Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-11-02 - PB TOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD 11 /02/06 Approved with correction 11/15/06 Present: Chairperson Margot Chiuten, Planning Board Members : David Means, Rod Porter, Rebecca Schneider, Darien Simon, John Wertis, Ken Zeserson, Code Enforcement Officer Alex Rachun. Applicants : Jamie Kehoe, Irene Kehoe Minutes : Ms . Chiuten presented the minutes from the September 19th meeting, Mr. Means made the MOTION, Mr. Wertis seconded to APPROVE the minutes . the was unanimous, MINUTES APPROVED . Ms . Chiuten presented the minutes from the October 25th, 2006 Public Hearing, Mr. Means made the MOTION, Mr. Wertis seconded to APPROVE the minutes, the vote was unanimous, MINUTES APPROVED . Ms . Chiuten called the meeting to order at 7 : 35 pm, she stated they would be continuing to review the project, no decision would be made tonight as they will continue the Public Hearing. They will give the public another opportunity on the 15th, she would like to go through the comments heard and within the two weeks be able to make a decision. They would be doing the SEQR form to determine if the project will or will result in any large or significant impact. For example by law a significant impact is increasing the traffic by a certain number of trips . There are thresholds and they are hugely high thresholds. Ms . Schneider asked if this is a decision they make, to see if they meet the thresholds, i . e . 150 cars — they are under the thresholds but if it is a special situation would they argue for that. Ms . Chiuten answered exactly, if they exceeded the traffic threshold they would require a traffic study be done . Mr. Zeserson stated this is difficult because they cannot predict the future but try to plan for that. Ms . Schneider stated the issues she felt they had to deal with are is the septic system designed to deal adequately with the steep grading and proximity to the lake. Will they be adequate to deal the quantity and not contaminate groundwater and ultimately pollute the lake. Ms . Chiuten stated her personal opinion is since he has hired an engineer and the Health Department has to approve it she is comfortable with this having the other levels in check. Mr. Zeserson agreed they have to defer to the other agencies completely, he is not capable of determining if they are adequate . Mr. Means agreed stating that is why they sent the plans to the other agencies to review with their areas of expertise . Ms . Chiuten stated they were asked to review and they also require a permit process thus the work would be reviewed then as well . Ms. Schneider stated for what it is worth it is difficult to look at-the systems look good but she does not have the expertise needed, she is concerned environmentally due to the steep slopes . Another item she would like to put on the table is the pathways with the steep slopes . Planning Board Meeting 2 11 /02/2006 Ms . Chiuten stated they had asked for the pathways, they also asked for specific information as to how the paths would be designed. The members reviewed the maps provided and determined the locations of the trails. Ms . Schneider stated for future reference she cannot determine the numbers, she would prefer the full scale to determine accurate measurements . They discussed the roadways would be gravel . Ms . Chiuten asked Mr. Kehoe if they were proposing gravel for all of the roads and pathways . Mr. Kehoe stated the roads are gravel the pathways that are there are basically hay. Ms. Chiuten asked what would happen on the trails that go to the back, the Board has concerns that if they have horses and carriages using the trails eventually it will rut-out, the grass will wear away and that will create erosion. Mr. Kehoe stated they had planned on having dirt and grass paths that would be natural . He can have Peter take care of this at the meeting on the 15th . They would maintain the roads he will not want erosion on the roads . Ms . Chiuten stated that is what they are looking for is confirmation it is protected. Mr. Zeserson asked if there is erosion on the road how that would affect other properties . Ms . Schneider stated that these are steep slopes that all drain down into the creeks and off their property. They have already have evidence of sedimentation down slope per comments from the public hearing. Once there is deforestation, removal of trees with roots that will hold that, the next rain it washed down. It is their job to review to make sure it is designed properly. They are bringing it up as an issue that due to steep slopes this should be prevented from happening. f t: Ms . Chiuten stated that one way to deal with it is write in a condition that if and when the trails are carved out, the soil be replaced and revegetated. Ms . Schneider stated she liked this idea, if this items can be written in for monitoring and protection . Mr. Means asked Mr. Kehoe how he felt about this, it is difficult for them to envision what is going to happen in 9 years as they draft this . Mr. Kehoe stated he was accepting of the requests . Ms. Schneider stated that from the public hearing it was evident that he has neighbors around him that care a lot about what is going on and they see some evidence, right or wrong, that he is affecting them. He wants good relationships with them, not complaining and calling the police. It is in their best interest and his for the Board to make sure there are not problems-and not complaining about erosion and sound . She clarified the applicant had provided the information they requested, then they have to review the DEC checklist, what else do they have to do . r Ms . Chiuten stated there are two different things going on, the first is the SEQR process t , and the Site Plan Review . In the SEQR Part 1 is completed by the applicant, Part 2 is their responsibility to review, they have to determine if there is a small to moderate impact, potential large impact and whether an impact can be mitigated by project change . She referred to page 7 of the SEQR application, it is their responsibility and it is filed as part of the record, the Determination of Significance with the Negative or Positive declaration is signed and filed. Mr. Zeserson asked for clarification that they would be completing the SEQR tonight. Planning Board Meeting 3 11 /02/2006 Ms . Chiuten replied yes, they do not have to make the Negative or Positive declaration tonight but if they could get through the document, draft a list of additional information needed, the decision could be made the 15 `h Mr. Porter stated it is not as difficult as it appears , the process goes fairly quickly. Ms . Chiuten stated some of the questions are very obvious, going through the samples the thresholds are huge and completing the form goes quickly. She indicated examples i . e. vegetating disturbed slopes . A lengthy discussion followed regarding the environmental impacts of each area. Ms . Chiuten left the meeting at 8 : 15 pm, she appointed Mr. Wertis to continue as Chairperson for the rest of the meeting. The Board completed Part 2 of the SEQR form after discussion of the Impacts, the specific areas were completed as follows . Impact on Land-Yes 1 . All Small to Moderate 2 . No Impact on Water 3 . No 4 . No 5 . No 6 . Yes-All small to moderate Other Impacts runoff will be mitigated with plantings to prevent erosion. Impact on Air 7 . No Impact on Plant and Animals Rebecca to research list per Tompkins County Unique Natural Area listings 8 . 9 . No Impact on Agricultural Land Resources 10 . No Impact on Aesthetic Resouces 11 . Yes-All small to moderate Other impacts/Proposed mitigation-The Board recognized this project is part of the Cayuga Scenic Byway, the fence was approved requiring tree plantings to mitigate aesthetics on site . Impact on Historic and Archaeological Resources 12 . No Impact on Open Space and Recreation 13 . No Impact on Critical Environmental Areas 14 . No Impact on Transportation 15 . Yes-All small to moderate Other impacts : The applicant is being required to have traffic and parking management onsite during big events . Impact on Energy 16 . No Planning Board Meeting 4 11 /02/2006 Noise and Odor Impact 17 . Yes-All small to moderate Other impacts : Amplified sound events have restricted hours, permit recommendation to Town Board for events over 100 people . Restriction on number of horses as well as manure bays design onsite to mitigate odor impact. Impact on Public Health 18 . No Impact on Growth and Character of Community or Neighborhood 19 . No 20 . No The members agreed they would research the information needed to make the decision at the continuation of the Public Hearing on November 15th A discussion of items requested and information received resulted in two additional items needed from Mr. Kehoe. A request for detail for regarding the manure bays as well as written confirmation from the Cayuga Nature Center, etc . regarding availability of overflow parking for bus parking. Mr. Kehoe stated he would contact Ms . Allen to provide the manure bay design, he has spoken with Mr. Weeks however due to a death in the family he has not gotten back to him in writing. The Board reviewed the draft of the resolution as prepared by Ms . Chiuten. Revisions were made to reflect concerns from the Public Hearing. The draft is as follows : DRAFT TOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD PROPOSED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2006-011 Keyman ' s New Park Project Site Plan Approval Tax Parcel No. 18.-4-2 and 18.-4-3 1488- 1500 Taughannock Boulevard Town of Ulysses, New York Planning Board, November 15, 2006 MOTION made by , seconded by WHEREAS : 1 . The Town of Ulysses Planning Board is considering a Sketch Plan for the proposed Keyman ' s New Park Project (NYS Route 89), Town of Ulysses Tax Parcel Nos . 18 . -4-2 and 18 . -4-3 , B- 1 Business District and R1 Rural Residential District. Since proposed project is located in a B1 and a R1 district a determination will be made setting the zoning precedents for this project. The project proposes rehabilitation of 7 existing cabins/bungalows, rehabilitation of the existing garage into a wine tasting room, construction of 3 new cabins/bungalows and a hobby/storage barn, a new horse barn, new septic systems, a gravel parking lot for approximately 50 cars, and site improvements . The proposed site improvements include plantings, stone walls and other aesthetic structures, two stone arch vehicular bridges and a wooden pedestrian bridge over existing drainage ways, and 8 ' high cedar stockade fencing. There are currently three driveway curb cuts onto NYS Route 89 which will remain. Existing trails throughout the parcel will be rehabilitated for use by pedestrians and horse-drawn wagons . Jamie Kehoe, Owner/Applicant, Allen Engineering and Novelli Engineering, Consultants and Planning Board Meeting 5 11 /02/2006 2 . The proposed Keyman' s New Park Project, which requires site plan approval, is an Unlisted action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617 , and 3 . The applicant has submitted materials for the above-described action, including a project description and a set of concept drawings, dated 8/ 14/06, as listed below : • FEAF-with a description of proposed uses, and inclusion that part Part of the project is located within a Tompkins County Unique Natural Area. • Plan for landscaping details, • Architectural blueprints for buildings to be constructed. • Base Map • Concept Map • Septic System Plan • Septic System Details • Erosion Control/SWPPP Plan • Pedestrian Suspension bridge detail • Masonry Arch Bridge detail 4 . The applicant has submitted a revised site plan on USGS map, dated XXXXXX, indicating the following changes , as listed below : • Location of the horse barn, paddock and any manure storage facilities on the R- 1 parcel . • Description of how horse manure will be stored/ managed to minimize runoff potential down slope and into the creek system. • Location of proposed parking and turn-around for buses . • Location of all proposed trails relative to topography and cross- ' sectional detail of the trails that will be supporting the proposed stagecoach traffic . • Location of 2 handicapped parking spaces, ideally one each by the Wine Tasting facility and the cabins . 5 . The Tompkins County Department of Planning submitted its review pursuant to § 239 —1 and —m of the NYS General Municipal Law, 6 . The Town of Ulysses Planning Board has received comments from interested/involved agencies, and has not received any opposition to its intent to declare lead agency, and thus is acting as the Lead Agency, 7 . The Town of Ulysses Planning Board held a public hearing on October 25 , 2006 at 710 PM, continued on November 15 , 2006 at 7 : 30 PM, 8 . It was determined the horse barn on the R1 parcel is an allowable use as a commercial stable . NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board, having undertaken the environmental review of the project as an Uncoordinated Review, established itself as Lead Agency, and 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 pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617 . 12 . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board hereby grants Site Plan Approval for the proposed Keyman ' s New Park Project proposal , subject to the following conditions prior to issuance of a building permit : Planning Board Meeting 6 11 /02/2006 1 . Applicant must revegetate all disturbed stream/creek/drainage swale banks with native/adapted plant species tolerant of intermittent inundation. Plant list to be approved by stormwater committee, plant species may be obtained at website name. 2 . Designate an alternate parking area for overflow and / or provide evidence in writing of the agreement with Cayuga Nature Center to provide such overflow space. 3 . Provide a plan for traffic control along Rt . 89 during events in excess of 100 I persons . E 4 . A maximum of six horses will be allowed at any time onsite, 5 . Maintenance of all trail surfaces with either vegetation or gravel to prevent soil erosion and sedimentation in the creek. 6 . Hours of operation for events using sound systems will be limited to 6am to 11 pm . 7 . Exterior lighting shall be reviewed and approved by the Town of Ulysses Planning Board before installation, 8 . Prohibit motor vehicles other than maintenance purposes on the trails, 9 . Provide signage and maps delineating property lines to all who use the Kehoe property. 10 . Provide temporary portable sanitation facilities for any large events . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board hereby reaffirms Site Plan Approval for the proposed fence approved on August 15 , 2006, given that said fence will adequately be mitigated with vegetation against negative visual impacts . BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED : That the Town of Ulysses Planning Board recommends to the Town of Ulysses Town Board legislation be adopted requiring Special Permits for events over 100 people Ii and/or involving amplified sounds . I The vote on the motion resulted as follows : AYES : NAYS : ABSENT : ABSTAINED : N/A The vote on the motion was CARRIED/FAILED The meeting was adjourned at 9 : 10 pm. Respectfully submitted, Robin Carlisle Peck Secretary 11 / 15/06 I