Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2014-11-18TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Shirley A. Raffensperger Board Room, Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. November 18. 2014 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Troy Road Residential Development located on the east side of Troy Road between Coddington Road and King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49.-1-26.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves developing an approximately 130-unit clustered subdivision on the 63.182 +/- acre parcel. The project would contain approximately 46 single family units, 14 two-unit duplexes (28 units total), and 14 four-unit townhomes (56 units total). The proposal will also include the development of a new road system with two access points on Troy Road, a 5,000 -I-/- square foot clubhouse, walking paths, stormwater facilities, and landscaping. Paul Rubin, Owner; Rural Housing Preservation Associates, Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning & Design, Agent. 2. Preliminary discussion regarding the draft scoping document for the Chain Works District Redevelopment Project Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement. 3. Persons to be heard 4. Approval of Minutes: September 2, 2014 and November 4, 2014. 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273-1747 or SPOLCE@TOWN.H HACA.NY.US. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) Accessing Meeting Materials Online Site Plan and Subdivision applications and associated project materials are accessible electronically on the Town's website under "Planning Board" on the "Meeting Agendas" page (htti)://vvww.t(m n.ithaca.nv.us/mee(in2-at»endas). TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday,November 18, 2014 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox(Chair), Linda Collins,Joseph Haefeli,John Beach,Yvonne Fogarty, Paula Wedemeyer, Hollis Erb Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Dan Thaete, Town Engineer; Susan Brock,Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:04 p.m. AGENDA ITEM Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Troy Road Residential Development located on the east side of Troy Road between Coddington Road and King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49--l-26.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves developing an approximately 130-unit clustered subdivision on the 63.182 +/- acre parcel. The project would contain approximate- ly 46 single family units, 14 two-unit duplexes (28 units total), and 14 four-unit townhomes (56 units total). The proposal will also include the development of a new road system with two access points on Troy Road, a 5,000 +/-square foot clubhouse,walking paths, stormwater facilities, and landscap- ing. Paul Rubin, Owner; Rural Housing Preservation Associates, Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning&Design,Agent Mr. Wilcox stated that although there is no public hearing, it has been the practice of the board to give the public a chance to speak after the board has had an opportunity for questions and comments. Mr. Whitham introduced the team: Noah Demarest, STREAM Collaborative Architecture + Landscape Architecture; David Parks, attorney; and Bob Bates, Rural Housing Preservation Associ- ates. Mr. Whitham said that they have listened to the comments from the town board and the residents and have re-thought through some of the elements of the project and at this meeting would present the sketch plan and where they are with their thinking for this site. Mr. Demarest said they are no longer pursuing a PDZ, as they presented to the town board, but are now looking at a cluster subdivision for this proposal. They are also working with HUNT Engineers and Architects. He showed a series of aerial photographs of the area bounded by Coddington Road, Troy Road, and King Road, the first of which was from 1938. It was primarily agricultural at that time. By 1954 it was still primarily agricultural, with some development along Coddington Road. By 1964, there was a little more development along Coddington. In 1980, there were a lot more homes along Coddington, but King Road had not been built out at that time. In 1991, there were the beginnings of development on King Road and a little more on Coddington.At present day, there is a lot more development along King Road, while Coddington has stayed the same, and there has been some development along Troy Road, but the site itself has remained largely untouched.A lot of the vegetation is second generation growth of farm fields.The existing conditions are hard to develop, Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 2 of 11 but there some potentially good amenities on the site. There's an area they call the glen, a wooded area they call the knoll is in center of site, and two power lines bisect the site. The power line that runs down the middle will be relocated and combined with the other one in order to open up the center of the site. They have had meetings with TCAT to explore different ways for potentially expanding bus service to the area. Utilizing the utility corridors, they can create walking paths to connect to IC and the South Hill Recreation Way near the reservoir. Mr. Whitham said they have had a number of conversations with TCAT.There are a number of potential connections: diverting their route is a possibility or there are shuttle services. It's very dependent on the density they are able to bring to the site. One potential would be a loop down Route 96 to King Road, then down Troy, and through their site. Mr. Demarest showed slides of some precedents they looked at locally and nationally that they wanted to use as a springboard for design and to get a better sense of scale and type of development. They have not yet designed the buildings themselves;what they've done is a test fit of this mix of single- family homes, duplexes, and townhomes on the site to create a connected community with open green space, a clubhouse, and access to a trail network both on the site and regionally. They are building-in the potential for onsite farming (not just a community garden), orchards, and maintaining the character of what's there now. There will be two entryways into the site.As you enter the primary entry, there will be a bus shelter, a clubhouse, and a primary loop with spurs off it that become alleyways that serve rear-loaded garages. They're planning for all units to have separate garages. The single-family homes will front on the street and have a single-car garage in the back.The cluster of four townhomes will have a shared alleyway with rear-loaded garages in the back. Each townhome fronts onto a common green space. The duplexes have a similar form to the townhouses in that they have rear-loaded garages, but they front onto a street. The major organizing element for the whole site is the large green space in the center. They can have an orchard space in the front. They're looking at as many sustainable practices as they can: onsite renewable energy, super-insulated construction, etc. [Note: To avoid confusion, Bob Bates will be referred to as Bob Bates and Bruce Bates as Mr. Bates] Bob Bates stated that at this point, they are looking at being able to produce a broad range of prices - a mix in economic structure. Townhomes will be at the lower end and are a way to begin in the ownership pattern; the duplexes will be a little larger and in the mid-range; and the single-family homes will be in the higher end of the market. Units will range in price from $200,000 up to whatever somebody wants to put into it. They want to make units available that reduce the utility impact and the utility cost. They are comparing the differences between doing roof solar and a solar farm. They are also looking at a geographically sustainable landscape - an orchard with apple trees and fruit trees. It's more than a subdivision; it's an integrated neighborhood. Mr. Parks introduced the concept of aging in place.With the mix of units, a couple could start out in a townhome, move into a larger house in the same community, and as they age, downsize to one of the townhomes again. Mr. Beach stated that one area he will be interested in is what effect this development will have on the East King-Coddington Road-Burns Road intersection,which is now scary at times. Ms. Collins disclosed that she lives in the neighborhood, right at the Coddington-Troy intersection. It's dangerous, not because there is a lot of traffic, but because of the structure: it's not a T intersec- Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 3 of 11 tion and there are no calming measures. In order to add traffic to that intersection, something different is going to have to happen. Mr. Whitham agreed that with a project of this scale in that area, traffic is going to be the first environmental issue to address. For years, he has driven his daughter from Brooktondale to the Montessori School, so he knows first-hand. Ms. Collins stated that she is glad to hear they have started conversations with TCAT. They have been taking routes off rather than putting routes on. She likes the neighborhood concept and sees elements that make that not just rhetoric. She likes the integration of different kinds of housing and the open space. The one thing that troubles her is that every unit has a garage - that suburban kind of sprawl,where you put people further out. She loves the area because she has woods behind her house and is still close to everything. It's a wonderful area, but if she wants a loaf of bread, she has to hop in her car. That's her choice. But it seems that there is an opportunity here to make this a neighbor- hood; she would like to see how creatively the applicant thinks about what will happen if TCAT won't go there. Mr. Parks said that he is to blame for the garages. He knows the neighborhood, and if you look at the town's Comprehensive Plan, the closest you will get to a grocery store is the planned commercial zone area at the Route 96 and King Road intersection. This means that everyone in this development will have to get in their car. They also have design ideas regarding the clubhouse. The purpose of the clubhouse is partially traffic mitigation in the sense that they're planning to make it more like a business center for telecommuting, so people can use it as office space. The second is that they hope the clubhouse will be community space for members of the neighborhood to be able to use for childcare.They would like to get approval for the project through the planning process, and after it's done, go back and seek approval to expand the use of the clubhouse so people outside the neighbor- hood could use it for other purposes. Mr. Wilcox said that may or may not work; the applicants can't use something as mitigation, but ask for approval later. Ms. Fogarty asked if this is being designed for home ownership. Bob Bates said it is being designed for home ownership. That does not preclude an owner from renting a unit out, but it is not being designed as a rental project. Mr. Wilcox asked about deed restrictions to prevent the owners from renting. Bob Bates responded that they will not deed restrict; if you're a homeowner, you have a right to rent that home. Their reason for going to a PDZ was to do a rental, but they were not able to develop that project. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that they have significant deed restrictions at Deer Run. Ms. Fogarty said she is familiar with this piece of land and understands it is wet. Planning Board Minutes 1148.2014 Page 4 of 11 Mr. Whitham said there is water on the site, particularly in two areas. They have taken that into account when laying out the project in a conceptual way. They have not done grading or stormwater plans, but they have taken the wet areas into consideration in a general way. They're working with HUNT Engineers. Mr. Demarest said there is no stream, but the wet areas are drained from the site. Ms. Fogarty said her understanding is that the water pressure in that area is not very good. People in the Southwoods area need pumps to get water to the second floor of their houses. Mr. Thaete said that if they make their connection on Troy Road,water pressure should not be an issue. Southwoods is a different entity; it is fed off Coddington Road. It is not a representation of the water issues in that area. There is a pump station on Troy Road that pumps up to the Troy tank. He assured Ms. Fogarty that they can connect on Troy Road and have sufficient pressure. Ms. Erb said she likes the idea of a small farm, but would still be interested to see a small fenced dog park, an actual community garden, and play areas for kids. She likes the fact that there is a garage and not three and four garages. Given the location issues Ms. Collins mentioned, she thinks cars are necessary. She commented that the alleyways seem large and not single-lane traffic. She assumes the HOA language will have serious restrictions about parking in the alleyway. Mr. Demarest responded that 22 feet are required for backing out of a garage. Ms.Wedemeyer said it looks as though each unit has a single-car garage and no designated parking for other cars. Mr. Demarest said there will be extra spaces, and that they will meet the requirement of one designat- ed parking space per unit and one additional per every three units.All the single-family homes have driveways. There are some, maybe 20, parking spaces associated with the clubhouse. They will distribute guest parking spaces throughout the site. Ms. Erb said she was glad to hear that there will be some starter homes. She would encourage some of those units be very small so there will be some housing that is affordable for median-income people. Bob Bates said that even under the PDZ, they wanted to make it affordable for a broad range of population. He said that in many communities, people make enough money to afford a reasonable house, but there are not enough reasonable houses available. Since Day 1, it's been their goal to have a broad range of housing. In this country, we don't integrate economically, and they want this to be broad economically and socially. Ms. Erb said, regarding interspersing, every single-family home is on the outside and every single- family home has a back yard that doesn't have to face anyone else. She asked whether that was a market function. Bob Bates responded that it is potentially a market function. Secondarily, a larger area of house requires a larger lot size. This allows for the larger units to be on the outside: it's a function of economics, it's a function of lot size, it's a function of getting it on paper. Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 5 of 11 Ms. Erb said the board will be very interested in the as-of-right number of units. Ms. Erb stated that were Mr. Bosak at the meeting, he would point out that they will have to pump sewage, and the board will want to know the emergency arrangements should they lose power. She said that when they come with the real plan, the board will want to know the set aside for the possible solar farm, the truck routing, the contractor parking, etc. She will want to see trail connections to the broader area off the property. Ms. Collin said that solar is becoming much more inexpensive, and there are developers on the west coast looking at solar as being an amenity; she would like them to consider that as a possibility. That or will they all be built to accommodate solar so people can choose to add it later on? Bob Bates responded that they're in complete agreement; they're not sure how to approach it yet, but that is their plan.All the units will be built so they can utilize solar. The question is whether it's done individually by each owner or as part of the HOA, and how the costs and maintenance are divided. They're also looking at the potential of a neighborhood heating district. Ms. Collins asked about phasing:whether they're thinking about five different designs and asking prospective owners to choose one or whether someone will buy a lot and do anything they want. Bob Bates responded that they have not defined that. The initial concept is to establish design criteria that give appropriate unit size, appropriate exterior finishes, etc, so that it isn't a hodgepodge,which makes it very difficult to sell. Mr. Demarest said that the projects they looked at ranged from having a pattern book of design guidelines all the way to pre-designed homes with a variety of styles to choose from, like Belle Sherman Cottages. Ms. Fogarty asked whether Rural Housing Preservation Associates is local. Bob Bates responded that it is in that he lives in Arkport, and his son went to Cornell and lives in Dundee. His company is a joint venture with a company in Delaware, Leon Weiner Associates. Between them, they own 6000 units of rental housing. They are a long-term holder of property. The president of Leon Weiner Associates is president of the National Homebuilders Association. They have done communities like this in their history, but not recently. They originally looked at this project as a rental development, but because of neighborhood concern, they decided to look at it as a for-sale development. They have not done this type of ecologically sound, sustainable, single-family development, although the other team members have. Green building makes good economic sense. Ms.Wedemeyer asked about gardening in the yards. Mr. Demarest said there will be more active vegetable gardening in a community garden space, but plenty of space at each unit for ornamental gardens. They are very much inspired by cottage commu- nities where you create common green spaces. Mr. Parks brought up the subject of whether they dedicate the roads to the town or keep them private. In the Holochuck project, it would have been nice to have narrower roads to slow the traffic Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 6 of 11 down and to create a more neighborhood feel - not necessarily have two lanes of traffic.You can't do that with town roads. If they try to minimize the impervious surface, the HOA would have to maintain the road. That has its benefits as well as its drawbacks. Ms. Fogarty brought up the woonerf-inspired road in the Greenways project. Ms. Ritter pointed out that that will be a private road. Mr. Wilcox said he doesn't have an issue with whether it's a public or private road, but there are advantages to the smaller roads. The alleyways have to be 20 feet wide, but that's far different from the 60 feet required for a public road. Ms. Erb said that instead of requiring a garage to come in square, tilting them would give a broader mass from the alleyway and would leave a triangular area for maybe storage. It wouldn't take up as much space backing out. She said she'll want realistic deer fencing for the community garden, which is over four-feet tall. She likes that there is considerable visual buffering from the surrounding neighborhoods now and she would hate to see that disappear. Bob Bates said they have looked at the site in many different ways. They are comfortable that the land requirement in the cluster development can be maintained in the ratio it is now,which is less than 40 percent. Part of the planning will entail a)whether they like the area they've chosen and b)whether they can develop within a certain framework within that. In other words, right now they've got single- family homes on the outside; they may change that. But they're looking at the amount of units in the clustered development and the ability to interchange those, depending on what they find from the survey, grading, and waterflow work. Maintaining over half the site as-is is as important to them as it is to the board. Ms. Erb said she is not just talking about the mass, but about the buffering along Troy Road, so it's not so apparent that there's a big development there. Ms. Collins asked whether this development will be under the new form-based zoning the town is looking at. Ms. Ritter said that in terms of the comp plan, this area was not slated for form-based code. It is considered semi-rural and appropriate for clustered development. Form-based is in particular areas that is expected to have a certain density and a certain mix of uses. Ms. Erb said that the comp plan agrees with the clustering and the preservation of the open space. Ms. Ritter agreed that since it's in an area with utilities, it's appropriate for clustering and if it also ends up bringing transit, that would be another plus. Ms. Collins asked whether auxiliary apartments are allowed. Ms. Ritter responded that if this were a development of just single-family homes, each of the homes could have an apartment. That is where you come up with the number for the number of units that are allowed. Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 7 of 11 Ms. Collins thought it would be nice if there could be inexpensive rental units above the garages that would make the beautiful integrated neighborhood even more so. Public comments A gentleman provided an explanation about power lines. He was looking at developing this property several years ago, so he had a conversation with NYSEG about them. NYSEG told him that the easements were created long ago in anticipation of future developments, and they had no way to know which way there were going. One may have been anticipated to be funneled over toward Ithaca College. They are of different widths because they bear the possibility for different voltages. Jim Semp is an abutting neighbor at 302 East King Road. He's been familiar with the project since its inception. He is in favor of the focus on alternative energy - incorporating elements like rooftop solar and solar hot water. The idea of incorporating some form of shuttle service to the area is vital. He has talked to TCAT about a loop around Ithaca College. In discussions with the planning committee, the applicant presented a preliminary traffic study. They said most of the traffic would come through the intersection of East King and Troy roads because that connects to a state route. He pointed out that that intersection is a two-way stop. There's no stop on Troy Road, which makes it a very dangerous intersection. There's a blind curve on the approach on Troy. A gentleman who lives nearby said he presumes that if individuals own residential properties, all that is not otherwise designated as owned by the individual is owned by the HOA. (Mr.Wilcox said that the HOA becomes a legal entity.)The gentleman pointed out that there are three dead-end streets that just go out and stop. This project could be a roaring success or it could be a marginal failure. So 20 years from now, the HOA could come to the town and say that this is such a success, since they have three accesses, they can add 40 more units. If it's a failure, they can say they really need more participants, so they need to extend these streets. Mr. Wilcox responded that he can't predict the future, but the zoning of the 63-acre parcel, in its entirety, limits the number of units to somewhere between 120 and 140; that's the maximum number of units allowed. Even if they build on only 35% or 40% of the land, they can't, under current zoning, add any more units. They will have taken all the units allowed and shoved them over to one side. Twenty years from now, the town board might make changes that they feel are beneficial. Ms. Erb pointed out that they would also have to deal with a very large power line going through the rest of the property, which will also limit the likelihood of putting more housing there. Those dead- end streets mostly serve the driveways. The gentleman said that in that case, there are some residences that share driveways. Ms. Erb responded that snowplows need places to put snow, and the board hasn't seen all the extra pieces of parking. Mr. Wilcox said the streets and alleys are very straight; there's no meandering, which can provide traffic calming. Mike Parker, the neighbor to the north, had a question mostly concerning the tree line that follows the edge of the parcel bordering his property. He sees no plans for a fence or anything that might Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 8 of 11 border it. He asked whether the trees that will be put in will be saplings that won't be actual trees that create any sort of blockage for 16 to 20 years. Mr. Wilcox agreed that it's not really clear where their property ends and Mr. Parker's begins. Bob Bates asked the board about the process going forward. Mr. Wilcox assured the applicant team that staff will make sure the site plan is sufficiently complete before it comes to the board. He said that they will need to have the as-of-right configuration when they come back next time, which most likely will be for preliminary subdivision approval. That's the proof that they can fit the number of units they propose. Ms. Brock addressed the team regarding the clubhouse. They mentioned that there were potential uses they wanted to put into the clubhouse that aren't currently allowed by zoning and that they might come back later and request that. She asked whether they would pursue that through a zoning change or through a use variance since, because they currently know what the zoning allows, that would be a self-created hardship and would be fatal to any use variance application. Mr. Parks said that the day care was considered vital. The question was that if they had a day care, the people in the surrounding area would want to use it, but they would not be allowed to create a commercial day care, so it's that modification they would be seeking. In a way, it wouldn't be a use variance; it would be a change in the zoning to allow that commercial purpose. If it's something they plan to get, they will get it after the fact. Ms. Brock stated that the zoning code defines clubhouse, so they'd have to ask Mr. Bates what it could be used for.As it's written, it must be used exclusively by members of the organization, and the building must be devoted to recreational or athletic purposes. So they have to look at whether the sales office and the leased office space in the clubhouse would meet that definition. They also need to be aware of the setback requirements for clubhouses. To a question from Ms. Fogarty, she replied that she does not know whether a community center is an allowed use in a low-density residential zone. Mr. Bates pointed out that all the roads are county roads, so if the board or applicant wants to change something, they'll have to go to the county. None of those intersections are town intersections. PB Resolution No. 2014.058: Lead Agency- Declaration of Intent, Troy Road Residential Development, Tax Parcel No. 49.-1-26.2, Troy Road Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at its meeting on November 18, 2014, considered a Sketch Plan for the proposed Troy Road Residential Development located on the east side of Troy Road between Coddington Road and King Road East, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49.-1,26.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves developing an approximately 130-unit clustered subdivision on the 63.182 +/-acre parcel. The project would contain approximately 46 single family units, 14 two-unit duplexes (28 units total), and 14 four-unit townhomes (56 units total). Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 9 of 11 The proposal will also include the development of a new road system with two access points on Troy Road, a 5,000 +/-square foot clubhouse,walking paths, stormwater facilities, and landscap- ing. Paul Rubin, Owner; Rural Housing Preservation Associates,Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning& Design, Agent, and 2. The proposed project,which requires subdivision approval and special permit by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, is a Type I Action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Chapter 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Environmental Quality Review because the proposal involves the development of more than 30 new residential units to be connected to community or publicly owned utilities (Section 148-5.B.2, Town of Itha- ca Code); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby proposes to establish itself as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed actions, as described above, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby requests the concurrence of all involved agencies on this proposed Lead Agency designation, said concurrence to be received by the Town of Ithaca Planning Department no later than 30 calendar days after the Full EAF Part 1 and application materials have been received by all involved agencies. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Fogarty, Wedemeyer, Erb AGENDA ITEM Preliminary discussion regarding the draft scoping document for the Chain Works District Redevel- opment Project Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement Mr. Wilcox mentioned that he had been at the city meeting from 6:00 to 6:30. They were still doing a presentation when he left, so no one from the public had had a chance to comment. He also pointed out that only three members of the city planning board had been present. Ms. Ritter said this is an opportunity to start thinking about the joint meeting with the city planning board. She said she had met the city consultant who the city hired to oversee the EIS at a meeting that day.At the meeting, he was making recommendations to change the scoping; he wants more of a beefed-up scoping document, he wants more detail, for instance, in the description of the project with more thresholds identified. He also talked about the need for fleshing out more of the potential significant adverse impacts. Mr. Whitham said they would have a new document the following week. He's not sure whether it will reflect all the changes mentioned in the conversation. The operational mode of the team is that anything that goes to the city also goes to the town. The same information also goes on their web site. Planning Board Minutes 11-18.2014 Page 10 of 11 Ms. Ritter said that that will be the document under discussion at the planning board meeting of December 2nd. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - Nobody came forward to address the board. AGENDA ITEM PB Resolution No. 2014059: Minutes of September 2, 2014 Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by Yvonne Fogarty WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on September 2; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, as amended, to be the final minutes of the meeting on September 2. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Fogarty, Erb Abstentions:Wedemeyer PB Resolution No. 2014.060: Minutes of November 4, 2014 Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by Linda Collins WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on November 4; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes to be the final minutes of the meeting on November 4. Vote Ayes: Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Fogarty,Wedemeyer, Erb Abstentions:Wilcox AGENDA ITEM Other business Mr. Wilcox reminded Ms. Erb that a few meetings ago, she had asked him for a change in planning board procedure. Ms. Erb responded that he has already incorporated the change.At tonight's meeting, he immediately reassured or gave factual information to people who spoke. She thought it would be good policy and practice to say, for example, Be assured, traffic will be part of this, or Under current zoning, they wouldn't be allowed to do that. That's all she wanted. Planning Board Minutes 11-18-2014 Page 11 of 11 Ms. Wedemeyer pointed out that this is an adversarial situation to begin with. People have to come to the board to ask permission to do things with property that they own, that they pay taxes on, that they write mortgage checks for, and that board members have perpetually seen instances where people aren't really clear what it is the board does and why the board is here. They've seen a number of instances where folks thought that since they've been in front of another group, why do they need to go in front of another board? She would suggest that the board take a few moments before every meeting and say this is the purpose of this board, this is the scope of what the board addresses, and this is what the board doesn't address. Mr. Wilcox said that would avoid people thinking the planning board is the town board and that they should reject a project. Ms. Erb pointed out that Mr. Wilcox already docs some of what Ms. Wedemeyer suggested in that he has recently begun making it clear to the audience what the board will be voting on and that it might entail two votes if there's a SEQR. Mr. Wilcox said the purpose is to make sure the public is reasonably aware of the process and the board's role in it as soon as possible. Ms. Fogarty said she was hoping that there would be a joint committee of the city and town for the Chain Works project and was disappointed that there wasn't going to be because she wanted to serve on that committee. She's very excited about the project, but has heard some negative comments of a nature that the town is in competition or conflict with the city. She was excited about working with the city. Going forward, she hopes that this board and the town planning department aren't going to talk about it that way. Ms. Ritter said that she gets along quite well with the city planning staff, so if there is a problem, it's not with staff; maybe it's with the town board. Ms. Brock doesn't think that the town board is vying to get more development on the town parcel because the town parcel has a lot of steep slopes and other site constraints, so they probably think it's more appropriate that a lot of it not be developed. There's a trail connection on the town parcel and she thinks that's what they're interested in. AGENDA ITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Mr. Haefeli, the meeting adjourned at 9:12 p.m. Respectfully submitted, vDebra DeAugistine, Depu