Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-07-25Page 1 of 7 2013-07-25 Planning Board July 25, 2013, 7PM Members Present: Joe Lalley (Chair), Joseph Laquatra (excused), David Weinstein, Craig Anderson, Thomas Hatfield, Marty Hatch, Wendy Martin (excused) Town Board Liaison: Joe Solomon (not present) Town Staff: Jane Nicholson (Senior Town Planner) Guests: José Guisado, David Bravo-Cullen, and Steve Scott The meeting was called to order by Chairman Lalley at 7:07 PM Review and approval of minutes from 27, June 2013. D. Weinstein motioned to approve the minutes, C. Anderson seconded the motion and the minutes were approved. Site Plan Review, Finger Lakes Library System, GA Architects, José Guisado Since the last meeting, Mr. Guisado has met with the Planning Department. He has made several changes based on their recommendations as outlined in the Site Plan Review memo (attached). He feels certain that they have addressed all of the necessary points. The existing building is metal with siding to create an old barn -look. The addition will be metal framed the same as the existing building and the existing building will be painted to match the addition. The roof is in decent condition and they don’t intend to replace it right away. The conference area will have a removable partition separating the two rooms allowing them to use the room for large gatherings (40 – 45 people) as well. They are planning on maintaining the skylights along the main spine of the addition. Mr. Guisado pointed out a new feature recently added to the plans which is along the top of the building. It is a V shape reminiscent of an open book. Mr. Guisado indicated that after the site plan review, there might be some changes. J. Nicholson responded that the plan has to be fairly finished. Some minor changes to the roof are fine but the Town will expect the final building to be very close to the plan. Mr. Guisado indicated that he feels the plans are 80-85% complete. He said they might change the location of some of the rooms but in terms of the bathrooms and areas with water, they will stay the same. The main organization of the building will be maintained; internal changes can come with building permits. Mr. Guisado turned in his information on Tuesday and J. Nicholson conducted a review yesterday and went to the site today. She has sent the information to the County and they have 30 days to respond. Until they get a recommendation to us, the Planning Board cannot make a decision. They can get a feeling for the project but cannot move forward with a resolution. T. Hatfield and M. Hatch asked if we could approve the plan pending county approval? J. Nicholson responded that we could do that but until the county comments come back, we can’t actually move on this plan. The Planning Department is recommending a full site plan review with modifications. They have concerns with the parking area and specifically the landscaping. For the site plan review they would like a more detailed landscaping plan identifying the type, Page 2 of 7 2013-07-25 size and location of the plants, which have to be a native species. J. Nicholson asked that the plan display a “zoomed” view of the landscaped area. Mr. Guisado said that the plan is still evolving; he did not anticipate this plan being the final plan. J. Nicholson stated that when the Planning Board looks at a site plan, there are going to expect that what is shown in the plan is actually what is being developed. They need to see a final plan. Mr. Guisado said they will be very close but what about the detail of planting, if we changed the thickness of this line of landscape, or if we add another kind of flower bed, that doesn’t have to be in the plan, does it? J. Nicholson emphasized that for the site plan review, they (the Planning Department and Planning Board) are really looking at that. We are looking for those details. Projects of this size re quire that we look at that especially because of access and site views. We need to know how big the bushes and trees are going to be. He needs a landscaping/planting plan. Mr. Guisado said that a lot of those decisions will be tied to the client and the client’s budget. He then asked if they are forced to do landscaping on the site? J. Nicholson responded that yes, he has to do landscaping per the zoning code. Mr. Guisado said that this area is very industrial and commercial and landscaping enhancement will be nice but …… J. Nicholson responded that landscaping is a requirement within the Town of Dryden design guidelines and site plan zoning. T. Hatfield asked how big the building is? 9-10,000 sq feet. M. Hatch is concerned with the guidelines that force a development to upgrade with landscaping where there was parking before? He is very much a fan of landscaping but he is concerned that we are putting too many strictures on the particulars of landscaping. What if the client were just to say, I am going to leave it as it is and put a few trees here and there….. J. Nicholson said that the Planning Board can require landscaping. T. Hatfield said we have had issues in the past that have made it very critical that the Planning Board have that right; instances of mixed use properties that had commercial and residential next to each other that needed a barrier that was both a visual and sound barrier. The way to do that so it looks ok is through landscaping which is why it is in the code and why we have to look at it. Another issue is the site line, the ingress and egress- what is the height of the plants there? The bushes should be dwarf so when you are in a car or truck, you can see traffic. Mr. Guisado indicated that on the sketch, the landscaping area along the road will be bushes with maybe one tree. T. Hatfield recommended that Mr. Guisado put some more thought into it and get it laid out, what is going here and there. Mr. Guisado said the question he has is “that shouldn’t stop the project from going forward, right?” T. Hatfield replied that it didn’t have to as long as Mr. Guisado was willing to work with staff. He thinks the Planning Board’s job is to make sure generally that the requirements have been met, we move it forward so Mr. Guisado doesn’t have to come back to us. But he still needs to get a building permit and staff approval. J. Lalley summarized the discussion….. it appears that the Planning Department is primarily concerned with the landscaping and signage along Route 366. To confirm, he asked J. Nicholson what other concerns the Planning Department has with the plan? Page 3 of 7 2013-07-25 J. Nicholson said that landscaping and signage are the main concerns. D. Weinstein asked whether they have received a storm water plan? J. Nicholson said that they are going with a notice of ground disturbance with the building permits. D. Weinstein refined his question to, there isn’t a plan to show where the run off from the buildings will go? Are you going to shuffle it off site? Mr. Guisado pointed out where there will be a ditch all around the building. J. Lalley - Phase one is the renovation of the existing building and phase two is the addition. We are looking at the project as a whole and approving the whole plan? He offered two options: one is a sketch plan with a few conditions and a waiver of site plan review (which could include the County’s (l) and (m) review and provisions for landscaping and signage) and then leave it up to the Planning Department. The second option is to go to a full site plan review. He asked what is the relative merit of one path over the other? From an end result perspective? J. Nicholson said she talked to D. Kwasnowski, she thought the Planning Board could leave it to staff’s discretion once we received the County (l) and (m) review but it doesn’t work that way. The decision to require or waive a full site plan review has to come from the Planning Board. J. Lalley replied that the Board was not giving up that right but wondered if the Planning Board could condition their decision on the County acting in a particular way, and leaving the landscaping and signage issues to the Planning Department. J. Nicholson pointed out that it really doesn’t matter if the Planning Board passes a resolution because it won’t take effect until after next month’s meeting. We need the County (l) and (m) before the Board can determine whether to waive or require a full site plan review. J. Lalley didn’t see much benefit in a full site plan review and stated that it seems the rest of the Board feels that way as well. D. Weinstein asked if the requirements were different for the applicant whether the Board passed a resolution tonight (requires the applicant to work with staff to ensure compliance) versus next month (his plan has to be complete)? And he asked if either plan would move the process forward faster? J. Nicholson said it will not change the speed of the process. M. Hatch disagreed, he thinks it will speed the process. T. Hatfield agreed the process would be sped up if a resolution were passed tonight and he pointed out that this month, the Board has a quorum and considering it is summer, the chance of having a quorum next month is questionable. J. Nicholson said it won’t speed things up for the applicant. M. Hatch responded that depends on how fast the county gets their report back. C. Anderson agreed with M. Hatch and T. Hatfield. J. Lalley - we have reviewed this and we don’t think there is a whole lot more to add. He understands that there are still a couple of gates to go through and there is no reason to take the chance that we might not have a quorum next time . He would rather pass a resolution that would accept the sketch plan and waive further site review subject to the following conditions: County completes their review and raises no objections for this Board to consider. Town Staff will work with Mr. Guisado to ensure he meets the signage and landscaping requirements. Page 4 of 7 2013-07-25 He needs to be approved for a building permit. Mr. Guisado was asked if he has anything more to offer. He responded by remi nding everyone that he has been cooperating with the Planning Department and will continue to work with them. He said they need to keep working back and forth. For instance, he might bring in a sign which they might not accept so he will have to leave and come back until it is the proper size. It is a work in process, I cannot come back here and say “this month I am going to bring you one final.” This is a work in process. T. Hatfield told him they have a resolution on the table that will solve that for you. J. Lalley explained to Mr. Guisado that the Planning Board is taking itself out of the process so he doesn’t have to come back to the Planning Board, unless the County has an objection to what you are planning or there is some difference of opinion that you cannot reconcile with the Planning Department. We are pleased with what you have proposed in concept. D. Weinstein asked about an easement between the two properties (FLLS and Tree Forms). No one was able to say. Site Plan Review with conditions Resolution # 8 Tom Hatfield offered the following resolution: Whereas, José Guisado, Developer, Finger Lakes Library System, has submitted the Sketch Plan per Article XI of the Town of Dryden Zoning Ordinance; and Whereas, the Planning Board finds the project to be consistent with the zoning and design guidelines and the Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, the Tompkins County Planning Department is in the process of a review pursuant to General Municipal Law § 239 (l) and (m); and Whereas, the Town of Dryden Planning Board and Planning Department have made recommendations for construction; Therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Board waives further Site Plan review and approves the Sketch Plan with conditions and with the following conditions: 1. County approval of GML §239 (l) and (m); and 2. establishment of a driveway easement between Dryden Radio and TV, located at 1300 State Route 366, and FLLS, located at 1302 SR 366, and filed with the County; and 3. landscaping and signage requirements as defined in the Commercial Design Guidelines and approved by the Planning Department; and 4. completion of the requirements as listed in the Planning Departments memo to the Planning Board, dated July 25, 2013. (attached) M. Hatch seconded the resolution. All approved. Comprehensive plan update J. Nicholson passed out the directive that D. Kwasnowski wrote for the Town Board providing the Planning Board with a charge to create a plan to update the Comprehensive Plan. (attached) Page 5 of 7 2013-07-25 The Planning Department staff will do a comprehensive plan assessment and then the Planning Board will review what they have determined. T. Hatfield asked if we are reaching out to the Conservation Board, the Ag Committee , everyone else? J. Nicholson said that this is regarding a proposal, not the actual plan. Once the assessment has been completed, then the other Boards will all be contacted. J. Nicholson pointed out that we are not getting into the details; this is part of determining where the comprehensive plan needs to be updated (such as pointing out that affordable housing is missing but we are not addressing the issue yet). The Planning Board will review the Comprehensive Plan and then they will reach out to the public and the other Boards. T. Hatfield thinks we need to have a huge education component. Last time, too many people don’t respond until the very end, if we can get people paying attention earlier on, there will be fewer problems at the end. J. Nicholson said we can treat this like the Varna Plan in terms of working with the public and getting their input. D. Weinstein – One thing that we did some of in the Zoning rewrite, probably not enough, is every time we made a decision we tried to put it on paper explaining why we are doing this. We should create a paper trail which takes a lot of time but it is worth it. J. Nicholson said they are starting at the beginning of the Comprehensive Plan and working through the entire plan. From there, they will create a proposal on how to update the Plan and roll it out to the public. C. Anderson said he thought a Comprehensive Plan was the opinion of the public, the public’s approach of what they want the town to look like eventually. D. Weinstein said that last time, they started with a survey. Once we get the proposal outlining what needs to be updated or changed, then we can look at the survey. T. Hatfield pointed out that the last time, the survey generated a huge respond, around 35%. J. Nicholson reminded everyone that public input is important but we need to have a proposal first. Then we can turn to the other boards and the public for the fine tuning. M. Hatch suggested a couple changes to the Comprehensive Plan Update Directive (see attached) J. Lalley thanked everyone for all of their hard work. There being no further business, D. Weinstein motioned to adjourn at 8:00PM. T. Hatfield seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully Submitted, Erin A. Bieber Deputy Town Clerk Page 6 of 7 2013-07-25 Planning Board- Comprehensive Plan Update Directive July 18, 2013 Whereas, The Planning Board (PB) was formed in or around 1968 with the adoption of the 1968 General Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance for the purposes of implementation of the General Plan, further planning activities, and advising the Town Board on matters relative to town planning and, Whereas, Upon adoption of subdivision regulations in 1976, the Town Board designated subdivision review to the Planning Board and, Whereas, The PB during the 1990s initiated an update of the General Plan through the initiation of a Comprehensive Plan, and Whereas, The Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 2005, and Whereas, The Town Board, upon recommendation from the PB, adopted Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan, and Whereas, The Town Board adopted, based upon Planning Board recommendations, amendment to the Zoning Ordinance and adoption of an updated Subdivision Local Law as well as a Comprehensive Plan amendment and Zoning Ordinance amendments for the hamlet of Varna in 2012, and Whereas, Further accomplishments have been realized from implementation of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan, and the recommended review and potential update interval in the plan’s Foreward is five years, Now, therefore, be it resolved that, The Planning Board is hereby charged with the task of evaluating the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan, and making recommendation to the Town Board of any and all amendments, or complete revision and update of the plan. The Town Board directs the Planning Board to work with the Planning Department to prepare:  At least one evaluation of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan based upon sustainability principles, and  An evaluation of the accomplishments to date of any and all objectives within the plan such as agricultural land protection, zoning revisions, open space protection, etc.  A proposal for future planning efforts including any targeted amendments, focus area planning, consolidation plans, comprehensive plan complete revisions, etc. This should include a specific plan or amendment development schedule, resources needed, budget etc. Page 7 of 7 2013-07-25 Sustainability Principles Analysis The Planning Department will prepare an analysis of the 2005 Comprehensive Plan relative to the principles of sustainability. Simply put, the principles are relative to the conservation of human and natural environment, economic vitality, and social well-being or quality of life. The town has participated and led an effort to further sustainability principles, mostly in the form of energy savings, and resource conservation and protection in an effort to further the economy and elevate the quality of life in the town. However, what has been missed? Are people happier? Angry? Frustrated? Struggling financially? Evaluation of Accomplishments to Date The Planning Board shall work with the Planning Department to evaluate what has been accomplished from the Comprehensive Plan, and what has not been addressed. Plan Proposal Finally, using the evaluations the Planning Board and Department shall work together to determine an appropriate path forward. This will be articulated in a proposal that will include specific goals and objectives, needs assessment, timeline and activities, and a budget, or description of effort needed. All of these tasks will be completed by December, 2013 and presented to the Town Board with the intention of initiating the proposal in January 2014.