Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1989-03-30f lembers present: B. Lavine, D. ticidt, :. 1 "elect: =rn, R. f'rlf;er fs, :�iir) p. Co ell, presiding. Absent: R. Clha°e, C. Rotunrra. Doug Sutton Pro] iminary Subdivision Iic. ;ring, Etna Ro;:M- Preserrt^ti original sketch plan of a loop road and 27 lots and nmv is presenting a 3 -phase developrPent. The frontage lots or first 5 lots as phase i , ph.. }se 2- the next S lots off of Wood Road, and I.ha haianre of th? lots in phase, 3. The rood t,tould be reworked in phase i r3rhd 2 as to make a loa ?p and lots 2'. and 21 would be made larger. Mrs. Caldwell asked v; here the proposeyi road leading to phase 2 would meet up with the proposed road of Steve Whites and after discussion, decided on having the possible right of way left for the proposed phase 2 to be moved tothe south of the proposed lot 5 1nsten;i of north of the proposed lot 5 so it would line up with the proposed read in Spruce Ridge. Mrs. Cald•.vell asked if an EAF had beet) done and one hrc�i not. Her. Sutton was instructed to do nn 11 AF on the whole 3 phases and map contours _and the rest of the list in the ordinance. Public input: Larry icing of Etna ovens property bordering the proposed subdivision end asked if there would be a diversion ditch to take care of drainar, prohlpms. Mr. 911tt.on said there would the a complete CIP6infojn plan. DECISION- Hers. Crildtl.jell said no more could be done <,t th-Is t hroe until an EAF was submitter3 and the health Dept. may ave questions on tle Sz (�R r�rccsss. This fn.jhlic hearing was rexssecl at r3: l0pm and will recrr, n vei on April 200h, the next schrdul d Planning Board meeting. of the c- xisting phase n, Ellis lligl-rler,dc Sub(I'visicn South of Ellis Fiollow Road near Pexeful Dr. CAROLINE AMID WILLIAM BROWN PROPOSED SUBDIVIShOtI MODIFICATION of the existing phase (4) Elllis Highlands Suhdivision South of Ellis Hollow Road near Peamful Dr. The Planning Board h €d originally approved the subdivision of four lots, the lots were put 'PTther and.now the originai.linos need to ba re- establishod. The original reap was on file Find there are no chkinq,s in the lot Imes. Lots 1, 2, and 3 had been consulidateo into one lot and now Mr. Sutton would like to re- estabilsh tlhe lot Linea. There were no casmmients from the public on this pub- lic hearing. Bard mema,r Lavine said hz would abstain from voting ss he Ihas hfa1 some involvement with It. The short EIS had hm- n submitted rs this is the only agency involved. The public h'eTring was closed at 5:30. DECISIONS- On motion, second, and with four members voting that a negative declaration be given to the EIS (short form). Vote- four yes, i abstention. Motion carried. On motion, second, and with four members voting that the modification of the subdivision be approved with the c=ontingency of Heoith Dept. approval. Vote - four yes, one abstention. Motion carried. Mr. Sutton tares directcxl by Mrs. C-;ldwel1, to contact thie Health Dept. and find out if any other approvals are necesscry or if the original is valid. (let something in writing and contact the zoning officer and he will contxt Mrs. Caldwell. CONTINUATiON OF PUBLIC H�ARIII,i3 FOi: fiiCHUKAS Sl18DiViSiON WEST Df,YDEPJ AND CASWELL ROAD- Mrs. Michukrs suhmitted an EP,F and m(nn. Mr. Lr ,ine a`*rd if in loo!' ing hr;k at the r"rd, they wiil ts'rti r w-thy it is herre for n suli- divisir, ?h of one lot is ;Phat the EAF 3 • '• implies. Mfrs. Caldwell suggastad that the EAF be modified to show that this one lot triggpred the subdivision process. Since other lots have been sold over ttae years a summary description was attached to the EAF s!tch that No Name subdivision has been triggered tired by this and previous sales off of the parent parcel. There was no one present to speak for or nigainst this proposal and there were no questions. The pubic hear ing Clo4sed. DECISIONS- On motion, second and all members voting that a negative declaration be given to the EAF. Vote- aii yes. Motion curried. On motion, second and all members voting that approval for this subdivision be given contingent upon I lavalth Dept. approval. Vote- all yes. Motloh carried. BRUCE BARKLEY DECISION ON (4) LOT SUBDiViSIO111- 11r. Barkley was asked to bring to this meeting a map with contours and a declaration on his EAF will be made. This Board assumets that the proper notification or forwarding of information was done by the zoning officer as there was no 'record of correspondance in the file. A letter from the Health Dept. was read stating that he did not need major subdivision plat approval as he is only dividing into 4 lots. He will need to obtain srptic and sewage system approval for each lot. Mr. Barkley specified the driveway for lot one will be 200 feet on Quarry Road and not on Ellis Hollow Road. Mr. Levine and Mr. Friedman shared the concern of not maintaining or improving natural buffers to protect the residential lots from the comoncrcial use. Mr. Barkley agreed and his intent is to do that, but did not want it to be too restrictive. Mr. Lavine's concern is not with Mr. Barkley ,but, if he sells it and the next owner doesn't feel the same need to maintain the natural buffer. Mrs. Caldwell doesn't feel this Board should impose more conditions on the variance. She feels that should have been done at the ZBOA hearing. Mrs. Caldwell reminded the Board that the stone quarry was next to residential land without any such restrictions. Mr. Lavine wanted the record to show that this was gin issue and the interpretation is that it is in the domain of the zoning board and not this board's. Mr. Barkley had to have the Town of Dryden approve the site of the drivew &y on Quarry Rd. and Tompkins Co. approved the site on Ellis Hollow, so as not to create hazardous situations. DECISION- R. Heidt moved, second by S. Lavine that this subdivision be approved. On friendly ammendmert by B. Lavine that this Board has considered the issue of some sort of buffer between the propo ed commercial and residential lots and be] ieves that thin buffer would be in the best intorest,but,f inds it to be only within the zoning board's doirain to enact and therefore it's not within this beard's action. Second by K. Friedman. ;Vote- all yes. Mr. 'Lrvinn. askad that the ZBOA be a,.vare of this concern fnr futi;re references. SPRUCE RIDGE SUBDIVISION- Preliminary approval had been granted in September of 1988 and notw Mr, White was present roquesting phasing of that subdivision. Final health dept. approval Was obtained in February of 1989 for the whole subdivision. Phase I the owners would like to have approved tonight if possible, it would consist of lots 1 -5 which front on Etna- t-fanshaw Rd. and Woad Rd. and would not require any additional roeds at this time. The ;owners might come brLk in this summer for approval on lots 6 -13, including the construction of the road. Mr. White also gave a written engineers report for the file at Mr. Anderson's request, modified JanuFry 30th, 1939, anal izireg the tests for water. Mrs. Caldwell said now they are requesting final approval on the pl-trsing. Nothing else has chenged. Lots 1-4 are down Etna Rd. consecutively, lot 5 is on Wiwi Rd. adjacent. DECISION- B. Lavine moved that phase 1, lots 1 -5 be approved. Second by D. Heidt. Vote- all yes. Final approval granted for phase i. R -A ZONIE- Eight people voice?; there opinions and concerns on ti11a land that would he or they would like to be in the R -A Zone. Mrs. Cald°:vell explained that tt?e itie7 that the R -A become an overlay zone instead of a nporate zone and the underlying hasic a =:ns are the same. One of the concerns v.ras that it took in so much territory and some substantial restrictions on it in the original propwAl and also reducing the R -C Zone., the allcoived uses in the R --C would be brought dovin to a small strip. There are two considerations, should there bear, overlay zone to meet the needs of soil erosion, fragile soils, ground water quality and where should it be and .ghat should the criteria be for it. CONCERNS- Margaret Pough of 132 Cenung Circle said her concerns ;^�tre about the small streams on top of Snyder Hill in a fragile soil crea where there is aintinued development and it has not been in an R -A zone. Wells and water concerns and the increased run off of the little streams at the top. Some of the back areas should be protected. She fears Cenung Rd. will be wiped out if more houses cause stream erosion. She feels if the zone comes over the crest of the hill it is insufficient. The area between Redwood Lane and Cenung especially needs to be in R -A. Even putting marshy streams in the relatively flat areas on top should also be in R -A. Mr. Lavine brought up a concept with the issue of the informal policy of surface water run off management for subdivision activity such that we require draincge plans by no increased runoff off the site. Larry Driscoll of 252 Hunt Hill Rd, said his property is very wet and the idea of the 24 unit Moore subdivision scares him. The 5 acre minimum is a good handle on the amount of construction that would be allowed. Richard Heidt thinks it is much too general and the 5 acre minimurn is not fair to the little guy. Peggy Walbridge thinks the 5 acre minimurn and broader zoning would help the town. Mrs. Caldwell asked about the criteria needed for an appeal Process. Mr. Lavine suggested the following major criteria for an appeal process if you can demonstrate in any development you do would result in a zero change in runoff of any point on the parcel and have the proposer also has to provide funds to the Town to hire an engineer to review it. B. Lavine said if there are areas that shouldn't be in, lets take them out. D. Heidt feels it takes in far too much area and the five acres isn't fair. Mrs. Caldwell said ha consid3rs it a mapping issue. Mr. Hoard of 108 Cornell St., Ithaca tivishes that spot zoning would be considored on Flunt Hi 11 area. B. Lavine said the criteria is different in what the R -A Zone is trying to accomplish, it's not the use that's allowed but the intensity of the use and based on an envirnomental fe for and should be applied across the board in the town. K. Friedman brought up the idea of a moritorium rather than a bad appeal process. Mrs. CalN,ell said there would be two categories of R -A, one with public water and seller and one without, still with the wale drainage concerns. The existing intre structure is another criteria, using reds the most efficiently as possible. Steps to take. If the overlay is the agreement of this bcrrd then our next step is the appeals process and then take it to public. hearings.