Loading...
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