HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-10-03Page 1 of 5
10-3-2013
Town of Dryden
Planning Board
October 3, 2013
Members Present: Joe Laquatra (Chair), Thomas Hatfield, David Weinstein, Marty
Hatch, Craig Anderson, Heather Maniscalco, Wendy Martin (excused)
Town Staff Present: Jane Nicholson (Interim Planning Director) and Nick Goldsmith
(Sustainability Planner)
Guests: Jose Guisado, Contractor for the Finger Lakes Library System
The business meeting was opened at 7:02PM.
1. Introduction of guests/ new member:
The members introduced themselves around the table.
2. Reading and approval of minutes from August:
The minutes were postponed until the next meeting.
3. Site Plan Review and SEQR for the Finger Lakes Library System, Jose Guisado
J. Nicholson reminded the Board that at the last meeting they made a motion to
require full site plan review with conditions. Mr. Guisado has made changes to the site
plan and has met with the Planning Department. Per the Planning Department’s
recommendation, Mr. Guisado has left the driveways as they are currently. The
planning Department is recommending that the Planning Board accept the site plan as
the final site plan with two conditions:
1. The light with the concrete base near Rt 366 be removed.
2. The exterior lighting has to comply with the zoning code: night sky compliant and
not glaring onto neighboring properties.
M. Hatch questioned whether there is an agreement with the neighboring property to
keep the emergency egress open. In case of the sale of the adjacent property,
Treeforms, will the second egress stay open?
J. Nicholson said that the zoning code permits one driveway with an egress to the
Treeforms property. T. Hatfield questioned what would happen if an accident
happened in the driveway and another car was blocking the drive between Treeforms
and the FLLS.
J. Nicholson made the point that even if it was blocked, the area between Route 366
and the parking area is flat so emergency vehicles will be able to cross almost
anywhere.
M. Hatch asked about the plantings and whether they were acceptable. A quick
discussion reassured the Board that the plantings were acceptable.
SEQR
M. Hatch read the SEQR and the members made minor changes and verified
information including:
The total amount of property, the amount covered, the amount planted, etc, didn’t add
up so the Board worked that out.
Page 2 of 5
10-3-2013
The depth of the water table is unknown and wouldn’t be known unless someone had
drilled/built in the past. The members determined that it has to be greater than 30
feet deep based on their knowledge of the landscape (a steep slope that doesn’t leak
water, etc.).
H. Maniscalco asked about the construction waste and how it is being disposed of in
regard to questions 16 and 17 on the SEQR. The Board determined that the SEQR
questions about solid waste disposal is related to whether or not the finished project
will be generating waste rather than the construction.
D. Weinstein asked about whether there are any requirements for waste disposal in
the building permit process. No, unless the project is attempting to get LEED
designation.
NEG SEQR DEC
RESOLUTION #12
Finger Lakes Library System
T. Hatfield offered the following resolution:
Whereas, the proposed action involves consideration of the application of Finger
Lakes Library System to renovate and build at 1302 NY State Route 366, in the Town
of Dryden; and
Whereas, the proposed action is an Unlisted Action for which the Planning Board of
the Town of Dryden is the lead agency for the purposes of uncoordinated
environmental review in connection with approval by the Town; and
Whereas, the Planning Board of the Town of Dryden, in performing the lead agency
function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance
with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law – the State
Environmental Quality Review Act “(SEQR), (i) thoroughly reviewed the Long
Environmental Assessment Form (the “Long EAF”), Part I, and any and all other
documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its
environmental review, (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of
environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant
adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR
§617.7(c), and (iii) completed the Long EAF, Part II;
Therefore, be it resolved the Planning Board of the Town of Dryden, based upon (i)
its thorough review of the Long EAF, Part I, and any and all other documents prepared
and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii)
its thorough review of the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to
determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the
environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR §617.7(c), and (iii) its
completion of the Long EAF, Part II, including the findings noted thereon (which
findings are incorporated herein as if set forth at length), hereby makes a negative
determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”) in accordance
with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action, and determines that neither a
full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be
required, and
Page 3 of 5
10-3-2013
Be it resolved the Responsible Officer of the Town Board of the Town of Dryden is
hereby authorized and directed to complete and sign as required the determination of
significance, confirming the foregoing Negative Declaration, which fully completed and
signed Long EAF and determination of significance shall be incorporated by reference
in this Resolution.
D. Weinstein seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
Site Plan Review with conditions
Resolution # 13
Finger Lakes Library System
D. Weinstein offered the following resolution:
Whereas, the Planning Board and the Planning Department have reviewed the Site
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, design
guidelines and comprehensive plan; and
Whereas, the Tompkins County Planning Department has provided a review pursuant
to General Municipal Law § 239-l and § 239-m;
Whereas, the Town of Dryden Planning Board and Planning Departments have made
recommendations for construction;
Therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Board approves the Site Plan with
conditions and waives further review with the following conditions:
1. The exterior lights have to meet the requirements of the Town Zoning Ordinance.
2. The light pole and it’s concrete base in the parking lot must be removed.
M. Hatch seconded the motion which was unanimously approved.
4. Update on Comprehensive Plan Assessment
The official directive was given to the Planning Board on August 15th. J. Nicholson
explained that the Comprehensive Plan was passed in 2005 and it is time to review i t
again to see what works and what doesn’t, what we have achieved and what we are
still working on.
N. Goldsmith created a summary of the Town Board directive which contains two
parts:
1. Analyze the Comprehensive Plan with reference to sustainability pri nciples
2. To evaluate progress toward meeting comp plan recommended goals and objectives
The goal was to finish the report by the end of 2013.
J. Nicholson and N. Goldsmith are using the STAR system (created by a partnership of
the US Green Building Council, National League of Cities, Center for American
Progress and Local Governments) to evaluate the Comprehensive Plan. They are going
through the Comprehensive Plan section by section and then they are comparing
notes and determining what might need to be changed. Once they have done their
analysis, they will generate a report to share with the Planning Board. The following
link has information related to the STARS program:
http://www.transportationcouncil.org/resources
Page 4 of 5
10-3-2013
N. Goldsmith and J. Nicholson showed their analysis of the transportation aspect of
the Comprehensive Plan. They used their example to demonstrate how they propose to
analyze the information.
J. Nicholson said there is another piece to the assessment which is evaluating the
Town’s progress since the Plan was adopted. She would like the Planning Board to
create a list of accomplishments since 2005.
She suggested two possible ways to generate the list. The Board can create a list from
their memories or they can look at the goals and objectives in the Comprehensive
Plan. That part will be combined with the assessment done by the Planning
Department and given to the Town Board.
D. Weinstein asked if there are any documents that might help the Board come up
with the information. J. Nicholson said she thinks the best start will be to simply look
at the goals and objectives and go from there.
D. Weinstein suggested that the Zoning plan is an accomplishment; it was an
outgrowth from the Comprehensive Plan. T. Hatfield and D. Weinstein had a
discussion about who first suggested changes to zoning, the Town Board or the
Planning Board? They agreed that the Planning Board recommended the changes.
M. Hatch pointed out that the county is revising their Comprehensive Plan and several
other towns are working on Comprehensive Plans. He wondered if there is a way to
work with the other groups to develop a coordinated agree ment between the
neighboring municipalities and the county.
J. Laquatra pointed out that part of the county’s charge is to coordinate the actions of
the various Towns within the County. And he added that New York State is a home
rule state which puts the governing of land use with the local government.
T. Hatfield suggested that could cause significant problems with communities
competing for control. M. Hatch responded that by working on a regional level, it
might help us accomplish our goals.
J. Nicholson came back to the fact that right now we are looking at a proposal for how
to revise the Comprehensive Plan and maybe a regional approach is a suggestion that
can come out of the analysis of the plan.
N. Goldsmith pointed out that the STARS system was designed around larger
municipalities. Dryden has its own priorities and once he and J. Nicholson are
finished reviewing the Comprehensive Plan, then the Planning Board can determine
which of the areas are important to Dryden.
M. Hatch said that the Comprehensive Plan emphasizes the tradition of agriculture in
this region. If we try and look at the STARS system, which was designed around the
complexities of social forces and environmental uses, then we might end up putting
more in the Plan than we want.
D. Weinstein offered the following resolution:
Whereas, the Town Board has charged the Planning Board with developing a proposal
for updating the Town Comprehensive Plan; and
Page 5 of 5
10-3-2013
Whereas, the Planning Board does not believe they can complete the proposal to their
standards by the December 2013 deadline; and
Whereas, the Planning Department has made recent and significant staff changes;
Therefore, be it resolved that the Planning Board requests the deadline for
Resolution 98 be extended until February 2014.
M. Hatch seconded the motion and the vote was unanimous.
D. Weinstein expressed his concern that the Planning Department and Board are
looking at potential changes to the Comprehensive Plan in the sense of sustainability
but might be missing other areas. Agriculture is one area that he wants to be sure gets
attention. J. Nicholson believes that as we go through the plan, all of the issues will be
reviewed. J. Laquatra added that the Planning Board can add or edit more
information. And J. Nicholson reminded the Board that they will have plenty of time to
make adjustments as needed.
The next business meeting will be October 23rd.
There being no further business, D. Weinstein moved to close the meeting at 8:36 PM,
the motion was seconded by C. Anderson and the meeting was adjourned.
Respectfully Submitted,
Erin A. Bieber
Deputy Town Clerk