Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Board Minutes, 11-16-21 DRAFT1  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  Town of Danby Planning Board Minutes of Regular Meeting November 16, 2021 DRAFT PRESENT: Ed Bergman Collen Cowan Scott Davis Kelly Maher Elana Maragni Jody Scriber (Chair) OTHER ATTENDEES: Town Planner David West Town Board Liaison Leslie Connors (Town Board member) Recording Secretary Alyssa de Villiers Public Meghan Anderer, Michael Barnoski, Ted Crane, Toby Dean, Bill Furniss, Katharine Hunter, Joel Gagnon (Town Supervisor), Choon James, Christine Lemonda, Jake McNamara, Tom Mullen, Larry Parlett, Ronda Roaring, Mark Solomon, Jonathon Zisk This meeting was conducted virtually on the Zoom platform. The meeting was opened at 7:01 p.m. Note: Since the last meeting, Town Clerk Adelman reported via email that Kathy Jett had resigned from the Planning Board. (1) CALL TO ORDER/AGENDA REVIEW There were no additions or deletions to the agenda. (2) PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR Ronda Roaring and Ted Crane both noted difficulties downloading the agenda and materials. (3) APPROVAL OF MINUTES 2  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  MOTION: Approve the October 19th minutes Moved by Maher, seconded by Maragni The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Absent: Davis (4) TOWN BOARD LIAISON REPORT Joel Gagnon (Town Board Chair) shared the following information: • Regarding the Norbut solar farm project, the Town Board began looking at the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act material. The delineation of the wetlands seems at odds with what is observed on the ground, so the Board asked for a second opinion on the matter. There was also concern about the interface and its location on the highway and its visual impact; the representation given did not show the whole picture. • Every board has an expiring member, and the Town encourages people to apply. • The Town Board approved the budget. There is a 7% increase in the tax levy, which exceeds the tax cap. It includes more money for the Highway Department and making the youth program coordinator a full-time position. • Planner West is completing a cleaned-up draft of the zoning update, which the Board will take up on the first Tuesday of December. • Planner West will ask the County for help applying for and overseeing a federal housing rehab grant. (5) DEVELOPMENT REVIEW SUB-2021-05 100 Van De Bogart Rd. Parcel: 20.-1-1.2 Applicant: Ray Van de Bogart Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Application Review, Schedule Public Hearing Proposal: Subdivide 184 acre parcel into 2 pieces approximately 63 acres and 126 acres Planner West said this application went through the Town Board and was granted a waiver from the subdivision moratorium to pursue subdivision. Both proposed pieces comply with zoning. MOTION: Schedule a public hearing for the December meeting Moved by Bergman, seconded by Maher The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Absent: Davis 3  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  SUP-2021-3 1360 Coddington Rd., Millroy Constas Residence Parcel: 6.-1-1.31 Applicant: Mark Constas Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Application review, Schedule Public Hearing Proposal: Grant special permit for second dwelling on a lot Planner West said the applicant would like to add a second dwelling on the lot, which is allowed by special permit in the Low Density Residential zone. Board member Maragni asked what the square footage of the build would be, and Planner West said he would get that information for the next meeting. MOTION: Schedule a public hearing for the December meeting Moved by Maragni, seconded by Bergman The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Abstain: Davis SUB-2021-06 2016 Danby Rd. Parcel: 14.-1-12.2 Applicant: Estate of Thomas K Randall Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Public Hearing, SEQR, Approve, Approve with modification, or Deny Subdivision Preliminary and Final Plat Proposal: Subdivide 103.42 acre parcel into 2 pieces approximately 2 acres and 101.42 acres. Project received a variance from the BZA allowing the remaining lot after subdivision to have less than 200’ road frontage as would otherwise be required. Planner West explained that the applicant was granted a waiver from the subdivision moratorium. Because the lot does not have 200’ of frontage for both pieces, it went to the Board of Zoning Appeals (BZA) and was granted a variance. It is now before the Planning Board for subdivision. The goal is to subdivide two acres with a garage with an apartment above to sell to the long-term tenant, allowing the estate to sell the rest to someone else. The two-acre parcel that will be created is conforming. It is the remaining parcel that is short on road frontage and received a variance for that deficiency. There were originally two dwellings on this parent lot, but the farmhouse burned down. Both that and the apartment over a garage were connected to the same septic system and would continue to be so. The applicant has provided a sample agreement of how that would work. With a full two acres, the owner of the garage/apartment will have enough room to create a septic field on their lot in the future if desired. Applicant Description Tom Mullen, a realtor for the estate, explained that they are trying to accommodate the existing tenant, Mark Solomon, staying in his home. They also have an agreement with another party to buy the remaining 101 acres. Everyone is in agreement about the shared utilization of the well and septic system. A great deal 4  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  of work has gone into this for over a year and a half. The farm has been in the same family for over 80 years. He felt the people moving in would be a strong addition to the community. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 7:28 p.m. Ronda Roaring said she thought this was putting the cart before the horse. You must have a building permit to convert a garage into a living facility and then you must have a certificate of occupancy (COO) to allow someone to live there. She said she was assuming there is not one, and you cannot sell a property unless you have a COO in New York state. She thought the dwelling was not compliant, and nothing should be done until the legal documents can be produced. Planner West said the building dates from the ‘70s and had been in residential use since before Mr. Solomon moved there. He said he has not seen a building permit. Mr. Mullen described the building’s specifications. He said it was originally built for storage but was converted to a residence some years later. It has always been hooked up to the existing well, which served the farmhouse. It originally had its own septic system, but this was later abandoned, and the building was connected to the farmhouse’s sand filter system. He said he had asked if they could have the Code Enforcement Officer inspect the building, but that is not possible because the building is already built. He said Planner West was not able to find a historical certificate of occupancy, but it is a good, habitable residence. He also thought some records may have burnt with the house. Board member Davis said he was not aware of a requirement that a building have a COO for sale. He did not know if it was their purview to insist on a COO. He said he questioned Ms. Roaring’s assertion. Ted Crane said he thought Ms. Roaring’s point was a valid one in that in this case the building may not have been built using the proper permits. He thought somebody who is knowledgeable on these things, like the Town lawyer, should probably rule on how to proceed. He thought the facts on the ground suggest they should not be worrying about it, but it is good practice to have rules and to make use of them. Board member Cowan said their responsibility was the subdivision, not the sale. Davis said he did not think this was the spot where this gets adjudicated. He thought many houses in Danby could not procure a COO, and if the Town wants to go around Danby and find those who cannot, that should be outside the Planning Board’s deliberations. Mr. Mullen said, as a practical matter, he could not remember where anybody is asked to produce a COO for the sale of their property, particularly for farms and rural residences. When asked directly by Mr. Crane, Planner West said he did not think anything about the buildings on the lot was apropos of consideration of subdividing the land. The public hearing was closed at 7:48 p.m. SEQR Review 5  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  Planner West read aloud Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) for SEQR. It was agreed that the answer was “no or small impact may occur” to all questions. MOTION: The proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Moved by Scriber, seconded by Bergman The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval The Board reviewed a draft resolution. Planner West said they Board could grant preliminary approval, grant both preliminary and final approval, or deny the application. Board member Maher confirmed that there was nothing about the building that would not allow it to be a residence if built new. Planner West said it would be an allowed use. Maher suggested an edit of deleting “to be sold to the long term tenant” in whereas 2(a) and adding “containing farm buildings and farmland” to 2(b), and this was done. MOTION: Approve resolution as written (with discussed edit) (Res. 10 of 2021) Moved by Davis, seconded by Bergman The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber SUP–2021-2 349 Durfee Hill Rd/110 Howard Rd. Parcel: 13.-1-3.2 Applicant: Jacob McNamara on behalf of William Furniss, Jr. Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Public Hearing, SEQR, Grant or deny Special Use Permit Proposal: Amend previous Special Use Permit to allow second dwelling unit permanently (previous SUP was for temporary use) Applicant Description Mr. MacNamara, representing Mr. Furniss, explained that there has been a modular home at the site for the last 15 years subject to a temporary permit, and they are looking to get a permanent permit. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 8:04 p.m. Ted Crane noted that he was still having issues accessing the agenda and documents. Thus, for practical purposes, the public did not have information distributed about the meeting. Secretary de Villiers said that she had been able to access the agenda packet just before the meeting. Mr. Crane thought there was a bigger problem on the sending end. The public hearing was closed at 8:09 p.m. 6  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  SEQR Review The Board reviewed Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) for SEQR. It was agreed that the answer was “no or small impact may occur” to all questions (moved by Davis, seconded by Cowan). MOTION: The proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Moved by Cowan, seconded by Davis The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Special Use Permit Approval The Board reviewed a draft resolution. The applicant made the correction that it is 110 Howard Rd, not 100. MOTION: Approve resolution as written (Res. 11 of 2021) Moved by Bergman, seconded by Maher The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Richards, Scriber SUB-2021-01.1 Hornbrook Rd. Subdivision Amendment Parcel: 6.-1-18.25 Applicant: Christine Lemonda Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Public Hearing, SEQR, Approve, Approve with modification, or Deny Subdivision Plat Amendment Proposal: Amend Subdivision Plat to include No Build and Restricted Build Areas. Planner West said this was originally part of a three-lot subdivision. That applicant did the full resource mapping exercise on one of the three lots, and the other two lots were subdivided with the requirement that before they could get a building permit they would need a resource map and to have their site plan based on that. The applicant has gone through that process and sited their proposed home based on that. They are applying to amend the plat to add this resource map. He said the Board did talk about the resource map at the last meeting. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 8:18 p.m. Ted Crane reiterated that the information was not available to the public. The public hearing was closed at 8:19 p.m. SEQR Review The Board reviewed Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) for SEQR. It was agreed that the answer was “no or small impact may occur” to all questions. 7  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  MOTION: All answers are “no” and the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Moved by Maher, seconded by Davis The motion passed. In favor: Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Absent: Bergman Plat Amendment Approval The Board reviewed a draft resolution. There were no proposed edits. MOTION: Approve resolution as drafted (Res. 12 of 2021) Moved by Maher, seconded by Maragni The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber SPR-2021-4 1435 Danby Rd. Gospel Church of Ithaca Parcel: 2.-1-47 Applicant: Michael Barnoski on behalf of Dan Grigoryev Anticipated Board action(s) this month: Public Hearing, SEQR, Approve, Approve with modifications, or Deny General Site Plan, Approve, Approve with conditions, or Deny Special Use Permit. Proposal: Build new church on site of previous church – improve parking access. Public Hearing The public hearing was opened at 8:26 p.m. Larry Parlett said that, as a neighbor of the church, he could not have a better neighbor. He said they are top-notch, quiet, and a good congregation to live next to. He said that, based on what he saw in the application, he was all for it. He said he likes the looks of what they are proposing to build, and it would affect him the most as the closest neighbor. Ronda Roaring said she did some research and found minutes from a Planning Board meeting on October 18, 2007. She remembered that taking the property off the tax rolls was discussed. In her remembering, they were told that if the property stopped being a church, it would need to revert to being a taxable property. She said she had a problem with them building something bigger, better, and in a different configuration after the property burned down; it may not ever be able to be converted into a taxable property again if they are permitted to build a new and bigger church. She thought they should be kept to what it was. The public hearing was closed at 8:31 p.m. 8  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  SEQR Review Planner West said this is an allowed use by special permit in the Commercial B zone. He asked about the energy code. Mr. Barnoski, the building designer, said they would be using air-source heat pumps and a high-efficiency boiler for supplemental heat. He is encouraging them to be solar ready. The Board reviewed Part II of the Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) for SEQR. It was agreed that the answer was “no or small impact may occur” to all questions. MOTION: All answers are “no” and the proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Moved by Maher, seconded by Bergman The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber Site Plan Review/Special Permit Approval The Board reviewed a draft resolution. No edits were made. Maher asked about approval for the driveway reconfiguration. Mr. Barnoski said that they had received approval for their PERM 33-COM for phase one and two; part three approval comes later, but the DOT is on board. Davis thanked the neighbor for his feedback; he said that is very helpful for him as Board member. MOTION: Approve resolution as written, accepting it all together (approving special use permit and general and final site plan) (Res. 13 of 2021) Moved by Bergman, seconded by Davis The motion passed. In favor: Bergman, Cowan, Davis, Maher, Maragni, Scriber (6) PLANNER REPORT Planner West reported the following: • He showed where applications are accessible on the website. • A site plan application from Dollar General has not yet come in. He has been working with the applicant to craft something that follows the Town’s rules. • He will be sharing a final draft of the zoning update soon by email. He expects the Town Board will be scheduling a public hearing on that. This will not be the end—he hopes that next year they can redouble their efforts to look at process and clarify the code. Three main topic areas that he thinks need to be addressed are short-term rentals, both for regular homes and glamping, seasonal homes and temporary housing structures, and incentives for universal design. • He is working with the Norbut Solar project to clarify issues around the interconnect facility and ground stormwater. Maher asked if they would be seeing that in December, and West thought not. It will come back for site plan review at some point, but SEQR is still being reviewed by the Town Board. Davis asked if it was possible to visit the site to better imagine the context. West noted it will be hunting season. He said the Town has hired a wetland consultant and will be going to the site on Nov. 29th and 30th. Mr. Nitchman owns the land and has been open to people coming out; the 9  PLANNING BOARD DRAFT MINUTES  developer has asked people to sign a liability waiver. Board members could talk with him about when to visit. (7) ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:51 p.m. ___________________________________________ Alyssa de Villiers – Recording Secretary   Page 1 of 2    Town of Danby Planning Board Resolution Number 10 of 2021  Nov. 16, 2021  Preliminary and Final Approval, Standard Subdivision SUB-2021-06  2016 Danby Rd., Tax Parcel 14.-1-12.2  1. Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Standard Subdivision of 2016 Danby Rd., Tax Parcel 14.-1-12.2 by Krystle Curran; and  2. Whereas the Applicant proposes to subdivide the existing 103.42 (+/-) acre property into two parcels:  a. Parcel A, measuring 2 acres, containing the existing garage/apartment  b. Parcel B, measuring 101.42 acres, to be sold as a farm, containing farm buildings and farmland  3. Whereas the parcel is in the Low Density (LD) Residential Zone and the proposed parcel does not meet the requirement of the LD District for a frontage of 200 feet, per Zoning Ordinance; and  4. Whereas the applicant was granted an area variance by the Board of Zoning Appeals on October 26, 2021; and  5. Whereas the proposed parcels meet all other lot area requirements per Zoning Ordinance; and  6. Whereas this is considered a Standard Subdivision in accordance with the Town of Danby Subdivision and Land Division Regulations; and    7. Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the Town of Danby Environmental Review of Actions and the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act and is subject to environmental review; and  8. Whereas legal notice was published and adjacent property owners within 500 feet notified; and  9. Whereas the Planning Board held the required Public Hearing on Nov. 16, 2021; and  10. Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency per the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act, did on Nov 16, 2021 review and accept:  a. A Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, submitted by the Applicant 11. Whereas the Planning Board did carefully consider Part 2 of the EAF and on Nov 16, 2021 make a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project; and    Page 2 of 2    12. Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to the proposed Standard Subdivision of 2016 Danby Rd., Tax Parcel 14.-1-12.2, by Krystle Curran, applicant and owner, subject to the submission of the final approved plat, having a raised seal and signature of a registered licensed surveyor, filed with the Tompkins County Clerk within six (6) months.  Approved Nov 16, 2020 ________________________________________ Chairperson     Page 1 of 1    Town of Danby Planning Board Resolution Number 11 of 2021  Nov. 16, 2021  Special Use Permit SUP-2021-2  349 Durfee Hill Rd/110 Howard Rd. Parcel 13.-1-3.2  1. Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board for a Special Use Permit at 349 Durfee Hill Rd/110 Howard Rd. Parcel 13.- 1-3.2 by William Furniss; and  2. Whereas the Applicant proposes to permanently allow the existing second dwelling on their lot which was permitted previously with a temporary special use permit in 2005; and   3. Whereas the parcel is in the Low Density (LD) Residential Zone and meets all the requirements to have a permanent second dwelling on the lot, per Zoning Ordinance; and    4. Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the Town of Danby Environmental Review of Actions and the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act and is subject to environmental review; and  5. Whereas legal notice was published and adjacent property owners within 500 feet notified; and  6. Whereas the Planning Board held the required Public Hearing on Nov. 16, 2021; and  7. Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency per the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act, did on Nov 16, 2021 review and accept:  a. A Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, submitted by the Applicant 8. Whereas the Planning Board did carefully consider Part 2 of the EAF and on Nov 16, 2021 make a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project; and  9. Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby grant a Special Use Permit for a second dwelling on a lot to 349 Durfee Hill Rd/110 Howard Rd. Parcel 13.-1-3.2.  Approved Nov 16, 2020 ________________________________________ Chairperson     Page 1 of 1    Town of Danby Planning Board Resolution Number 12 of 2021  Nov. 16, 2021  Subdivision Plat Amendment SUB-2021-01.1  Hornbrook Rd. Parcel: 6.-1-18.25 1. Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board to amend the subdivision plat for Parcel 6.-1-18.25 by Christine Lemonda; and  2. Whereas the Applicant proposes the required Resource Map that was required as a condition of the Standard Subdivision that created the lot; and   3. Whereas the proposed resource map is in compliance with the Town of Danby conservation guidelines for standard subdivision; and    4. Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the Town of Danby Environmental Review of Actions and the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act and is subject to environmental review; and  5. Whereas legal notice was published and adjacent property owners within 500 feet notified; and  6. Whereas the Planning Board held the required Public Hearing on Nov. 16, 2021; and  7. Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency per the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act, did on Nov 16, 2021 review and accept:  a. A Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, submitted by the Applicant 8. Whereas the Planning Board did carefully consider Part 2 of the EAF and on Nov 16, 2021 make a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project; and  9. Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby amend the subdivision plat for parcel 6.-1-18.25 to include the proposed resource map to be filed with the Town Clerk.   Approved Nov 16, 2020 ________________________________________ Chairperson     Page 1 of 2    Town of Danby Planning Board Resolution Number 13 of 2021  Nov. 16, 2021  Site Plan Review Approval SPR-2021-4 1435 Danby Rd 1. Whereas an application has been submitted for review and approval by the Town of Danby Planning Board to approve a Site Plan and grant a Special Use Permit at 1435 Danby Rd for the Gospel Church of Ithaca; and  2. Whereas the Applicant proposes to build a new church on the site of their former church that was destroyed by fire; and   3. Whereas the use is allowed by Special Use Permit in the Low-Density Residential Zone and replaces a recently destroyed building for the same use; and   4. Whereas the Planning Board has considered the General Considerations Required for All Special Permits in the Zoning Ordinance; and   5. Whereas the Planning Board has considered the General Considerations for Site Plan Approval in the Zoning Ordinance; and    6. Whereas this is an Unlisted Action under the Town of Danby Environmental Review of Actions and the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act and is subject to environmental review; and  7. Whereas legal notice was published and adjacent property owners within 500 feet notified; and  8. Whereas the Planning Board held the required Public Hearing on Nov. 16, 2021; and  9. Whereas this Board, acting as Lead Agency per the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act, did on Nov 16, 2021 review and accept:  a. A Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF), Part 1, submitted by the Applicant 10. Whereas the Planning Board did carefully consider Part 2 of the EAF and on Nov 16, 2021 make a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance for the project; and  11. Now Therefore, be it Resolved that the Town of Danby Planning Board does hereby grant a Special Use Permit for the Gospel Church and approve the general and final Site Plan for the Church’s reconstruction.   Approved Nov 16, 2020   Page 2 of 2    ________________________________________ Chairperson