minutes from the February 09, 2004 meeting with IMR. 1 . All lights to include the existing building will be down lights . 2 . 30 ' setback from the right of way for parking 3 . Drainage Engineered • Amended 04/ 12/04 • Mr. Kasonic stated in their latest submittal it includes the proposed lighting that IMR would like to use. On the revised Site Plan Map they have cut down on the lighting. There are two (2) in the front of the building, one ( 1 ) on the side where there are access doors (70 watt down lights) and one ( 1 ) new pole light (400 watt) at the end of the parking facing back towards the building. The pole light will be similar to the one that is currently there . Lin Davidson stated the end result is when one looks across from Route 34 at the building it should not be a bright as it is now. Larry Sharpsteen inquired if the lights on the existing building were going to be replaced with the same. Lin Davidson made it clear to Mr. Kasonic that the board requested to have the existing lights replaced as well. Mr. Kasonic states he believes there are two (2) on the front of the building, and they can be replaced. Parking Setback Mr. Kasonic states they are in compliance with the setbacks for parking. Identification of Buffers • To date, no plans have been made for landscaping. Lin Davidson states this is an Industrial Park and the board ' s thoughts were to soften the parking area to the North. Lin Davidson requested to see some sort of Landscaping plan. Drainage Viola Miller asked if the drainage had been engineered. Mr. Kasonic states there is a note from Gary Wood on the larger plan that states the Stormwater Detention area was designed to control run off from the entire Industrial Park based on 55 % over all . Larry Sharpsteen advised the members as well as Mr. Kasonic that that design was changed. The original retention pond that was on the West end did not meet the Town ' s requirements and it was redesigned. Part of the retention on the land is now taking place behind the railroad bed. David Herrick confirmed that Larry Sharpsteen' s statement was correct. The detention is located to the East of the property. Lin Davidson asked Mr. Herrick if this complies with the general design of the current Stormwater Regulations . David Herrick recommended to the board to obtain an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. • • Amended 04/ 12/04 • Lin Davidson made a motion to close the Public Hearing at 7 : 50 PM. Larry Sharpsteen seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Nancy Loncto advised Mr. Kasonic the Planning Board ' s next step is to review the comments that were made and have a resolution based on previous minutes and tonight ' s questions . The Code Enforcement Officer will be sending a letter with a list of items that the Planning Board will require from Mr. Kasonic . List: 1 . Permanent Water Quality Plan approved by the Town of Lansing ' s Engineer 2 . Erosion & Sediment Control Plan approved by the Town of Lansing ' s Engineer 3 . Landscaping Plan-Buffers 4 . Lighting replacement identification on existing building. 400 watt will meet Section 901 . 5 Stormwater Presentation, David Herrick, Engineer Consultant for the Town of Lansing Mr. Herrick appeared before the board for a short presentation. Packets of Frequently Asked Question concerning the New Storm Water Program were distributed by Mr. Herrick to all board members. These significant questions/answers from the list were • reviewed by Mr. Herrick. 6. "Larger common plan" in essence covers construction activities that disturb 1 acre or more of soil in the course of completion of the project. Disturbance is clarified in the packet. Disturbance does include anything that takes the existing conditions and modifies it to the point where soil is exposed. This is even applicable to an existing site and requires that you file for coverage under the new Phase II SPEDES permit by the State . Example : Subdivisions where you may have a small 5 lot Subdivision where you ' re disturbing more than 1 acre but in total less than 5 is required to have an Erosion and Sediment control Plan and filed with a Notice of Intent with the NYS DEC but does not necessarily have to have the Post Construction Control practices (water quantity, water quality) . Larry Sharpsteen asked if we had one development and all the lots were reasonably within a quarter of a mile, the development set up, sold off There are 5 different Contractors, each one building on a different lot what are the requirements? Does the Developer before the land is sold have to have the Sediment Control Plan set up and each of the people he sell to have to abide by it? David Herrick explained if we have a small scale residential project with multiple housing Contractors they need to abide by what ever Erosion and Sediment Control Plan was prepared by the Developer. The question was asked by Larry Sharpsteen as to who monitors the Developer to make • sure that he has the Notice of Intent submitted before the Planning Board approves a Subdivision. Amended 04/ 12/04 David Herrick states that The Town of Lansing is called a Municipal Separate Storm • Sewer System, (Population density somewhere in the Town) that qualifies the Town for having to abide by the MS4 designation. Within x many years the Town must prepare Stormwater Management Ordinances that will define the Enforcement and set forth how projects will be handled from the Stormwater Management perspective. The NOI does not need to be filed with the State prior to Subdivision approval . Mr. Herrick states the Town may choose (Town Ordinance) that the Planning Board Chairperson does not sign the Final Plat until the Notice of Intent has been typed up, signed, and delivered to the Code Enforcement Officer also with the State (DEC) . A group (The Genesee Finger Lakes Regional Planning Commission) through the Inter Municipal Organization has approached the Town and offered to help develop Stormwater Management of us. Mr. Herrick and Mr. Platt have met on a couple of occasions with the gentleman that is working on this . The Town Board expects to have a local Law to clarify Storm Water Management to be in place by the last being June of 2005 . Thomas Ellis asked the question if all the plans had to be prepared by a licensed organization that is capable of understanding the new plan. David Herrick explained that the Notice of Intent asked the Operator to clarify who developed the plan. It could be a Soil Scientist, Professional Engineer, or a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Professional . A Site Work Contractor could prepare the plan as long as they have someone on staff that would meet all of the qualifications. All • modifications or updates to plans must be given to the Code Enforcement Officer, also, be at the work site. This should be updated by the Operator/ Contractor to the State DEC . If the Developer sells to a Contractor and is no longer involved in the project, than he must file a letter of termination to NYS . Once that has been completed the case is closed and the responsibility falls in the hands of the Contractor. Mr. Herrick stressed to the members the importance of how plans were developed for infrastructure, construction of the roads and utilities . In the end they become property of the Town. This is where the board will want to look at the greatest amount of erosion and sediment control . 24 . If a Major Subdivision proposes to build quantity or quality practices they are going to want to be permanent features, someone needs to maintain them. The State is saying that Institutional arrangements can be made through Home Owners Association, maintenance by the Municipality or creation of Stormwater Districts . The Town is looking into creating benefit districts that will support the cost of maintaining those facilities . Nancy Loncto requested to know from Mr. Herrick exactly what are the Planning Board ' s responsibilities are in the interim. Mr. Herrick states that the Planning Board is covered by the State ' s general permit. (the SPEDES) . Currently there is no enforcement. • Any further questions or concerns of the board, please feel free to contact David Herrick. Amended 04/ 12/04 • Suggested Changes/Additions : Subdivision Rules & Regulations Viola Miller and Larry Sharpsteen shared the following changes/addition with the board. A detailed outline of how the Planning Board follows through on a Subdivision is needed. 1 . Informal Consideration *This allows the people to express what they have in mind, if it is feasible and can they proceed. This seems to speed things up, also saves the builder money and time. 2 . Sketch Plan Submission *A change should be made to allow more than five (5) days for submission to the Code Enforcement office for submittal to the Planning Board. *Minor Subdivisions should be treated according to the Sketch Plan. Skip the Preliminary and go directly to the Final. 3 . Public Hearing * Change to after Sketch Plan submission, before Preliminary Plat 4. Preliminary Plat * Time consuming, and should not all happen in one ( 1 ) meeting. *The definition for a Minor Subdivision does not coincide with one another in our • Regulations . *Page 4 Section 402 does not agree with Section 502, also on page 16 *Major Subdivision must have at least 2 Public Hearing *Date of Submission should be the 1St date that the Planning Board is presented with it. * Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat *Add in: Engineering Plans must be submitted for Planning Board' s review and the Town ' s Engineer approval at the Developer' s cost. *The road design needs to be turned over to the Town Board for approval prior to the Final Plat. * County 239 must be submitted at this level. *Performance Guarantee- should know cost from the Developer' s Engineer *Add NYS Reality Law *Time Limits-Phases *page 14 under Soils, change from Planning Board to the Health Department *page 15 , Drainage, reference to the Stormwater Ordinance needs to be made. *page 14, Topography 5 foot for slopes of less than 5 %, 10 foot for slopes of more. • *page 17, Drainage, add Stormwater Ordinance Amended 04/ 12/04 • *page 17, change shall be approved to must be approved. *page 21 , G, need to check w/Town Board. ? 55 changed to 80 . Also, look at the lot closer. Note added by Richard Platt, Town wants Hammerheads, not Cul-de-sacs. *page 24, Lots must be rewritten *page 29, Drainage, Retention Ponds or other effective measures should be added. *Recommend to put the different zones in the Rules and Regulations for reference . *page 29, Water & Sewer, Lighting should be added. 5 . Final Plat *Page 8 , Section 404 paragraph A, the number of days should be changed to 10 working days . *Must at least have 2 Public Hearings *Page 11 , once the Developer has filed with the County Clerk, the Code Enforcement Office must be notified. Flaglots *Add design standards after area requirements Checklist • Clarify checklist. Is it for the Planning Board, the Developer or for the Code Enforcement Office? If the Planning Board uses Article 4, the procedure is set out well. If a checklist is needed to give to the Code Enforcement Office for the Developer, if based on Article 4 and then, A, B , C etc . of each particular section it would be bullet proof 1 Lot Subdivisions It was suggested that a Planner write a section on 1 Lot Subdivisions . 1 Lot subdivisions are handled so much differently. It was recommend to replace the Minor Subdivision in Appendix 1 with 1 Lot Subdivisions. Boundary Change Need definition. Approval of March 8 , 2004 Minutes Larry Sharpsteen made a motion to accept the minutes as submitted. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Next Working Meeting, April 26, 2004 Continue discussion on Flag Lots and Application process. • Lin Davidson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9 : 45 PM. Gregg Travis seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. • Town of Lansing Monday, March 22 , 2004 7 : 15 PM PLANNING BOARD (Working ) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ('Denotes present) * Nancy Loncto, Chairperson * Tom Ellis * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson * Viola Miller * David Hatfield * Gregg Travis * Brian Ivery (Alt.) Bud Shattuck, Deputy Town Supervisor * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer Public Present David Herrick Vince Mehringer • Barry Kasonic Steve Ruoff General Business : Nancy Loncto opened the meeting at 7 : 15 PM. IMR Public Hearing, Final Site Plan, 131 Woodsedge Drive, Tax Parcel # 37. 1 -2-53 .221 Nancy Loncto declared the Public Meeting opened at 7 : 16 PM. The Public Hearing notice published in the Ithaca Journal on March 13 , 2004 was read aloud. There were no Public comments . Nancy requested comments from the Board Members as she reviewed minutes from the February 09, 2004 meeting with IMR. 1 . All lights to include the existing building will be down lights . 2 . 30 ' setback from the right of way for parking 3 . Drainage Engineered • • Mr. Kasonic stated in their latest submittal it includes the proposed lighting that IMR would like to use. On the revised Site Plan Map they have cut down on the lighting. There are two (2) in the front of the building, one ( 1 ) on the side where there are access doors (70 watt down lights) and one ( 1 ) new pole light (400 watt) at the end of the parking facing back towards the building. The pole light will be similar to the one that is currently there. Lin Davidson stated the end result is when one looks across from Route 34 at the building it should not be a bright as it is now . Larry Sharpsteen inquired if the lights on the existing building were going to be replaced with the same. Lin Davidson made it clear to Mr. Kasonic that the board requested to have the existing lights replaced as well . Mr. Kasonic states he believes there are two (2) on the front of the building, and they can be replaced. Parking Setback Mr. Kasonic states they are in compliance with the setbacks for parking. Identification of Buffers • To date, no plans have been made for landscaping. Lin Davidson states this is an Industrial Park and the board' s thoughts were to soften the parking area to the North. Lin Davidson requested to see some sort of Landscaping plan. Drainage Viola Miller asked if the drainage had been engineered. Mr. Kasonic states there is a note from Gary Wood on the larger plan that states the Stormwater Detention area was designed to control run off from the entire Industrial Park based on 55 % over all . Larry Sharpsteen advised the members as well as Mr. Kasonic that that design was changed. The original retention pond that was on the West end did not meet the Town ' s requirements and it was redesigned. Part of the retention on the land is now taking place behind the railroad bed. David Herrick confirmed that Larry Sharpsteen ' s statement was correct. The detention is located to the East of the property. Lin Davidson asked Mr. Herrick if this complies with the general design of the current Stormwater Regulations . David Herrick recommended to the board to obtain an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. • Lin Davidson made a motion to close the Public Hearing at 7 : 50 PM . Larry Sharpsteen • seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Nancy Loncto advised Mr. Kasonic the Planning Board ' s next step is to review the comments that were made and have a resolution based on previous minutes and tonight ' s questions . The Code Enforcement Officer will be sending a letter with a list of items that the Planning Board will require from Mr. Kasonic . List : 1 . Permanent Water Quality Plan approved by the Town of Lansing ' s Engineer 2 . Erosion & Sediment Control Plan approved by the Town of Lansing ' s Engineer 3 . Landscaping Plan-Buffers 4 . Lighting replacement identification on existing building. 400 watt will meet Section 901 . 5 Stormwater Presentation, David Herrick, Engineer Consultant for the Town of Lansing Mr. Herrick appeared before the board for a short presentation. Packets of Frequently Asked Question concerning the New Storm Water Program were distributed by Mr. Herrick to all board members. These significant questions/answers from the list were • reviewed by Mr. Herrick. 6. "Larger common plan" in essence covers construction activities that disturb 1 acre or more of soil in the course of completion of the project. Disturbance is clarified in the packet. Disturbance does include anything that takes the existing conditions and modifies it to the point where soil is exposed. This is even applicable to an existing site and requires that you file for coverage under the new Phase II SPEDES permit by the State. Example : Subdivisions where you may have a small 5 lot Subdivision where you 're disturbing more than 1 acre but in total less than 5 is required to have an Erosion and Sediment control Plan and filed with a Notice of Intent with the NYS DEC but does not necessarily have to have the Post Construction Control practices (water quantity, water quality) . Larry Sharpsteen asked if we had one development and all the lots were reasonably within a quarter of a mile, the development set up, sold off There are 5 different Contractors, each one building on a different lot what are the requirements? Does the Developer before the land is sold have to have the Sediment Control Plan set up and each of the people he sell to have to abide by it? David Herrick explained if we have a small scale residential project with multiple housing Contractors they need to abide by what ever Erosion and Sediment Control Plan was prepared by the Developer. The question was asked by Larry Sharpsteen as to who patrols the Developer to make • sure that he has the Notice of Intent submitted before the Planning Board approves a Subdivision. David Herrick states that The Town of Lansing is called a Municipal Separate Storm • Sewer System, (Population density somewhere in the Town) that qualifies the Town for having to abide by the MS4 designation. Within x many years the Town must prepare Stormwater Management Ordinances that will define the Enforcement and set forth how projects will be handled from the Stormwater Management perspective. The NOI does not need to be filed with the State prior to Subdivision approval . Mr. Herrick states the Town may choose (Town Ordinance) that the Planning Board Chairperson does not sign the Final Plat until the Notice of Intent has been typed up, signed, and delivered to the Code Enforcement Officer also with the State (DEC) . A group (The Genesee Finger Lakes Regional Planning Commission) through the Inter Municipal Organization has approached the Town and offered to help develop Stormwater Management of us. Mr. Herrick and Mr. Platt have met on a couple of occasions with the gentleman that is working on this . The Town Board expects to have a local Law to clarify Storm Water Management to be in place by the last being June of 2005 . Thomas Ellis asked the question if all the plans had to be prepared by a licensed organization that is capable of understanding the new plan. David Herrick explained that the Notice of Intent asked the Operator to clarify who developed the plan. It could be a Soil Scientist, Professional Engineer, or a Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Professional . A Site Work Contractor could prepare the plan as long as they have someone on staff that would meet all of the qualifications . All • modifications or updates to plans must be given to the Code Enforcement Officer, also, be at the work site. This should be updated by the Operator/ Contractor to the State DEC . If the Developer sells to a Contractor and is no longer involved in the project, than he must file a letter of termination to NYS . Once that has been completed the case is closed and the responsibility falls in the hands of the Contractor. Mr. Herrick stressed to the members the importance of how plans were developed for infrastructure, construction of the roads and utilities . In the end they become property of the Town. This is where the board will want to look at the greatest amount of erosion and sediment control. 24 . If a Major Subdivision proposes to build quantity or quality practices they are going to want to be permanent features, someone needs to maintain them. The State is saying that Institutional arrangements can be made through Home Owners Association, maintenance by the Municipality or creation of Stormwater Districts . The Town is looking into creating benefit districts that will support the cost of maintaining those facilities. Nancy Loncto requested to know from Mr. Herrick exactly what are the Planning Board ' s responsibilities are in the interim. Mr. Herrick states that the Planning Board is covered by the State ' s general permit. (the SPEDES) . Currently there is no enforcement. • Any further questions or concerns of the board, please feel free to contact David Herrick. . Suggested Changes/Additions : Subdivision Rules & Regulations Viola Miller and Larry Sharpsteen shared the following changes/addition with the board. A detailed outline of how the Planning Board follows through on a Subdivision is needed. 1 . Informal Consideration *This allows the people to express what they have in mind, if it is feasible and can they proceed. This seems to speed things up, also saves the builder money and time. 2 . Sketch Plan Submission *A change should be made to allow more than five (5) days for submission to the Code Enforcement office for submittal to the Planning Board. *Minor Subdivisions should be treated according to the Sketch Plan. Skip the Preliminary and go directly to the Final . 3 . Public Hearing * Change to after Sketch Plan submission, before Preliminary Plat 4. Preliminary Plat * Time consuming, and should not all happen in one ( 1 ) meeting. *The definition for a Minor Subdivision does not coincide with one another in our • Regulations. *Page 4 Section 402 does not agree with Section 502 , also on page 16 *Major Subdivision must have at least 2 Public Hearing *Date of Submission should be the 1st date that the Planning Board is presented with it. * Major Subdivision Preliminary Plat *Add in: Engineering Plans must be submitted for Planning Board' s review and the Town' s Engineer approval at the Developer' s cost. *The road design needs to be turned over to the Town Board for approval prior to the Final Plat. * County 239 must be submitted at this level. *Performance Guarantee- should know cost from the Developer' s Engineer *Add NYS Reality Law *Time Limits-Phases *page 14 under Soils, change from Planning Board to the Health Department *page 15 , Drainage, reference to the Stormwater Ordinance needs to be made. *page 14, Topography 5 foot for slopes of less than 5 %, 10 foot for slopes of more. • *page 17, Drainage, add Stormwater Ordinance *page 17, change shall be approved to must be approved. • *page 21 , G, need to check w/Town Board. ? 55 changed to 80 . Also , look at the lot closer. Note added by Richard Platt, Town wants Hammerheads, not Cul-de-sacs . *page 24, Lots must be rewritten *page 29, Drainage, Retention Ponds or other effective measures should be added. *Recommend to put the different zones in the Rules and Regulations for reference . *page 29, Water & Sewer, Lighting should be added. 5 . Final Plat *Page 8 , Section 404 paragraph A, the number of days should be changed to 10 working days . *Must at least have 2 Public Hearings *Page 11 , once the Developer has filed with the County Clerk, the Code Enforcement Office must be notified. Flaglots *Add design standards after area requirements Checklist Clarify checklist. Is it for the Planning Board, the Developer or for the Code Enforcement • Office? If the Planning Board uses Article 4, the procedure is set out well . If a checklist is needed to give to the Code Enforcement Office for the Developer, if based on Article 4 and then, A, B , C etc . of each particular section it would be bullet proof 1 Lot Subdivisions It was suggested that a Planner write a section on 1 Lot Subdivisions . 1 Lot subdivisions are handled so much differently. It was recommend to replace the Minor Subdivision in Appendix 1 with 1 Lot Subdivisions. Boundary Change Need definition. Approval of March 8, 2004 Minutes Larry Sharpsteen made a motion to accept the minutes as submitted. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Next Working Meeting, April 26, 2004 Continue discussion on Flag Lots and Application process . • Lin Davidson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9 :45 PM. Gregg Travis seconded. VOTE : ALL IN FAVOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Vt5 M-O ti 5 ( la 7;Z1 6 `-F ? LAO./ ‘a)U 1/41C e- PkeRSa •1 C/ 70? y FA , R1 i n. ‘.` ' tcx. t19-r5 N't- c mow c, k r r-C c2 K 10