HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-12-28 - PB TOWN OF ULYSSES
PLANNING BOARD
12/28/07
Approved 01/15/08 with corrections
Present: Chairperson Ken Zeserson, Planning Board Members : David Kerness,
David Means, Rod Porter, Rebecca Schneider, John Wertis, Deputy Supervisor
Dick Coogan.
Applicants : Michael and Melinda Cirri, Mike May-attorney for David Kline
Public : John Hrubos
Mr. Zeserson presented the development district prepared from the last meeting.
He asked the members if they had specific questions .
Mr. Wertis stated he had questions regarding the business hours part. The statement
indicates all sales are to cease an hour prior to closing. His question is how will they
collect money, he pulls into the parking lot will he pay an admission ticket or pay item by
item .
Mr. Cirri indicated he would pay item by item there is not an admission fee to get onto
the grounds .
Mr. Wertis stated he is on the grounds for free, if he wants to play miniature golf or jump
on the trampoline he would pay the fee, but the way it is written if they have dispensing
machines or purchase food this could not be done. If he and his buddies are coming home
from Ithaca at 11 : 30 on Friday and want to play a round of golf they would not be able to
but they also could not purchase a t-shirt or get a drink. He is not sure this is what they
really want in this section.
Mr. Kerness stated they could revise allowable uses .
Mr. Means stated it did not seem to make sense to limit the arcade, food and retail sales
an hour prior to closing.
A discussion of the group revised the business hours section to have all activities in
( 16 . 3 . 11 a) sales cease one hour prior to closing. The indoor arcade game was removed
from the activities area and listed separately as an allowed use.
Mr. Means asked if the district is owner specific .
Mr. Wertis acknowledged it is not owner specific, if the Cirri ' s sell the district
allowances go with the property. That is part of their problem, these are the good guys,
and the Board does not know who might own it in the future.
Mr. Cirri stated they had spent a lot of time on noise, and his recollection was they were
going to reference the existing Town ordinance.
Mr. Kerness stated they did for the overall complex, they specifically focused on the go
karts and decided 75 dbs would be within the range and decided to have the overall
complex included to reflect current Town standards .
Mr. Wertis asked if it would make sense to have the overall limits listed first.
Mr. Porter stated it probably would not make a difference, he asked why they would limit
the go carts to less than the overall.
Mr. Kerness stated a cumulative impact would occur; they reviewed the noise impacts
from studies he presented at the last meeting. He offered to review this information with
Mr. Porter.
Planning Board 2
12/28/07
Mr. Porter stated he understood and declined the information being reviewed again.
Mr. Wertis stated he thought the wording was off, he asked for clarification specifically
the hour' s portion of the noise regulations .
A discussion of the members chose to revise this section to have the 55 dbs for all other '
operating hours as specified in Section 16 . 3 . 11 (c) .
Mr. Means asked if it was under their control or not, but what would happen if someone
brought in a cooler of beer to the picnic section.
Mr. and Mrs . Cirri stated alcohol is not allowed.
Mr. Means asked if it should be written in or would it be up to the applicants to enforce .
Mr. Zeserson stated he thought it would be covered under the State and County laws, he
asked if the applicants planned on selling alcohol.
Mr. Cirri stated they have no intention of serving alcohol on the premises and they would
feel more comfortable dealing with this issue on their own.
Mr. Wertis stated the noise level should be changed to reflect the district boundary not
the property boundary.
The other members agreed this would be a logical change. All portions of the
development district reflecting property boundary would be changed to district boundary.
Mr. Means stated he had questions regarding the parking areas. The way he reads it if 1
they follow the design standards they would need 1 tree for 5 parking spaces . There was
some concern regarding trees for buffers and let it go on the South side of the property.
The way it looks now there are no plans for trees on the South side of the property.
Mr. Cirri stated it is in the color rendering to have trees .
Mr. Wertis recalled a discussion that if there were tall trees in the parking lot it would
block the aesthetic view of the golf course to people driving along the road. They did not
necessarily say no trees were necessary, but he remembers this conversation.
Mr. Means stated he thought no tree ' s was an extreme, he noted there were two islands to
be landscaped.
A discussion regarding an acceptable amount of trees and the current design standards.
The requirement for different districts as well as the requirement for having 30 foot
deciduous trees was also an issue for the applicant ; he was concerned this requirement
would be overkill . Concern regarding how the design standard was established in the
zoning ordinance. The standards were established to eliminate projects that would have a
large area of paved parking areas with no landscaping as had been done in past projects .
The members are doing a good job at reviewing the ramifications of this project and
mitigating the potential impacts.
The economic ramifications was also approached, additional items added onto this
project reduces the viability of this project. The survey shows woods along the North and
West sprinkled along the South across the road are shrubs and woods . The need for trees
to shade and provide cooling for radiant heating was an issue.
The Board decided 1 tree per 10 parking spaces in or around the parking lot would be
acceptable. The applicant agreed this would be a viable plan for the current phase as well
as the future plans . The decision to not list immediately adjacent due to future expansion
Planning Board 3
12/28/07
of the parking area was made. The parking area specification was reflected to show the
change.
Mr. Zeserson stated the parking specifications were done, the next item was signs.
Mr. Wertis stated under signs the business directional signs were not necessarily on the
property or are they? What are business directional sign ' s, he asked Mr. Coogan for
clarification.
Mr. Coogan stated it could be on Route 96, i . e . mini-golf 5 miles, or on the property
mini-golf here. The specifications etc . are in the zoning ordinance.
Mr. Porter noted it could not be less than 500 feet from the nearest intersection.
Mr. Coogan reviewed the new zoning ordinance to verify it was still in place. He
affirmed the members decided the sign specifications were acceptable at the last meeting.
Mr. Zeserson stated the next item would be outdoor lighting.
Mr. Wertis stated the specifications were a mess, it seems when they look at the section
there were two intents . One is relative to the chart on page 89, the Town is taking some
responsibility for safe lighting, and the bottom of the page is more restrictive and
focusing on installation and the kinds of particular luminaire ' s . Somehow, they need to
recognize that. They have in part a, security lighting on the premises should be a
minimum of . 5 footcandles could the applicant decide they want the entire facility lit up
under this specification.
Mr. Porter noted that the way the specification is written they would have to provide
security lighting for the entire facility.
The members discussed the specification and if the security lighting should be a
minimum vs . maximum. The need for security for seeing if someone is chiseling into the
facility as well as safety reasons . They also decided needing a standard for the operating
hours as well as the non operating hours . The questions why they would want to require
. 5 footcandles when there are no people on the premises . The applicants stated they
would like lighting but not the entire facility. The applicants were asked what they want
for the security lighting, the applicant stated he would require some lighting but is not
sure at this point a maximum would be acceptable .
The discussion to list a maximum during non operating hours of . 5 footcandles for
security lighting. The lighting at the district boundary at all times was revised to reflect
maximum of . 2 footcandles at all hours was revised into the specifications .
Mr. Zeserson noted the next area they briefly touched on was vegetative buffers .
Ms . Schneider stated she has a point to note, they have a map that shows vegetative
buffers but on the map listing the expansions the stormwater management system and the
go cart track extends into this buffer.
Mr. Cirri stated at the last meeting they were informed they could keep it materially
maintained. Specifically this means if they have to remove a tree or two this would be
allowed to assist in the operation of the business but they cannot remove the entire tree
line.
Mr. Zeserson stated this was suggested by the unofficial legal counsel .
Ms. Schneider stated if the other members were okay with this with the go carts but the
stormwater management system has 1 /3 of it in the tree line how would this work.
She reviewed the 11 /02/07 map and asked for clarification.
Planning Board 4
12/28/07
Mr. Cirri stated the new maps did not reflect this change but they have moved this to
accommodate this buffer being left intact and maintained. He indicated the changes on
the maps provided . One of the maps did not reflect the revised date he would take care of
this as soon as possible.
Mr. May stated when the surveyor/planner did this the tree ' s were not measured it is a
scaled out measurement.
Ms . Schneider noted it is approximate and the distance away from the boundary would be
the stormwater management plan. She stated if the other members were comfortable with
these revisions she determined they were acceptable to her.
The members agreed this would be a sufficient plan for these buffers .
Ms . Schneider stated she has a quick question on a related issue, she loves the way the
buffers are being left, however she questioned if there were any fencing being provided
for the ponds in the mini-golf area. She was concerned regarding the attractive nuisance
criteria, preventing kids from wandering into the ponds .
Mr. Coogan stated it would depend on the depth this would be dealt with under the
building code regulations .
Ms . Schneider stated she had run into this during the construction of the turtle project at
Cass Park, they had to construct a fence around the tiny channel around the turtle due to
attractive nuisance laws . She wanted to make the applicants aware they may have to deal
with this . She commented the security lighting may deal with this .
Mr. Cirri thanked Ms . Schneider and stated he would check with the mini-golf builder as
he has probably dealt with this, they do have rope fences around certain holes, yet there
are at least 1 or 2 holes that they hit the ball into the water. He reviewed the mini-golf
area and noted that with the exception of 1 hole the areas would have roped fences .
Mr. Zeserson asked based on what they had just discussed they do have a proposed
resolution.
Mr. Kerness noted they had not discussed the construction section and there was a change
proposed . He noted they wanted to add 1 , 000 linear feet maximum to the size of the go
cart track.
Ms Schneider asked for clarification on section d . , there were typographical errors that
were corrected to reflect 25 ,000 square feet layout per master plan of 12/ 18/07.
Mr. Zeserson presented the resolution provided in hardcopy to each member.
Mr. Cirri asked if before they put the go carts in there is a new technology that is created
would they have to put in electric under the specifications .
Ms. Schneider asked if they could get a variance if in fact new technology is available at
that point in time.
Mr. Coogan stated in a development district there are no allowances for change, if fuel
cells are the trend they would have to put in electric unless they come in for a new
district. The zoning may change to allow these changes in the future but at this point
there is not a change mechanism in place.
Ms . Schneider agreed that they should allow for technological improvements however
she agreed this was not a place to deal with this issue. The advancement in technology
should be addressed as a whole with the development districts and thought this issue
should be addressed to the Town Board.
Planning Board 5
12/28/07
The members discussed and requested Mr. Zeserson write a letter to the Town Board
requesting changes/improvement to development districts be incorporated into the
zoning. They also expressed concern regarding the commercial sign size, lighting and
noise ordinances.
Mr. Zeserson agreed he would compose a letter and send it to the members for editing,
once reviewed it would be sent to the Town Board .
Mr. Coogan stated this is a good point for the Planning Board they are using the
document and need to provide input to the Town Board regarding areas that are working
and not working.
Mr. Hrubos stated he came to this meeting planning on attending a 5 minute meeting so
he wanted to express that he has been very impressed with the process this Board went
through. Their attention to detail and their consideration to the applicant were outstanding
and he applauds them for this . He does think this project will be a nice benefit to the
entire Town and thanked them for all their hard work and wished them all a Happy New
Year.
Mr. Means asked Mr. Zeserson to include in his letter a simple procedure is often easier
to enforce. The lighting area is complicated and difficult to understand.
Ms . Schneider noted that they seemed to arbitrarily decide on 10 trees vs . 5 trees as well
as the lighting, she would think there is scientific background for the zoning. She
questioned on where the zoning came from .
Mr. Porter stated that the tree section was primarily aesthetic .
Mr. Coogan stated it was recommended to be aggressive for tree planting. It was more to
eliminate areas such as Palmer' s and Shursave. It was more to prevent an urban setting.
Mr. Zeserson asked if everyone has reviewed the resolution.
Mr. Coogan stated he had one suggestion which he seems is important, under the 9th item
he would add a comment they have established guidelines for the development district.
He would insert "Whereas, the Town of Ulysses Planning Board has given due
consideration to all information and comments in conducting the creation of Cirri
Development District and has established standards and guidelines for the development
district . "
Mr. Kerness asked if the resolution could be listed in the legal notice. He is not sure the
public would know about the project in its full capacity.
Mr. Coogan stated he is not sure it would help .
Mr. Zeserson stated he does not know if it would help, if they put it in front of the public
word for word he is not sure they would understand. This Board has spent almost two
hours going over a two page document and they are experienced in this area.
Mr. Wertis stated they only way they could do that would be to list a paid advertisement
the newspaper would print what they want to print.
Ms . Schneider stated they could list it in the newspaper and reference the webpage for
specifics .
Mr. Kerness stated they could do an article with the newspaper and reference the website
as well providing information to the public .
Planning Board 6
12/28/07
•
Ms . Carlisle Peck stated the Town Board would have to decide on how to advertise this
and provide further details to the public .
Mr. Zeserson stated he would like to finalize the resolution and call the vote for the
Cirri Development District. Mr. Zeserson read the following resolution to the members.
WHEREAS, the Town of Ulysses adopted zoning regulations in Local Law Number 4 of
2007 that includes 3 . 5 establishing criteria for Development Districts and their rezoning,
WHEREAS, Michael Cirri has participated in a Sketch Plan Conference, submitted the
required documents and paid the fees for the rezoning of the proposed Development
District for a Family Entertainment Center,
WHEREAS, the proposed project, Cirri Family Entertainment Center, is to be located in
the existing Development District 5 and the proposed use and lot requirements for this
project conform to the specifications outlined in 16 .2 . 11 (a) and 16 . 3 . 11 (b) of the current
zoning law,
WHEREAS, other interested agencies have been notified and afforded an opportunity to
respond to this project,
WHEREAS, the Town of Ulysses has notified the Tompkins County Planning
Department pursuant to General Municipal Law #239 1, m, and n review having no
negative impact on the County and therefore no supermajority being needed for passage
by the Town of Ulysses Planning Board,
WHEREAS, the Town of Ulysses Planning Board made findings and a determination on
the environmental impact of the project under SEQR and determined the action to be a ' I
Type I with a negative declaration
WHEREAS, the proposed project complies with the Town of Ulysses Local Law 01 of
2007 Stormwater Management and Erosion & Sediment Control and all control measures
are in compliance with the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual and
WHEREAS, Public Hearings on the development district and SEQRA shall be conducted
by the Town Board as the approving authority,
WHEREAS, the Town of Ulysses Planning Board has given due consideration to all
information and comments in conducting the creation of the Cirri Development District
and has established standards for the proposed district,
WHEREAS, the project in question does indeed offer facilities deemed desirable to the
community according to the currently operative Comprehensive Plan for the Town of
Ulysses,
WHEREAS, the surrounding land use is zoned primarily Agriculture to discourage dense
residential development and encourage open space and the proposed project of mini golf courses,
Go-kart track, corn maze, batting cages would help preserve the openness and intended character
of this area,
WHEREAS, there are currently few residential dwellings in the area surrounding the proposed
project that would be adversely affected by the lights and noise of a family entertainment facility,
WHEREAS, the proposed development district is in a location that has been a development
district since 1983 ,
THEREFOR'; IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the Planning Board of the Town of Ulysses
hereby recommends approval of the proposed Cirri Family Entertainment Center in a newly
Planning Board 7
12/28/07
formed Development District pending the outcome of the public hearing as shown on the Draft
Dated 12/ 18/07 .
Mr. Porter MADE the MOTION to approve the resolution, Mr. Kemess SECONDED the
MOTION;
Mr. Zeserson called the vote and is recorded as follows :
Mr. Kemess AYE
Mr. Means AYE
Mr. Porter AYE
Ms Schneider AYE
Mr. Wertis AYE
Mr. Zeserson AYE
THE RESOLUTION WAS PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.
Mr. May asked if could be provided with a copy of the Kline resolution.
Mr. Zeserson stated they would be composing the resolution he would be happy to do this
over the weekend and send via email .
Mr. Means stated they would not have it done by the end of the year.
Mr. Coogan stated they could make it simple they are taking an existing development
district and recommending approval of creating a separate development district out of it.
They could state the boundary as indicated in the survey map and uses as described in the
draft of the zoning. Technically they have changed Kline ' s district, they would be stating
that the remaining portion shall conform to the boundaries and uses remain in effect.
Mr. Wertis noted the draft indicates a difference in the zoning due to the tractor
equipment being added to the specifications . He asked if the members had envisioned
they could have up to 50 cars due to the 500 feet allowance. He has never seen it happen
they are always clustered along the building but it is allowed.
Mr. Coogan stated they could not get the cars in there . The 75 feet requirement would
prevent this . There was some change in the center line due to new paving. He stated the
cars have to be 5 feet from the building . This is a New York State building code
requirement.
Mr. Means asked if there was a problem changing 500 feet to 200 feet.
Mr. May stated the contract with Cirri ' s is Mr. Kline ' s district would remain intact. He
mentioned this before and if the Town Board did not approve the contract they would
retain what they have.
Mr. Wertis asked Mr. May he is comfortable with the draft which added the new items
as still being left intact.
Mr. May stated he does not have an issue with the additions, he just wants to insure his
clients district is left intact if the project does not get approved.
Mr. Zeserson asked the members for assistance in drafting the resolution. The members
composed the resolution as follows :
WHEREAS, the Town of Ulysses Planning Board recommended approval for the Cirri
Development District to be created out of the existing Kline Development District,
WHEREAS, the original intent of the Kline Development District was a 3 acre site,
Planning Board 8
12/28/07
WHEREAS, all uses will remain the same with the addition of farm equipment,
WHEREAS, a SEQR review indicated a Negative Declaration for environmental
impacts,
WHERAS, the Town of Ulysses Town Board shall hold a Public Hearing and a SEQR
Hearing for public comment,
THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, the Town of Ulysses Planning Board
recommends approval for the Kline Development District as shown on the Draft dated
12/ 18/07 .
Mr. Porter MADE the MOTION to approve, Mr. Kerness SECONDED the motion.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows :
AYES : Mr. Means, Mr. Porter, Ms . Schneider, Mr. Wertis, Mr. Zeserson
NAYS : NONE
ABSENT : NONE
ABSTAINED : NONE
THE RESOLUTION WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY
Mr. Zeserson adjourned the meeting at 9 :40 a.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Robin Carlisle Peck
Secretary
01 /04/08