Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-06-26 • Townf o Lansing Monday, June 26 , 2006 7 : 15 PM PLANNING BOARD PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ('Denotes present) * Nancy Loncto, Chairperson * Tom Ellis * Larry Sharpsteen * Lin Davidson * Viola Miller David Hatfield Brian Ivery * Matthew Besemer, Town Board Liaison * Richard Platt, Zoning and Code Enforcement Officer * David Herrick, P.E. Town of Lansing Engineer Public Present John O ' Connor Timothy Buhl, P. E. Darby Kiley • Greg Lawrence Thomas Besemer Herb Beckwith Linda Beckwith General Business Nancy Loncto called the Planning Board Meeting to order at 7 : 17 PM. Ms. Loncto requested if there were any concerns/suggestion from the Public Present. There were none . Approval/Denial pp ental of June 12, 2006 Minutes Thomas Ellis made a motion to approve the minutes as presented. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen - Abstained MOTION CARRIED. Stormwater Workshop Darby Kiley brought to the board's attention an upcoming Stormwater Workshop being given by • Ellen Hahn of the DEC, at the Cooperative Extension Bldg on Wednesday, June 28th from 4:30 PM to 6:30PM.. Ms. Kiely encourage all members to attend. Public Hearing -Tilley Enterprises, Inc. - II1 (Flag) Lot Subdivision,on, 2669 North Triphammer Road, Tax Parcel # 44.-1 -2 Nancy Loncto, Chairperson opened the Public Hearing at 7 :20 PM and read the Legal Notice published in The Ithaca Journal. Ms . Loncto asked for Public comments, there were none at this time. Larry Sharpsteen made a motion to leave the Public Hearing open and continue business. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen Aye MOTION CARRIED . II Thomas Ellis made a motion to close the Public Hearing at 8 :25 Pm. Lin Davidson seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye • Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen - Aye MOTION CARRIED . Lin Davidson completed the SEQR. Lin Davidson made a motion to declare a negative declaration. Larry Sharpsteen seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen - 'Aye MOTION CARRIED . Viola Miller made a motion to accept the 1 Flag Lot Subdivision as presented. Larry Sharpsteen seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye • MOTION CARRIED Larry Sharpsteen - Aye • Drake Road Subdivision, Revised Sketch Plan, Parcel # 35:3-13.12 Timothy Buhl, P .E. appeared before the Planning Board with a handout of his responses (in red) to David Herrick ' s concerns. Drake Road Subdivision — Sketch Plan 1 . Stormwater Management: a . Gradingswale- As portrayed,ed y , the s e capturing runoff from lots 6 and 7 is immediately at the top of a very steep slope. It would be preferable to capture only rooftop and driveway runoff than to risk disturbing this slope during construction, or introducing concentrated runoff to it in the long term. Ther g ailing plan will be moth aed to reflect this re illl .1' .fi request. b . Hydrology/ Hydraulics - We received no updated hydrologic report, so we cannot evaluate if the practice identified provides sufficient controls. New computations and revised Hydrology / Hydraulics forthcoming, to be added top lan sheets entitled such. c . Erosion and Sediment Control : • Provide more detail on construction sequencing. • If the houses will be developed separately, they will need a stand-alone sequence. • Will the stormwater pond be used during construction as a sediment trap, and if so when will sediment be removed? • The requested detail is being added to the plans, including the stand-alone sequence for the house lots. The usage of the stormwater pond (and sediment removal) will be detailed in the maintenance section of Stormwater Management Report. d . Permanent Stormwater Management: • Insufficient design information is available regarding retention area sizing and routing. This information is being added to the plans, along with the pond profile & sections. • The contours provided suggest that the pond does not conform to the geometry guidelines and requirements set forth in the "New York State Stormwater Management Design Manual" as follows : Minimum Length to Width Ratio of 1 . 5 : 1 (Required) To be checked and detailed. Long Flow path (design guidance) To be checked and detailed. Irregular Geometry (Design Guidance) To be checked and detailed. Pond Buffer (Required) This item will be added to the plans. e. General Format: • Some referenced documents are currently out of date including : The 1997 "Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control" and TOG 5 . 1 . 10 have been replaced with a 2006 document available on DEC ' s web site. • The SWPPP has been modified to incorporate references to the August 2005 NY ® Standards & Specifications for Erosion rind Sedimentation Control complete with corresponding Appendices. The TOGS reference has been eliminated. The "Reducing the Impacts . . . " document 1S also out of date. This document is still referenced and is in circulation as per the following DEC website link. http://www. dec.slate.ity.us/website/dow/toolbox/index.html Mr. Buhl indicated that by the next Planning Boardl Meeting (July 10, 2006), he will have everything in order to meet Mr. Herrick' s satisfaction. Thomas Ellis made a motion to accept this as the "final run" for the Preliminary Plat. Larry Sharpsteen seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Abstained Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen =� Aye MOTION CARRIED . North Triphammer Multi Use Subdivision, Revised Sketch Plan, Parcel # 37.1 - . 6-3362 Timothy Buhl, P.E. appeared before the Planning Board with a revised Sketch. Mr. Buhl explained the he has eliminated the 2nd public road and replaced it with a gated emergency access driveway. An allowance has been made for the future connector road on the South end of the property. In the Multi-Family section there will be a private loop road with a private access drive Ting into it. The private access drive with be gated and used only for emergency vehicles. To date, Mr. Buhl is waiting for comments from John Lampman at the Tompkins County Highway Department. An additional Building in the Southwest comer was added to increase the density for if/ when Public Sewer comes in. In addition, it will compensate for the 60' right of way strip given to the Town. Viola Miller questioned who would be responsible for building the road to the south in the 60' right of way. After further discussion it was decided that Mathew Besemer would check with the Town Board and Richard Platt will check with Guy Krogh. David Herrick brought to the boards attention that in the "ast projects, there has been P on a clause for financial obligations with regards to roads. Mr. Herrick thither stated that it is important that the Town make sure that the lands that are proposed are set aside for a municipal right of way, stay that way. Larry Sharpsteen inquired from David Herrick if the drainage information on the Sketch was at a point where the Planning Board could proceed to a Public1Hearing. • David Herrick indicated he had previouslycommented on the location of the retention areas, and he • had asked Timothy Buhl to confirm that all the lands that are developed can get into one of the several areas that are proposed. The principle focus area would be the Southern lots. Those lots would need access to a facility before being discharged. Timothy Buhl advised Mr. Herrick that he did add 3rd retention area. Richard Platt expressed a concern that adjacent property owner John Young had with regards to removal of large trees in the Northwest corner. Timothy Buhl explained that they must take some of the trees out and go with the lowest spot there is . Mr. Buhl indicated that there is a possibility that the retention pond could be shifted to the South a bit. Larry Sharpsteen made a motion to accept the Sketch Plan submitted and classify this as a Major Subdivision. Lin Davidson seconded VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — ,Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen — Aye MOTION CARRIED . • Cayuga WaySubdivision, Revised Sketch Plan, Grandview Drive, Parcel # (s) 40.-3-28.2 & 28.1 Timothy Buhl appeared before the Planning Board with a, revised Sketch. Mr. Buhl states he has reduced the Plat Plan by one lot, for a total of 17 lots and the retention area grew quite a lot. Barden Homes has sent a letter to the Town advising that they will accept Mr. Buhl's layout, however, they have requested that Mr. O'Connor change the turn around/further extension to be more along the property lines. Members of the board had concerns with the 90 degree to n/T at the bottom of the road. This could create maintenance problems for the Highway Department, as well as problems for the Fire Department. The Planning Board suggested that Mr. Buhl work directly with Jack French and Scott Purcell regarding the road. Below is a copy of Timothy Buhl ' s responses (in red) to David Herrick ' s concerns . Cayuga Way Subdivision — Sketch Plan Highway and Water System: a . The proposed road configuration requires centerline slopes in excess of 10%. Refer to the centerline profile for Road A. The Engineer must indicate how the grading can be modified to mitigate this condition. Roadway centerline slopes up to 12% are allowed for local roads according to the Town Ordinances. The direct perpendicular slope actually minimizes grading, as side cuts and fills • are eliminated. We do not feel that further mitigation is required. b . The Engineer should contact us to coordinate the temporary use of the Town' s booster station • constructed in Pheasant Meadow and future connections to a higher pressure tank grid. As mentioned in previous correspondence the Town is interested in a connection from the tank site to the main proposed on Grandview Drive. The use of the Town 's booster station is anticipated for this project, and we will co-ordinate with the Town engineer in this regard. We also have no problem in working to make a new water main tank site connection, and will assist with easements as necessary. c. The re-configured lot layout along Placid Terrace in the Lakeview Subdivision will require agreements that are likely critical to completing a through street. It is recommended that these agreements be drafted now and executed by all parties . We discourage adding the completion of this step as a condition to any Planning Board approval. We have already provided the Town with a letter of understanding/agreement from the owners of the Lakeview Subdivision in this regard. If further agreements are necessary at this time, we need to be aware of any particulars that must be covered to cover any Town concerns. Please advise. d . A copy of a sealed boundary and topographic survey must be submitted with any subsequent plans. This is understood and in progress. It was felt thatcompletion of the design and preliminary approvals were necessary prior to the surveyor preparing the final plat map. The original boundary and topo survey drawings will be provided by the owner. . e . The alterations within the Lakeview Subdivision may require additional Planning Board action on previous approvals granted that project. We understand that the Planning Board will have to review the minor modifications made to the Lakeview project; in that no new lots were created and the changes were done to accommodate the Planning Bboard's desire for eliminating dead end streets, we do not anticipate a lengthy review process. 1 . Stormwater Management: a . Hydrologic Calculations: The drainage areas provided in the report do not 'include off-site runoff; and it is unclear from the plans provided how much area this may include. In review of the plan, quantifiable off--site runoff appears to be from the Mass! property to the West as part of a small parcel that was inadvertently eliminated in the postdev hydrologic drawing. This can be represented as off-site drainage on the drawing with an account for CFS which will be adequately handled by the PostDev diversion swale that runs on the Northern edge of the property. Please clarify this a bit further with Dave. • The drainage analysis includes two design points (Design points 1 and 2). Although off-site runoff needs to be included, the drainage boundaries for the Post-Developed condition appear to be otherwise correct. However, in the Pre-Developed condition, the drainage area to Design Point 2 is incorrect, as much of this drainage area actually appears to flow to the east, with at least some runoff flowing toward the swale behind lot 32 of the adjoining property. • We believe the PreDev delineation is correct for this site. Runoff from the existing Bland development to the South is addressed by existing road ditches. Runoff from the West, r. • tion northwest and north do not impact the proposed Cayuga Way site with the exception from • p the Massi property as discussed above. The drainage area to design point 2 flows froin southwest to northeast which is represented as a design point, or, a component of the time of concentration (longest flowpath)for this subcatchment and, consequently a summation of runoff from this system. This runoff will be attenuated under Postiev conditions through a series of interceptor swales and drains to the retention„pond. As such, the discrepancy here is unclear. We will attempt to clarify this with the Town Engineer. • Site Layout and Grading: • In a few areas, the site grading is not very clear. An example is the swale between lots 17 and 18, where the contours do not appear to tie in to existing contours. The reviewer must be reviewing the original sketch plant drawings, as there is no longer a lot 18. Please see updated plans dated 5-29-06., We are assuming the references is made to the ill-defined swale between current lots 16 and 17. This area lies on a natural divide, and the contours for the side yard swale will be have to be reshaped to account for this ridge, and will be shown on the final drawings. As this area is on the upper part of the watershed, there is very little runoff affected by this proposed swab Another is the 18” culvert that crosses "New Road B" where the invert in and out do not match up with the contours shown on the plan. This has been: corrected on the 5-29-06 plan set submitted to the Town. • The proposed road grades are steep in some locations (on the order of 12%) . As designed, the road is directly perpendicular to the existing site contours in these areas . • This item was addressed in the first item above. The septic sizing provided assumes 8% natural slope, but many of the lots exceed this slope. The septic system designs are generic at this point, but will be modified to show all site conditions in the final submittal to the Tompkins County Health Department. Permanent Stormwater Management Practices : • The proposed stormwater management pond does not meet the following criteria set forth in the New York State Storwmater Management Design Manual: Each of these items will be evaluated for compliance in accordance with design standards. Minimum Length to Width Ratio of 1 . 5 : 1 (Required) Long Flow path (design guidance) Irregular Geometry (Design Guidance) Pond Buffer (Required) • The dry swale proposed does not meet state standards due to the shallow depth of material above the underdrain. This practice only treatsja few lots, and a traditional grassed channel" may provide sufficient treatment. Regardless of which option is used, a "60-day" DEC review period will be required. The dry swale will he removed hi lieu of using a grassed swale (channel) to provide the necessary water quality volume from lots 16 and 17 in subcatchment 1. It is acknowledged • that this will require 60-day review. • A more detailed long-term maintenance is required for both the pond and dry swales. • The maintenance plan as referenced in the SWPPP, Chapter 7 of Reducing the Impacts of Stormwater Runoff New Development — NYS DEC Division of Water, Bureau of Water Quality Management, April 1992 appears to still be the accepted document for long-term maintenance. b . Erosion and Sediment Control: • The plan calls for rock check dams on rock-line channels, which is unnecessary. Acknowledged. This was part of a layer that was not turned off The checks will be removed in these locations. • The construction sequence is not of sufficient detail. It is unclear when the road will be constructed relative to individual lots. The road and underground utilities will he constructed prior to any lot development. This will be amplified in by note Section 3 in the SWPPP as well as on sheet Sheet 6 of the drawings. • There are no ESC or grading plans for individual lots. A generic plan would typically be sufficient to cover these lots . In this case no generic plans are included, and more detail will be required due to the steep slopes of some loth (5-7 and 10- 14) . A generic plan will be included with more detail on the steeper sloped lots. c . General Format: • Some referenced documents are currently out of date including: The 1997 "Guidelines for Erosion and Sediment Control" and TOG 5 . 1 . 10 have been replaced with a 2006 document available on DEC ' s web site. The SWPPP has been modified to incorporate references to the August 2005 NY • Standards & Specifications for Erosion and Sedimentation Control complete with corresponding Appendices. The TOGS reference has been eliminated. The "Reducing the Impacts . . . " document is also out of date. This document is still referenced and is in circulation as per the following DEC website link. http://www. dec.state.nv.us/Website/dow/toolbox/index.html Larry Sharpsteen stated for the record that if this becomes a Sketch Plan this evening, it is not binding on the Town as acceptance of allowing the change in the angle for the new proposed road. David Herrick has highly recommended that the Town Attorneybe involved as far as road agreements between both Subdivisions and any other formal agreements . Lin Davidson made a motion to accept the Sketch Plan. Larry Sharpsteen seconded. VOTE AS FOLLOWS : Lin Davidson — Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Viola Miller — Aye Larry Sharpsteen —°, Aye MOTION CARRIED. • Langridge, • Avec, 78 Asbu Road, Parcel # 31I�7.1-5-13 Informal Discussion - • ry , Photo Lab Mr. Platt presented the following letter requesting feedback from the Planning Board Members with regards to requiring the owner to go 'through Site Plan Review. L 78 Asbury Rd. Lansing, NY 14882 June 19, 2006 Town of Lansing Planning Board Lansing, NY 14882 To Whom It May Concern: I am closing my current business site in Ithaca and I would like to continue to": provide my services to a small core of my loyal clients from my home. I currently have a home office and studio with an adjacent room for storage. I would like to set up my darkroom in the storage room. I understand that I live in an R2 zone and that a site plan review is a stipulation for having a home business in an R2 zone. However, I am asking if there is any way you could please waive the site plan review? I will not be altering the outside of my home, and will use the existingoffice and studiospaces in myhome. I will convert an adjacent storage room into a darkroom by simply covering one small side window on the inside, I have quite a limited client base, and any meetings at my home would be held inside and would be by appointment only, Therefore, there should be no need for more than three • off-street parking spaces. 1 work by myself, so there are no employees. All work is done inside and the business does not produce any offensive noise, odor, smoke, dust, heat, glare, or elecUical disturbance. My services have become more and more specialized over the years, and I have no plans or expectations of expansion Because of this, my compliance with these parameters will not change. I again ask that you waive the need for a site plan review, based on the ease of compliance with the special conditions for article 802.9 "Residential (home) Business or Occupation", and due to the low impact of this change on both my home, and my neighbors. Thank you very much for your consideration. Please feel free to call me at 607-272-8389 (work) or 607-257-5175 (home) if you have any further questions. Sincerely, Avec Langridge After a brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Planning Board Members that Ms. Langridge return to the Planning Board for Site Plan Review. Also, at that time Ms. Langridge should also provide information as far as Ale names of the chemical used in her photo process, and the way she plans to dispose ;of them. Beckwith, Herb & Linda, 1 Lot Subdivision, 7 Whitetail Crossing, Parcel # 23 .- 1 -28 .31 Mr. & Mrs. Beckwith appeared before the Planning 'Board requesting that the Planning • Board waive the requirements for the 30 feet access to a public highway for a 1 Lot Subdivision in order to sell their home. Mr. Beckwith explained to the board that he set v up• 4 property upin 1985 for two lots with a 50 foots strip reserved for access. At that time, • P P Y p and up torecently the required access was 20 feet. Mr. Beckwith further explained that if the Planning Board does not waive the requirement of 30 feet, than he will have his remaining 29 acres land locked. Larry Sharpsteen explained that he felt this was a Subdivision issue not a BZA. Mr. � Sharpsteen did indicate that if they approved the 1 Flag Lot Subdivision, they could include a restriction stating no further use or Subdivision of the 29 acres until there is adequate access provided on lower Ross Road. Nancy Loncto read Article 8 , Section 801 Special Circumstances under the Town of Lansing Subdivision Rules & Regulations . Viola Miller indicated that she thought this should be a BZA issue. It was the consensus of the Planning Board Members that Richard Platt check with the Town Attorney for clarification as to who has jurisdiction over this Subdivison issue . In addition, Mr. Platt will check with Harry Willis at the NYS office. Mr. Beckwith would like to have this settled by the (next Planning Board meeting in July as he has a closing date set in August. • Other Business Thomas Ellis questioned David Herrick with regards to his comments on The Stormwater Disturbance Plan for the Lobdell Major Subdivision. Mr. Ellis states he does not think it is feasible for Mr. Lobdell to build 3 homes and disturb less than 1 acre of land. Mr. Herrick indicated that Mr. Wood, P.E. for Mr. Lobdell has proposed this plan. Mr. Herrick further stated it is up to them to minimize their disturbance. Mr. Herrick further stated that he mentioned in his comments that Mr. Wood must prove to the Code Enforcement Office when applying for this Building Permit that his plans identify how he is going to limit it to . 33 acre of disturbance per lot. Mr. Ellis feels the Planning Board has set a precedence by permitting this . Viola Miller excused herself at 9 : 15 PM. Lin Davidson made a motion to adjourn the meeting at 9 : 30 PM. Thomas Ellis seconded. VOTE AS FOLLLOWS : Lin Davidson -Aye Thomas Ellis — Aye Nancy Loncto — Aye Larry Sharpsteen — Aye MOTION CARRIED . • Town of Lansing Planning Board Meeting • June 26, 2006 Visitors Please Sign In Below : (Please Print) Name Address 7---letnANO BsZco_dm e r L._ a `7-fr- cs_sg, Ulcuozatne_sc.. ►m t 5 LL IACs • http ://www. lansingtown . com/ •