HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-04-21-PB-FINALTOWN OF ULYSSES
PLANNING BOARD
MINUTES
April 21, 2015
Approved: May S, 2015
Present: Chairperson John Wertis, Board Members: Sarah Adams, David Diaz, Andy Rice, and
David Blake; Town Board Liaison Richard Goldman
Excused: Craig Salino
Members of the Public Present: Lance Brabant of MRB Group
Call to Order at: 7:00 p.m.
Agenda Review; Minutes Review (04/07/2015)
No changes to the agenda were made.
Mr. Wertis MADE the MOTION to accept the meeting minutes for April 7, 2015 with minor
changes, and Mr. Diaz SECONDED the MOTION. The vote was as follows:
Mr. Wertis AYE
Ms. Adams AYE
Mr. Diaz AYE
Mr. Rice AYE
Mr. Blake ABSTAINED
Result: Meeting minutes for April 7, 2015 approved.
Privilege of the Floor: The Planning Board welcomed MRB Group planner, Mr. Brabant who
has been an engineer at MRB Group for 10 years. He has worked with several municipalities,
including Dryden, Avon and Canandaigua, and will provide similar assistance to the Town of
Ulysses in the form of guidance during the SEQR process, Site Plan review, and any other
questions or concerns relative to applications that come before the Planning Board. While he has
assisted other municipalities in crafting board resolutions, Mr. Brabant said he would be working
directly with Town Environmental Planner Darby Kiley and with the Planning Board on an as -
needed basis.
Review of Planning Board Rules and Procedure re: Agendas and Planning Board Schedule
Ms. Adams proposed the Planning Board discuss its meeting schedule and suggested the Board
consider dedicating one meeting per month for applications and projects and another meeting
solely for Zoning issues and revisions. It seems each meeting of the Planning Board is taken up
with applications, leaving little to no time to discuss Zoning concerns.
Planning Board 2
April 21, 2015
Ms. Adams MADE the MOTION to designate one meeting a month for reviewing applications
and designate the second meeting to allow the Planning Board time to discuss more general
planning issues. Mr. Rice SECONDED the MOTION.
Mr. Blake said he does not disagree with the concept, but he expressed concern that such a
meeting schedule could delay an applicant's proposal. He later referenced the Trumansburg
Yoga Studio, whose owners wished to purchase property that was in foreclosure. The timeline
for purchasing the property was short. Ms. Adams said it is up to the Planning Board to inform
the applicant of its timeline, and added that most planning boards do not meet twice a month.
Mr. Rice said he supports having one meeting per month dedicated to Board business. A work
meeting allows the Planning Board time to examine Zoning issues without the distraction that
might occur with other business that is often emotionally charged. Mr. Diaz said Ms. Adams's
proposal makes sense. He does not see the Planning Board having the appropriate time to address
Zoning matters under the current schedule.
Mr. Wertis felt the Planning Board has dealt with most of the major issues with Zoning or, at the
very least, is headed toward revising and updating those problem areas. He has no quibbles with
holding a Planning Board meeting until 9 or 9:30 p.m. and believes the Board could address both
business and work matters at the same meeting if scheduled correctly. Echoing Mr. Blake's
comment, Mr. Wertis said the Planning Board should not lock itself into a schedule that may
possibly delay an applicant's timeline. He would rather the Board address an application
promptly rather than delay it for another two weeks.
Mr. Rice added that the community would observe the Planning Board's schedule if it were
clearly laid out.
Ms. Adams felt the Planning Board would never get to discussing substantive Zoning changes
without a dedicated monthly work meeting. Weighing changes at 8:30 p.m. is not optimal.
Asked by Mr. Goldman for insight, Mr. Brabant said a lot of communities hold two Planning
Board meetings per month while smaller communities typically hold just one. The number of
applications determines frequency of meetings. In Canandaigua, after the Planning Board's
meetings were stretching into midnight, they opted to designate the first meeting of the month for
both critical applications and continuation for applications. New applications are reviewed once
a month. The continuation process allows the Planning Board more time to review an
application, if necessary.
Mr. Wertis offered a friendly amendment to Ms. Adams's resolution, adding a provision that
would permit the Planning Board to address applications at its second meeting. The amended
resolution, which was accepted, is as follows:
BE IT RESOLVED, that the first meeting of the month is reserved for applications, and the
second meeting is designated for substantive planning and zoning proposals. The continuation of
Planning Board 3
April 21, 2015
applications not completed at the first meeting may be continued at the second meeting at the
discretion of the Board.
The vote was as follows:
Mr. Wertis NAY
Ms. Adams AYE
Mr. Diaz AYE
Mr. Rice AYE
Mr. Blake AYE
Result: Resolution approved.
Proposed Open Development Area
Mr. Wertis said this is the second time the Planning Board has been asked to deal with an Open
Development Area. State law says that, unless an Open Development Area is established, a
Town may not issue a building permit to a property that does not have access to a street or
highway. The Town Board discussed the Open Development Area and referred it to the Planning
Board for review. The issue appears to be entirely focused on health and safety since access to
the property must accommodate fire and emergency response vehicles. Responding to the
Town's request for review of the parcel's driveway access, the Trumansburg Fire Chief noted the
need for space in order to maneuver a fire truck. The manager of Trumansburg Emergency
Medical Services also noted the lack of space to turn around an ambulance. Specific numbers as
to how much space would be needed was not included, and Mr. Wertis said exact numbers for
the turnaround for the biggest piece of equipment they have are necessary.
Ms. Adams said her initial concern is with the fact that the parcel is located in a Unique Natural
Area. It is a concern that should be considered now and not delayed until Site Plan Review. Mr.
Blake noted that the Planning Board's task is to simply give information back to the Town
Board. Ms. Adams suggested the Planning Board note that the parcel is located in a UNA in its
formal resolution back to the Town Board. Mr. Blake said he is concerned about grading and
erosion and the ability of the road to support the heaviest expected vehicle.
Mr. Wertis requested additional information from the fire department. Ms. Adams noted that the
parcel is also a non -conforming size. At what time, she asked, does the Planning Board say that
this parcel is not an appropriate lot for development and there is no reason to proceed?
Mr. Goldman said the parcel is a grandfathered lot and believes that the Planning Board does not
have the power to prohibit a house from being constructed on the parcel. The Planning Board is
being asked to review the Open Development Area relative to health and safety issues.
Mr. Wertis said road maintenance is another question. Who is responsible for the maintenance,
under what sort of legal agreement and is that in writing?
Planning Board 4
April 21, 2015
Mr. Wertis MADE the MOTION to continue discussion of the Open Development Area at the
Planning Board's next meeting due to the need for additional information, and Mr. Diaz
SECONDED the MOTION. The vote was unanimously approved.
Result: Further discussion of Open Development Area is scheduled for the next meeting.
Sign Policy Review
Mr. Wertis MADE the MOTION to approve a resolution recommending to the Town Board an
amendment to Zoning Law to remove site plan review for signs in the B 1 and IL Zoning
Districts. Mr. Blake SECONDED the MOTION.
Mr. Wertis prefaced the ensuing discussion by saying that some Planning Board members felt
frustrated by a recent decision concerning the Trumansburg Wine and Spirits sign. The
information in the Town's Zoning document was clear enough to the applicant that he met all the
requirements, but Planning Board members were frustrated because it seemed like they were
rubber-stamping approval.
Ms. Adams apologized that she did not come fully prepared to discuss the Trumansburg Wine
and Spirits sign at the April 7, 2015 meeting. She felt the issue was whether or not the sign in
question was considered temporary. The Planning Board should have deemed the sign temporary
and stated that it was not allowed because it was not constructed of appropriate materials. She
suggested the resolution be tabled until the larger issue of signage is addressed, possibly during
the Town's future Zoning updates through the recently awarded NYSERDA grant.
Mr. Wertis withdrew the motion and stated the Planning Board would readdress the issue
sometime in the future. By his count, he said there are 15 signs within the Town that fit the
Town's definition of Temporary Sign, which allows for display for two weeks. There is a
question of whether or not the state Department of Transportation has any rules with putting
temporary signs in their right of way. Enforcing Zoning law in regard to temporary signs would
be a nightmare and require a registered date with the Town. Mr. Wertis reminded the board that
should there be any new application for a sign in the Business District, the board will follow the
site plan review process.
Mr. Goldman said it is not a matter of whether enforcement is difficult. If the Planning Board
deems it important to enforce time limits on temporary signage, then it is the job of the Town
Board to see that it happens. Also, he stated the Town Board is compiling a list of delinquent
properties with Zoning and Code violations and prioritizing what to do about them. He requested
Planning Board members inform Town Board Member John Hertzler of problem properties.
Photographs are helpful.
Solar and Wind Power Regulations
Since Ms. Kiley could not attend the meeting due to illness, the Planning Board skipped ahead to
its next agenda item.
Planning Board 5
April 21, 2015
SEAR Part 3
Mr. Wertis said he was reacting to a sentence in part 3 of the SEQR when he proposed at the
April 7 meeting to issue special considerations to an applicant who stated his intention to build a
home on Perry City Road. The language in Part III states that consideration should be given for
potential short-term and long-term cumulative impacts of development. Mr. Wertis said it was
important that the applicant understand that they need to take special considerations for storm
water when they develop the Perry City Road parcel. The cumulative effect of developing the
hillside could cause problems. In the future, Ms. Kiley may be advised not to write Part III but
instead delay it until the Planning Board completely reviews the SEQR. Town Counsel advised
Mr. Wertis that it would not have been a good idea to hand the applicant a document with special
considerations as part of the SEQR.
Mr. Diaz said the action on April 7 was purely about the subdivision. He agreed with Mr. Wertis
that there may be significant impacts if the applicant chooses to develop the property.
Mr. Wertis said there has been a suggestion that the Planning Board meet with the Trumansburg
Village Board of Trustees to discuss SEQR.
Ms. Adams said her problem with SEQR is that it is meant for larger projects in bigger
communities and does not adequately account for the size of communities. Mr. Brabant said the
Short Environmental Assessment Form is intended to address some of Ms. Adams's concerns.
Other communities have stated similar problems with SEQR, most notably how to state concerns
with an application instead of rubber-stamping it. He pointed to Mr. Wertis's suggestion to hold
off on completing Part III or have it done well in advance to allow for Planning Board review.
Mr. Wertis MADE the MOTION to adjourn the meeting, and Mr. Blake SECONDED the
MOTION. The vote was unanimous.
Meeting adjourned at 8:16 p.m.
Respectfully submitted by Louis A. DiPietro on April 22, 2015