Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2018_0226_Planning Board Minutes1 Village of Cayuga Heights Planning Board Meeting #76 Monday, February 26, 2018 Fire Station – 7:00 pm Minutes Present: Planning Board Members Chair F. Cowett, G. Gillespie, J. Leijonhufvud, R. Segelken Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross, Deputy Clerk J. Walker, Trustee M. McMurry, Alternate E. Quaroni K. Cuddeback, Gimme Coffee B. Warren, Warren Real Estate, 830/832 Hanshaw Road Members of the Public Item 1 – Meeting called to order  Chair F. Cowett opened the meeting at 7:00 pm.  Chair F. Cowett appointed Alternate E. Quaroni a full voting member of the Board for the meeting. Item 2 – August 28, 2017 Minutes  The Board reviewed the minutes of the August 28, 2017 meeting. Motion: E. Quaroni Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 238 APPROVING MINUTES OF AUGUST 28, 2017 RESOLVED, that the written, reviewed and revised minutes of the August 28, 2017 meeting are hereby approved. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, J. Leijonhufvud, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Abstained – G. Gillespie Opposed – None Item 3 – Public Comment  No members of the public wished to comment. 2 Item 4 – Special Use Permit – Gimme Coffee/Corners Community Shopping Center  Chair F. Cowett stated that he is acquainted with the applicant; he does not have a financial stake in the outcome of the application and his relationship with the applicant will not impair nor influence his judgment on the application.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that Lona’s Cakes vacated its space in Corners Community Shopping Center, which is located in the Village’s Commercial zoning district, and Gimme Coffee would like to open an establishment there; under the old zoning code, a coffee shop/restaurant type establishment in the Commercial zoning district required special approval from the Board of Trustees; under the new zoning law, a special use permit from the Planning Board is required.  R. Segelken asked if there would be a public hearing.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that a public hearing would be required.  K. Cuddebank, Gimme Coffee, stated his willingness to answer the Board’s questions.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked about changes to the existing space.  K. Cuddebank replied that the physical arrangement will be kept intact, that the existing kitchen area and seating area for three or four tables are adequate.  Chair F. Cowett asked about the number of employees at any one time.  K. Cuddebank replied that there will be a maximum of four employees at any one time.  Chair F. Cowett asked about hours of operation.  K. Cuddebank replied that hours of operation will be 7 am to 7 pm, although hours may be extended to 9 pm during the summer as he is considering installing a frozen custard machine.  E. Quaroni asked about days of operation.  K. Cuddebank replied that days of operation will be seven days per week.  R. Segelken asked about outdoor seating.  K. Cuddebank replied that there will not be outdoor seating and that he is aware of the need for unimpeded pedestrian access exterior to the store.  R. Segelken asked about sign conformance with the provisions of the new zoning law.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that he expects any sign to conform to the new zoning law, but that the sign will be subject to a separate permit.  R. Segelken asked if baked goods will be delivered or made on premises.  K. Cuddebank replied that baked goods will be delivered.  R. Segelken asked if there will be a drive through window.  K. Cuddebank does not know if this is possible, but would not do this for coffee; it is possible there might be a walk up window for frozen custard.  R. Segelken asked if coffee roasting will be done on premises.  K. Cuddebank replied that coffee roasting will not be done on premises.  R. Segelken asked if there will be music playing outside.  K. Cuddebank replied that there will not be music playing outside. 3  J. Leijonhufvud asked about the number of daily customers.  K. Cuddebank replied that he has not done a demographic analysis, but expects that within six months of opening the number of daily customers will be similar to the Trumansburg store, or 225 customers a day or more.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked about site occupancy.  K. Cuddebank replied that there are currently 12 seats in the space and that most of the business will probably be takeaway.  Chair F. Cowett asked if Health Department approval is needed in addition to the special use permit.  K. Cuddebank replied that Health Department approval is needed as well.  J. Leijonhufvud asked about any possible plans for expansion.  K. Cuddebank replied that expansion would likely not be possible given the adjacent laundry.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked if any days of the week will be busier than others.  K. Cuddebank replied that Saturday and Sunday are typically the busiest days of the week for his business.  J. Leijonhufvud asked why the Community Corners location was chosen.  K. Cuddebank replied that he had not been looking for other location opportunities, but Anna of Lona Cakes was a Gimme Coffee customer and he learned from her of the opportunity to start up a business in the Lona Cakes space right away with minimal complications.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked if there had been any discussions with shopping center owner T. Ciaschi about parking spaces.  K. Cuddebank replied that there had not been discussions with T. Ciaschi about parking spaces.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross questioned if there might be some benefit to having T. Ciaschi acknowledge the potential for increased parking demand due to Gimme Coffee replacing Lona Cakes.  The Board discussed the potential for increased parking demand; there will likely be some increase in parking demand since Gimme Coffee would likely have more daily customers than Lona Cakes; some of these customers would likely come from medical office building, Island Fitness, and other shopping center customers which would reduce the potential increase in parking demand; the time of the day where shopping center parking demand would be highest near Gimme Coffee is between 11:30 am and 1:30 pm, whereas Gimme Coffee’s peak hours, according to its special permit application, are between 8:00 am and 10:00 am; there could be a possible parking conflict with the nearby Chemung Canal Trust Company bank parking; shopping center owner T. Ciaschi has made provisions for overflow shopping center parking should it be needed. 4 Motion: J. Leijonhufvud Second: R. Segelken RESOLUTION No. 239 TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSED GIMME COFFEE AT CORNERS COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER FOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT REVIEW RESOLVED, that the Planning Board accepts the proposed Gimme Coffee at Corners Community Shopping Center for Special Use Permit review. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, G. Gillespie, J. Leijonhufvud, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None  E. Quaroni temporarily left the meeting.  The Board discussed the project in relation to the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) and whether to categorize the project as a Type 1, Type 2, or Unlisted SEQRA action. Motion: R. Segelken Second: J. Leijonhufvud RESOLUTION No. 240 SEQRA REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED GIMME COFFEE AT CORNERS COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER RESOLVED, that the Planning Board categorizes the project as an Unlisted SEQRA action and declares itself lead agency for SEQRA review of the proposed Gimme Coffee at Corners Community Shopping Center. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, G. Gillespie, J. Leijonhufvud, R. Segelken Opposed – None  Chair F. Cowett gave K. Cuddebank a copy of Part 1 of the SEQRA short form to be filled out and signed by the applicant prior to the Planning Board’s next meeting.  E. Quaroni returned to the meeting. 5 Motion: R. Segelken Second: E. Quaroni RESOLUTION No. 241 TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED GIMME COFFEE AT CORNERS COMMUNITY SHOPPING CENTER RESOLVED, that a public hearing will be held on March 26, 2018 at 7:10 p.m. regarding Special Use Permit review for the proposed Gimme Coffee at Corners Community Shopping Center. Aye votes – Chair F. Cowett, G. Gillespie, J. Leijonhufvud, E. Quaroni, R. Segelken Opposed – None Item 5 – Developer’s Conference – 830/832 Hanshaw Road  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that B. Warren, Warren Real Estate, approached him about wishing to discuss with the Planning Board possible future directions for his property at 830/832 Hanshaw Road.  B. Warren stated that he has no real agenda for the property, but has received a number of inquiries over the years and may in the future be looking for a new tenant and therefore wanted to meet with the Planning Board; his property consists of two parcels and two buildings; his company is located in a building at 830 Hanshaw Road which is the parcel nearest to the Triphammer/Hanshaw intersection; the building located at 832 Hanshaw Road, which includes an older red brick former house with a newer addition, is currently leased to the Tompkins Trust Company; it is possible that Tompkins Trust, given changes being made by the company, will not renew its lease when it expires and a new tenant will be needed; past inquiries he has fielded about the property have included questions about a drive -through.  E. Quaroni asked B. Warren how he would envision a drive-through and the type of business that would use it.  B. Warren replied that any drive-through would be confined to the 832 Hanshaw Road property and showed the Board a conceptual plan for the drive-through.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that B. Warren had agreed severa l years ago to close the driveway at 830 Hanshaw Road due to concerns of the Village’s Board of Trustees for traffic safety, even though a traffic study done at the time stated that sight lines were sufficiently safe.  B. Warren stated that he envisions a drive-through business such as a bank, Panera type restaurant, or a drug store, but not a MacDonalds , and does not anticipate a need to open the closed driveway at 832 Hanshaw Road. 6  Chair F. Cowett stated that, whatever the business type, the Planning Board would be concerned with a potential impact on Community Corners area traffic and the effect of its customers, using a drive through or not, entering and exiting the property.  E. Quaroni stated that any change from the property’s current type of use would have the potential to increase the amount of traffic currently using the property.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked whether the 832 Hanshaw Road building could accommodate multiple tenants.  B. Warren replied that, because of its layout, the 832 Hanshaw Road building could accommodate two tenants, but probably not more than that; the red brick former house is 2500 square feet in area and the addition is also 2500 square feet.  R. Segelken asked about stormwater flooding issues he has observed in the rear of both parcels.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that he is aware of the flooding issues and that in his judgment these are not related to runoff from parcel parking lots, but are instead due to flooding from the stream located there.  B. Warren thanked the Planning Board and stated that his discussion with the Board was extremely preliminary, and that he still has a tenant with a lease at 832 Hanshaw Road and is merely thinking ahead. Item 6 – Traffic Consultant RFP  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that the Village’s Board of Trustees had requested proposals from traffic consultants for a study of traffic conditions in the Community Corners area and to make recommendations for improvements, such as improvements in level of service; possible improvements could range between, at a minimum, lane reconfiguration and, on a significantly larger scale, a traffic circle or traffic lights.  J. Leijonhufvud stated that any recommendations for improvements should include not only level of service, but also aesthetics and pedestrian safety.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross stated that the Board of Trustees is looking to the Planning Board for its advice about what items should be included in any study.  R. Segelken stated that access to public transit should also be included.  E Quaroni asked whether the study would require collection of new traffic data or could it use data previously collected for the medical office building at Corners Community Shopping Center.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that the consultants would likely wish to collect new traffic data, especially if not involved in the traffic studies conducted for the medical office building.  J. Leijonhufvud asked about the timeline for the Planning Board to advise the Board of Trustees. 7  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross replied that there is no hard deadline, but that it would be helpful if the Planning Board could give its comments at its next meeting on March 26, although he does not currently have electronic versions of all proposals to forward to the Board to consider.  Chair F. Cowett stated that the Board would need a minimum of two weeks to read through all the proposals in order to give its comments at the March meeting.  The Board discussed whether it wished to take on this project and agreed to do so on the condition that electronic versions of the proposals are forwarded to the Board two weeks prior to its March 26 meeting. Item 7 – New Business  The Board discussed a possible resolution to be offered by R. Segelken and addressed to the Village’s Board of Trustees to improve pedestrian amenities in the Commercial zoning district.  R. Segelken stated that site plan review for the new medical office build ing had prompted upgrades in pedestrian amenities at that location; it is time for pedestrian amenities to be upgraded throughout the Community Corners area and Commercial zoning district; the level of these amenities may once have been appropriate, but ar e no longer so and pedestrians need to be better taken care of.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross asked R. Segelken if he could envision these topics and concerns being addressed in the scope of work of the traffic study proposals.  R. Segelken replied that he would be glad to sit on consideration of his resolution until after he has read these proposals.  Code Enforcement Officer B. Cross informed the Board of a preliminary proposal by NYSEG to build a natural gas compressor on North Triphammer Road adjacent to Kendal, whether located in the Village’s right of way or on Kendal property.  The Board briefly discussed the NYSEG proposal.  The next meeting of the Planning Board is scheduled for March 26, 2018.  J. Leijonhufvud is unable to attend the Board’s March 26 meeting. Item 8 – Adjourn  Meeting adjourned at 9:10 pm.