Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-08-15-PB-FINALTOWN OF ULYSSES PLANNING BOARD MEETING MINUTES Tuesday, August 15, 2017 Approved: September 5, 2017 Present: Chair David Blake, and board members David Tyler and John Wertis; Town Planner Darby Kiley; Town Board Liaison Rich Goldman. Rebecca Schneider, Sara Worden and Benjamin LeWalter were excused. Public in Attendance: none Call to order: 7:02 p.m. Agenda Review; Minutes Review (7/18/17) Mr. Blake referenced the Planning Board's previous meeting and Ms. Schneider's concerns over proposed development on a flag lot. He said Ms. Schneider was correct in saying that the Board did not have all the information needed to address the proposal. Mr. Blake felt perhaps the Planning Board should recommend to the Town Board that simple projects on flag lots be decided by the planning and zoning officer and not by the Planning Board. The officer would know the applicant's situation better than the Board. Mr. Wertis said flag lots come before the Planning Board for a reason. From past history, there have been proposed flag lots where neighbors were not happy. Maybe a review is worthwhile, but perhaps there is a more simplified process. Ms. Kiley said flag lots can be created as simple subdivisions that the zoning officer approves. The development of the flag lot has to go through site plan review. Ms. Kiley said she would like to see the site plan review requirement taken out. There are instances when neighbors are upset about a proposed flag lot, but how would a Planning Board review resolve concerns, particularly when there is no public notice of a flag lot's development unless the Board opts to hold a public hearing? Privilege of the Floor: No one addressed the Board Mr. Tyler MADE the MOTION to adopt the July 18, 2017 meeting minutes, and Mr. Blake SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried. Discussion on Solar Regulations — comments from Ag Committee (dated 4/13/17) Having reviewed the Ag Committee's comments, Mr. Tyler said he is reluctant to change much from the solar regulations without good reason. Although solar is something to encourage, it is quasi industrial, and the Town has already been burned, he said. In regard to the Ag Committee's concern that 2,000 square feet might be too low of a threshold between major and minor solar collection systems, Ms. Kiley felt the 2,000 number reflects many meetings' worth of deliberations with several stakeholders; she does Planning Board 2 August 15, 2017 not see any reason to change the number. Mr. Wertis said he liked the idea of adding a statement to the "Major Solar Collection System" section in reference to the ag exemption in site plan review. Consensus was reached to add this language to the section. Glare was discussed, first in regard to the recent Renovus project on Route 96, and then more generally. Considering sunlight angle and positioning of panels, Ms. Kiley felt it would be physically impossible for Iradell Road neighbors near the Renovus solar structure to experience glare issues. Referencing Renovus's previous Agard Road project, Mr. Goldman said the Town reviewed a glare study, but he felt it was inaccurate. Ms. Kiley noted the many variables considered in a glare study; for instance, if an installer is not precise with the angle of a particular panel or panels, the glare study and its projections become irrelevant. Mr. Goldman suggested adding language to the solar law, giving the Planning Board the right to request action — for example, the installer will make adjustments to the panels — if there are complaints from neighbors concerning glare. The Planning Board returned to the Ag Committee's suggestion to raise the solar panel height limit to at least 32 feet. Ms. Kiley said both the Ag Committee and the Conservation and Sustainability Advisory Committee (CSAC) have recommended 32 feet. She has requested additional information concerning solar height from a Cornell solar professional — David Kay — but has yet to hear back. Ms. Kiley preferred the lower, 20 -feet height limit established by the Planning Board, and Mr. Blake, too, said he sees no reason to make the change. Ultimately, Mr. Blake suggested the Planning Board wait to hear from Mr. Kay before considering any changes to the maximum solar height. In Section 212-139.1 "Standards for minor solar collection systems", part D, the Planning Board weighed the Ag Committee's request concerning the inspection of solar collector installations by the Town Code Enforcement Officer. It was the Ag Committee's feeling that electrical inspection work is best left to a professional and not the Town Code Enforcement Officer, whose role should be more to assure that the inspections have been completed. The Planning Board reached a consensus to strike "by the Town Code Enforcement Officer or" from the following graph: "All solar collector installations must be performed in accordance with applicable electrical and building codes, the manufacturer's installation instructions, and industry standards, and prior to operation the electrical connections must be inspected by the Town Code Enforcement Officer or by an appropriate electrical inspection person or agency, as determined by the Town. In addition, any connection to the public utility grid must be inspected by the appropriate public utility." Ag Committee suggestions concerning battery storage and buffers were considered but ultimately no changes were made to the law language. In Section 212-139.2 "Standards for major solar collections systems", part B, note 2, sub paragraph a. (Design Standards), the Ag Committee had concerns with minimizing removal of trees and vegetation for solar installations. Their thinking is by retaining forested areas and existing shrub vegetation, solar systems are likely to be installed on farm land or fallow farm land. Ms. Kiley understood the Ag Committee's concern but feels the Planning Board should not be encouraging removal of forests for solar. She does not feel there is reason to change, and Mr. Blake felt similarly. However, he suggested including "if deemed appropriate by the Planning Board" to the existing language. Ultimately, Planning Planning Board 3 August 15, 2017 Board members reached consensus on this change: "Removal of trees and other existing vegetation shall be minimized, and if deemed appropriate by the Planning Board offset with planting elsewhere on the property if the proposed vegetation does not shade solar collectors". In the same section, note 2 (Design Standards), sub paragraph g, the Planning Board opted to retain the use of "revert" rather than "redeveloped", which the Ag Committee suggested. The use of revert follows State language, Mr. Blake offered, adding that the use of "redeveloped" suggests more than simply removing footers. No change was made. In the same section, note 4 (Areas of Potential Sensitivity..."), sub paragraph I, the Ag Committee preferred that an agricultural data sheet system be used to help identify prime soils and soils of statewide importance. Ms. Kiley said the Town already uses ag data sheets for site plan review. No change was made. In the same section, note 3 (Property Operation and Maintenance Plan), Mr. Wertis suggested replacing "mowing and trimming" and replace it with "management of underlying vegetation." The Planning Board reached consensus on the change, updating the paragraph to read: "Property Operation and Maintenance Plan. A property operation and maintenance plan is required, describing continuing solar collection system maintenance and property upkeep, such as management of underlying vegetation." Town Board Liaison Report Mr. Goldman said the Town has closed on the old Jacksonville Church, which had previously been owned by Exxon Mobil for several years. The Town is currently working with a realtor for a deed restriction for the property, is seeking bids for clean-out work, and hopes to have the property ready by the beginning of September. Agenda items for next meeting Ms. Kiley said the applicants of the Inn at Taughannock want to bring materials to the Planning Board for its September 5 meeting. We will begin review of the project regardless of how the Town BZA decides on several variance requests, Ms. Kiley said. Both Mr. Tyler and Mr. Blake expressed their preference that the application materials be finalized and submitted all at once. Ms. Kiley said the applicants have a Phase 1 they would like the Planning Board to review. The Inn project was generally discussed among Planning Board members. Mr. Blake MADE the MOTION to adjourn the meeting, and Mr. Wertis SECONDED the MOTION. The motion was unanimously carried. Meeting adjourned at 8:28 p.m. Respectfully submitted by Louis A. DiPietro II on August 30, 2017.