Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-02-16 - PB TOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD 02/16/06 Approved 05/02/06 with corrections Present : Chairperson Margot Chiuten, Planning Board Members : David Means, Rod Porter, and John Wertis . Code Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun, Deputy Supervisor Dick Coogan. Excused : Darien Simon Applicants : Washington Street Partners-Joe Hucko , Matthew Moore and Bruce Poushter. Public Guests : Jim Seafuse, Bret Seafuse and Darren Palmer A quorum is present at the meeting; the meeting was called to order at 7 : 37 pm by Ms Chiuten . Minutes : The minutes of the January 31st meeting were presented . Ms Chiuten had made corrections to the January 31St Minutes . Mr. Wertis made the MOTION to approve, Mr. Porter SECONDED . All in favor. MINUTES APPROVED WASHINGTON STREET PARTNERS : Ms Chiuten stated they did not have the information back from the County Planning Department . Mr. Coogan stated the county is required to review any plan that is on a state highway. The county may comment however all need to remember a comment is different from a recommended modification. Mr. Wertis stated they had not reviewed the traffic data. Mr. Seafuse stated they could lower the speed limit as much as they want, the traffic problem is due to non enforcement of the speed limit. He has rarely seen any tickets issued due to speeding in front of his store . A flashing caution light might help , he realizes it is difficult to get the speed limit reduced . But if they are going to put a development across the street the time to ask is now. Mr. Wertis stated he is concerned knowing they are adding to traffic problems by approving this Site Plan. Mr. Hucko stated he does not live here thus has no familiarity with the traffic, but if they look at the drawing it does not match the volume being stated by the store owners . Mr. Seafuse asked if there was a total of the Village Police, Sheriff or where did the numbers come from . Mr. Porter replied they had all reported individually with respect to what they responded to in this area. Mr. Hucko stated that the DOT report stated the report period as September 2001 -August 2004 with data that lists 19 Total ; upon examining the map they provided they exceed the 19 accidents . He does not understand what this indicates . Ms . Chiuten and Mr. Wertis stated they do not understand either which is why they would prefer this data be reviewed . Mr. Hucko replied the board is asking them to be potentially accountable for accidents that are occurring on Rabbit Run Road and whether they build this or not these accidents will still happen. Planning Board 2 02/ 16/2006 Mr. Bret Seafuse stated that if they are only reporting 4 accidents then there is a problem . Mr. Porter stated there is a discrepancy they list 4 for the marker in front of Shursave but have 11 accidents diagramed on the next page which shows the map in front of Shursave. Mr. Wertis stated he would like to ask DOT to explain the difference . Mr. Hucko stated they would do whatever they need to do within reason ; however they retained an engineer, did a traffic study and they did an evaluation, this was submitted to the Board and DOT . DOT had all the information-why do they go to DOT if they are not reviewing the historical problems of the site . There is a lot of subjective commentary going on . The state approving entity gave conceptual approval for this site. This is a minor commercial project-if there is a house built on site it will affect traffic . But is it a reasonable effect-the engineer' s feel it is and DOT feels it is . We are sitting here on speculation and subjective terms . We have data that says there are 4 accidents . Mr. Porter noted that the Sheriff' s department says 36 for this area. Mr. Wertis stated this is exactly what they would like to find out . He would like to get back to the agency and examine the peak hours to weigh the volume . Ms Chiuten stated that when she spoke with DOT they felt they had been rushed into this approval . Mr. Hucko stated that DOT has a laundry list of items and this was given to them months ago . There was no rush to the process. Mr. Coogan noted that this was given to DOT due to the request to have the water line run from the Village . Mr. Hucko stated they had met with DOT on several occasions . They were cognizant of the plans they met with them in Cortland and in Syracuse. This letter was a by-product of their submissions and their meetings . They have no reason to believe that they are not aware of their traffic problems on their state highways . He cannot imagine if there is a high problem area it does not trip something on their charts-why are we paying taxes and going to DOT . Mr. Seafuse stated that even if they make the decision to approve it would have to be addressed later. It will increase accidents but in actuality they do not know this . They can argue all night, the bottom line is there is nothing that can be done , they are on a state highway. They cannot approve the curb cut, they put it in and have 12 more accidents then the town can appeal to DOT for traffic lighting. Mr. Coogan stated one of these could be used as mitigation. Make the mitigation incumbent on the town to write a letter of support to be sent to DOT to study traffic and accidents in this area. The Planning Board can request the Town Board review for an Access Management Plan for future development. Mr. Wertis asked if there were traffic experts that could review the data for the traffic concern. Mr. Coogan stated that any consultant is going to review the information from DOT and they will return the review in more grandiose form similar findings . The DOT own the roads and the consultants will not counter what DOT says . Mr. Wertis stated he did not believe that the Town ' s consultant had reviewed the traffic plan. Mr. Porter noted that they had a letter from Barton and Loguidice had questioned items . These were addressed by Washington Street Partners . Ms . Chiuten rioted that they had received approval for 54 parking spaces by the Board of Zoning Appeals as well as a variance for the building size to 12 ,075 gross square feet . Mr. Hucko marked off on the Site Plan the three spaces they would be eliminating to accommodate the variance . Planning Board 3 02/ 16/2006 Ms . Chiuten noted they had to do the Negative Declaration on the Site Plan Review. Continued discussion led to the following resolution regarding Washington Street Partners, Trumansburg, Commons . TOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD PROPOSED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-001 Trumansburg Commons Kinney Drug Store SEQR Determination for Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval Tax Parcel No. 12-3 - 18 2100 Trumansburg Road Town of Ulysses, New York Planning Board, February 16, 2006 MOTION made by Mr. Means, seconded by Mr. Porter WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval and recommendation for Subdivision Approval from the Town of Ulysses Planning Board, and an area variance for parking from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the proposed Trumansburg Commons/Kinney Drug Store proposal located on a +/- 1 . 74 acre parcel located at 2100 Trumansburg Road, currently part of Tax Parcel No . 12-3 - 18 , B1 Business District. The remaining +/- 4 . 3 acres of the property are not under consideration at this time . The proposal consists of a 12 , 075 gross square foot, one-story drive-thru pharmacy, one 24 foot wide driveway on NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road, a 54- space parking lot, stormwater facilities, on-site well, and landscaping. Trumansburg Commons, LLC , Owner/Applicant ; Joseph H. Hucko, Agent, and 2 . The proposed action, which includes subdivision approval, site plan approval, and a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals , is an Unlisted Action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617 , for which the is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in an uncoordinated environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, Subdivision Approval, and area variance, and 3 . The Planning Board, on January 3 , 2006 , has reviewed and accepted as adequate for public hearing a Long Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and project information as follows : • Planning Board Submittal, dated December 15 , 2005 • Requested Supplemental Information, dated 12/23/05 • Set of Drawings, dated December 2005 • Letter of Confirmation of Authority, dated January 2 , 2006 • 65 % Contract Drawings, dated January 2006 • Revised Survey, dated 1 /6/06 • Response to comments, by Synapse Risk Management, LLC , dated January 19 , 2006 • Response to comments, by Jim Napoleon & Associates, dated January 19, 2006 • Revised Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and Associated Drawings, dated January 2006 , and • Revised Proposed Final Site Plan, Figure 1 , dated Jan. 2006 showing the proposed site plan on the existing survey, and including the existing driveway to the ShurSave property north of Route 96, and I I . I ; Planning Board 4 02/ 16/2006 • Revised Subdivision Map, dated 1 /6/06 and revised 2/6/06 to remove the zoning boundary from the drawing, • Revised Proposed Site Plan dated 2/ 16/06 modified to show 54 parking spaces . 4 . The Planning Board, at a meeting held on January 19 , 2006 reviewed additional information that the project site is located within an area of archaeological sensitivity defined by the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), and voted to request review of the project by the State Historic Preservation Office, and 5 . In a letter dated January 27 , 2006 , the Planning Board notified the State Historic Preservation Office its intent to act as lead agency and its request for SHPO review the above-named project. It was later determined by the Planning Board, upon review of the Phase 3 Archaeological Site Mitigation-Water Distribution System —Towns of Ulysses & Ithaca Tompkins County for the Water District #3 Project, dated May 2004, prepared by Hartgen Archaeological Associates , that the known historic and archaeological site is located at the Halsey House on Trumansburg Road, approximately ''A mile from the proposed project site . In addition, it was determined that, based on the preliminary project plans submitted by theiapplicant, the project will not undertake significant grading operations , thereby limiting disturbance to any potential artifacts . As a result of these determinations, it was agreed that no further Phase I archaeological study was required by the applicant. 6 . The Planning Board received accident data from both the Sheriff' s Office on February 8 , 2006, and from the NYS Department of Transportation' s Systems Operation Section on February 14, 2006 , indicating there might be above-average rates of accidents in the project area. The Planning Board understands that more detailed review by DOT under the SEQR process will be required prior to final approval of the width, location and geometry of the proposed driveway. 7 . The Planning Board, on February 16, 2006 prepared a Part II of the Full Environmental Assessment Form, and reviewed and accepted as adequate drawings, site details and studies included in the site plan submission as listed above ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board, having undertaken the environmental the project as an Uncoordinated Review , established itself as Lead Agency, review of t , P J and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED : The Towel of Ulysses Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above-referenced action as proposed, and therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required, and that a notice of this determination will be duly filed and published pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 12 . The vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Ms . Chiuten, Mr. Means, Mr. Porter, Mr. Wertis NAYS : Ncine ABSENT : None ABSTAINED : None The vote on , the motion WAS CARRIED Planning Board 5 02/ 16/2006 PROPOSED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-002 Trumansburg Commons Kinney Drug Store Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Recommendation Tax Parcel No. 12-3- 18 2100 Trumansburg Road Town of Ulysses, New York Planning Board, February 16, 2006 MOTION made by Mr. Porter, seconded by Mr. Wertis WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval and recommendation for Subdivision Approval from the Town of Ulysses Planning Board, and an area variance for parking from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the proposed Trumansburg Commons/Kinney Drug Store proposal located on a +/- 1 . 74 acre parcel located at 2100 Trumansburg Road, currently part of Tax Parcel No . 12-3 - 18 , B1 Business District . The remaining +/- 4 . 3 acres of the property are not under consideration at this time. The proposal consists of a 12 ,075 gross square foot, one-story drive-thru pharmacy, one 24 foot driveway on NYS Route 96/Trumansburg Road, a 54-space parking lot, stormwater facilities, on-site well, and landscaping. Trumansburg Commons, LLC , Owner/Applicant; Joseph H. Hucko , Agent, and 2 . This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ulysses Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in an uncoordinated environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, recommendation for Subdivision Approval, and area variance, has , on February 16 , 2006 , made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the Applicant, and project information as follows : • Planning Board Submittal, dated December 15 , 2005 • Requested Supplemental Information, dated 12/23 /05 • Set of Drawings, dated December 2005 • Letter of Confirmation of Authority, dated January 2 , 2006 • 65 % Contract Drawings , dated January 2006 • Revised Survey, dated 1 /6/06 • Response to comments, by Synapse Risk Management, LLC, dated January 19, 2006 • Response to comments, by Jim Napoleon & Associates, dated January 19 , 2006 • Revised Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and Associated Drawings, dated January 2006, and prepared a Part II, and • Revised Proposed Final Site Plan, Figure 1 , dated Jan. 2006 showing the proposed site plan on the existing survey, and including the existing driveway to the ShurSave property north of Route 96, and • Revised Subdivision Map , dated 1 /6/06 and revised 2/6/06 to remove the zoning boundary from the drawing, • Revised Proposed Site Plan dated 2/ 16/06 modified to show 54 parking spaces . 3 . The Planning Board, on January 19, 2006, held a Public Hearing for the SEQR, 4 . Trumansburg Commons/Kinney Drug Store is a legal conforming use under the B1 Zoning District and the variance for reduction of parking was granted. Planning Board 6 02/ 16/2006 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board hereby recommends Subdivision Approval to the Zoning Officer for the proposed subdivision of +/- 1 . 74 acres located at 2100 Trumansburg Road, currently part of Town of Ulysses Tax Parcel No . 12- 3 - 18 , subject to the following conditions : a. Removal of section of building to remain on Tax Parcel No . 12-3 - 18 in order to achieve side yard setback of 15 feet, as required by Article XIII — Business District, Section 13 . 5 of the Town of Ulysses Code, and b . Submission prior to plat being filed and building permit be issued an original or mylar copy of the plat and three dark-lined prints , prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ulysses Zoning Officer, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board hereby grants Site Plan Approval for the proposed Trumansburg Commons/Kinney Drug Store proposal located on a +/- 1 . 74 acre parcel located at 2100 Trumansburg Road as shown in the site plan submission materials, subject to the following conditions : a. Submission of a stormwater Operation and Maintenance Plan/Schedule for the stormwater infiltration basin, prior to issuance of a building permit, and b . Provision of solid screen fencing around the dumpsters , and c . Submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and/or federal agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent for NYSDEC , highway work permit from NYSDOT, and d . Developer and William J. Auble reaching an agreement, prior to issuance r of a building permit, satisfactory to the Zoning Officer, that the side yard setback on the remainder of Town of Ulysses Tax Parcel No . 12-3 - 18 has been provided as required by Article XIII — Business District, Section 13 . 5 of the Town of Ulysses Code, and e. Whereas the GML 239 1/m/n has not been completed, the Chair of Town of Ulysses Planning Board will not sign the Site Plan as approved until the County Planning Department has conducted their 239 1/m and provided that the review does not recommend disapproval . If the County makes recommendations not previously discussed the Site Plan will come back to the Planning Board for review/approval . The vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : Ms Chiuten, Mr. Means , Mr. Porter, Mr. Wertis NAYS : None ABSENT : None ABSTAINED : None The vote on the motion WAS CARRIED Mr. Coogan stated the County' s highway concerns for the future . The Route 13 corridor is number one priority then Route 89 with Route 96 following. These have been prioritized and will be dealt with in this sequence . The Planning Board can request the Town Board review for an Access Management Plan to help mitigate traffic concerns and recommends such. Mr. Porter stated that Ms . Chiuten had spoken with DOT and has voiced the Planning Board ' s concern with traffic safety thus she has done due diligence. The representatives from Washington Street Partners thanked the Board for the work they had done and excused themselves from the meeting. Planning Board 7 02/ 16/2006 The remainder of the meeting was spent discussing the future meetings and training. Mr. Coogan stated Mr. Ken Zeserson and Rebecca Schneider had been appointed by the Town Board and would be receiving their notices of appointment within a day or two . Ms . Chiuten stated the next meeting would be the regular day of 3 "d Tuesday of the Month - March 21st, 2006 . She asked Mr. Coogan if there could be some form of training available for that date . Mr. Coogan stated he would contact the County Planning to have someone come and provide training for that day. Meeting adjourned at 9 : 47 pm Respectfully submitted, Robin Carlisle Peck Secretary 05/02/06