Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-01-17TOWN OF DRYDBN Planning Board ® January 17, 2008 N'Iembers Present: Barbara Caldwell, Chair; Toni Hatfield; Joscph Laquatra, Jr.; David Weinstein, Joseph Lalley, Megan Whitman, Martin Hatch. Others Present: Mary Ann Sumner, '['own Board Liaison; Larry lyabbroni; Henry Slater; Patty Nkfillard, Recording Secretary; Jonathan Lucente, Town Resident, Agenda: Oriole Drive, Lucente, Sketch Plan Review Presentation & Discussion regarding Design Guidelines Alternative Crops for alternative Energy and how the Town of Dryden might promote them Meeting called to order at 7:12. Oriole Drive, Lucente — Larry Fabbroni Mr. Fabbroni presented a map of the proposed neat section for the Oriole Drive Subdivision. Phase I included an expanded sewer district. This would be Phase 11. It includes 16 lots. As for roads. they would finish Cardinal Drive and connect a new road from Meadow Lark Drive to Hanshaw Road, ®0flie main sticking point at the time we did the 7 or 8 lots for Phase I was the sewer, The Village of Cayuga Heights wouldn't allow connections to the sewer line at the time. In 2003, the 6 municipalities: City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Town of Dryden, Village of Cayuga Heights, Village of Lansing and Town of Lansing struck an inter - municipal sewer agreement which opened up this area of the Town of Dryden to sewer service at the Cayuga Heights plant. Some of the sewage in the Northeast would be diverted to the downtown sewer plant (City of Ithaca) and that was how Cayuga Heights could accept more sewage. What we've planned in this development is to extend the sewer along Cardinal in to a fill area that's in the area of lots 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16. About 20 years ago a till was put in from excess material from the construction of Briarwood Drive in the Towii of Ithaca. so this is all clean fill. So we .would expand it by gravity in to that area and Serve all the lots except 1, 2, 3 and 4. The sewer at the end of Meadow Lark would be extended to serve those 4 lots. The water, which as I say now already moves from the end of Cardinal to Meadow Lark would be extended in another loop that would loop to the end of Meadow Lark and back so this area would b e Cayuga water and create a loop. What we're trying to do is plan for the portion of remaining Lucente that we can get in to the gravity before we would have to entertain a pump station. Most likely we would have to put some in this area somewhere (indicating a section on the map) to serve the balance of the land and possibly lands outside of Lucente lands in the Town of Dryden. What were proposing now, these 16 lots, would finish off Meadow Lark and Cardinal and give access to Hanshaw Road at a point that has almost unlimited sight distance from both directions. ® We would have all the drainage come down to the crossing at Hanshaw Road. This is where the drainage now goes under Hanshaw Road. Our proposal would be pretty traditional — state LA a go I'B 01 -171-2008 Page 2 of 20 requirements that would fulfill your riee v stormwater ordinance that you enacted the first of the year. Joe Lalley: What's the intent of the area to the NE of lot 16 there? Is that going to stay forever wi Id? harry Fabbroni: It's pretty much empty and it's being reserved for maybe a pump station and access to the drainage facility. .toe Lalley: So the boundaries of the subdivision that you've proposed here would include the 16 lots here plus that space? Larry Fabbroni: It could. This is just a sketch plan so I'm kind oi'here ears open. We don't have anything, any particular plan for this area. Joe Lalley: Would there ever be any — it seems there is some sort of trail right through here — would there ever be a development to the north of the pond? Larry Fabbroni: Eventually. We have three different possible build outs of this area. Joe [.:alley: So conceivably, might there be a road here? Larry Fabbroni: it could either be from here or an extension from here. It depends on what your feelings are. i left both possibilities open. As far as what in particular this could be, we don't have anything on the board. Barbara Caldwell: I'd like them to be the same character. Because 1 think the interface currently... Larry Fabbroni: Nrl%e're al-vvays talking about one -story industrial sites tip north because if you look at the area map, you kind of see a parcel — an odd shaped parcel to the East of Lueente land that kind of starts to show you where the airport zone comes in. The first map will show you that we have no Federal wetlands on this property. The area map, the second one shows you the State wetlands —there are no Stale wetlands on this property either. `The third map, if you look at the aerial there, you kind of see where the woods ends. In the middle of the picture, there's a woods and _just to (lie East of it there's kind of a diagonal line. That diagonal line isn't very far off of the clear zone for the airport. Also in that photo, you can see along Haw haw Road there are areas that have been filled in there. The area that is kind of the lightest was filled in in the 80's. The area to the Fast was actually filled in in the 601s. Joe Lalley: 1-low far Last does Sapsucker go? Larry Fabbroni: Sapsucker line on this map is right here. Maybe ti0 feet to the left of the shop. I 01 -17 t3 -2008 Page 3 of 20 0 W Larry Fabbroni: The maps that were in your mail that went home show a little better. David Weinstein — You said that you wanted the sewage to be gravity fed — but you've gone past the height of land, so how does this work? Larry Fabbroni: This land was filled in in the 80's and it wasn't particularly with that in mind, but as it turns out. there is anywhere from an 8 to a 12 foot fill in the entire length of these lots and that's what makes it possible. Otherwise, as much as I could envision what the land used to be, we would run out of gravity there probably in the old plan. That sewer district that I formed could have been served by gravity at the time. David Weinstein — Are you going to have to fill 5 and 6 to get them high enough? Larry Fabbroni: No. I have spot elevations on my big map if you're interested. Henry Slater —The depth for the sewer line is enough. David Weinstein —Lout the line wasn't built extremely deep under Cardinal Drive, so you didn't have that much flea there. Larry Fabbroni: The elevation here is like level, and the sewer is about 8 % feet deep For 100 feet, you end up where you're still Jonathan Lucente: Do you consider the dra. 1090, here, enout ti n age the elevation here is about 1036 on the ground so when you run from that point four feet deep 1h in the ground there that you're ok. in Meadow Lark and Cardinal to be adequate? Larry Fabbroni: I'm don't know at what point you came in, John, but everything drains this way now on Meadow Lark and Cardinal. In this new development, everything will drain Last. Jonathan Lucemte: The problem is that it doesn't drain at all. i live on 29 Meadow Lark Drive, right: on the corner, and they just scrubbed out my ditch a couple weeks ago to get all the four years of slime and stuff out of the bottom of the ditches and that pretty much ended up in a resultant stagnant pond of water sitting on my corner lot. The water doesn't run anywhere. The whole neighborhood comes right down to my house and it just sits in a real deep pile of ocean on the intersection of Oriole and Meadow Lark Drive. Larry Fabbroni: Nell, two things. I think you're talking about road frontage on Meadow Lark. But the new road, the ditch would start here and go to the South. That will only improve that corner situation. Barbara Caldwell: Expressed concern for having the driveways for having all those properties going out on to Hanshaw Road. Would rather have them go on to an internal street, which means lot 6 might have to be lost depending on where Meadow Lark would come around. • Larry Fabbroni: The only lots that would require access onto Flanshaw are 14 and 15. What we were proposing was a combined driveway on the lot line, so we would have one more driveway VB 01 -1? -2008 Page 4 of 20 onto Flanshaww. Lot 13, because the houses would be built back from the road to begin with — it was easy to build access to Lot 13 from Oriole. Lots 11 and Oriole, and Lot 16 would have'a drivewway of Nelleadowv Lark access point for the lots on Hanshaw. Discussion of speed limit in that area. 12 would also have driveways off . There would only be one additional Barbara Caldwell: Depending on how useful that additional land is beyond there, now is the time to say, ok, let's have more access and maybe have Meadow Lark scoot around David Weinstein: I agree with Barbara. l certainly would be. maintain the \vholc atmosphere ofruralness to not duplicate Hanshaw where you have one driveway after another. If we as you said; the fields across the road are open. We can mail in keeping with our desire to what you see further down on can minimize that with big set backs stain that feeling of openness. Larry Fabbroni: The house sites would be in the back area of the lots for that reason and because that is where the water and sewer services will be as well. Those two lots (14 and 1 5) because of the fill, they are a little bit of a tortuous - We can develop a very gentle slope over this 200 feet in to the lot where coming in the back of those two lots is problematic. Joseph Laquatra: Did you come up with any options for going that way'? Larry Fabbroni: Showed on the map a possible alternative at the back of the lots. We talked about doing a road back there, but %with the different elevations— if you walk out there you would get a better appreciation of why it's not going to work — with a road there. David Weinstein: But coming down off the from of that pile — that's going to be tough. Larry Fabbroni: If we combine the driveway, we'll have double the width and we can do it once. David Weinstein: So the idea of possibly bending Meadow Lark down just a bit in the back of 16 — there's no possibility there? Larry Fabbroni: There's a possibility, but I don't know that you want to disturb that area. You want to keep that woodsy area if you can, Usually you tell me to keep area open, so i was trying to do that here. David Weinstein: 1 appreciate that. Larry Fabbroni: We can develop the access at the rear of these properties. Martin Hatch: If you came around, you would have to sacrifice Lot 3. But you came around and went down through there. Larry Fabbroni: 'That's a lot of road for not getting a whole lot out of it, And for those lots, they would have a road in front of them and in back of them too. P 01 -17 -2008 Page 5 of 20 s 1 Lalle Looking in the context of there possibly being future development to the North Joseph y g i b 1 one of the things we've been talking about in our planning efforts for subdivisions: you've got it. You've got municipal services, you've got space, and the thing that I Would want to make sure we don't do is that we don't do anything — this falls right under cluster development. The piece that falls to the North — we want to make sure we don't do anything that won't get in our way for the. development of that North piece. Larry Fabbroni: To address tl give you a central pan access if you could connect it to the iat issue, when I pictured this access here, this access here would to two sides of a road up in to the 55 acres that is to the North; and Cast where the storage buildings are. Joseph Lalley: In our notion of a cluster development; instead of having something that would be traditional like this — that there might be more conservation room down here. It isn't this model anymore. That's where we're trying to go as a town. Maybe it has no bearing at the moment other than whatever we do here, I don't want to preclude. Larry Fabbroni: This is seen more as industrial sites because of the noise aspect being so close to the airport. What we're doing today is to finish off the residential portion of the area we're talking about. Joseph Lallev: In that case, is there a way that we can apply the cluster concept to the 16 parcels: Dan Kwasnowski: I think we had talked about that because it is in a sewer district, but l didn't .just look at the 16 lots, I looked at the whole development and said geez there's no playground, there's no park. When you talk about 16 houses, you say, well, we need a park. There's lots of walking trails around. There's Monkey Run. But I think what Joe's alluding to and what I would say is, beyond cluster, if you look at this neighborhood, you could say even if it was just an acre, if you had a park in there. Ewen if it was associated with the pond, if You just had a playground and open space, maybe a walking path on the pond or connected to Sapsucker Woods, then I think what vou're looking at is a park reserve here. That would be planning a full build out. Larry Fabbroni: That would be a better use than roads. Joseph Lalley: If we were to cluster the houses in an area where there's roads and parking and services, and the pay off were to be. more open space and less curb cuts, that might get you economically what you need to get out of this and get us, from an aesthetics standpoint, what we've been trying to do in Cluster subdivision. 'Phis is the perfect opportunity. You've got municipal services, you've got your roads, and in fact there may be some economic incentive for W to consider that because you won't have to do as much municipal — you might be able to concentrate the infrastructure. Joseph L,aquatra: Do we have a town ordinance yet that would allow this? 0 Henry Slater: We don't have any mechanism to do it.. PB 0147 -2008 Page 6 of 20 • Dan Kwasnowski: What you're talking about, you're not talking about a green space and clustering the house at one point.. You're talking about a fall build out of property that's been building and you've got 50 or 60 houses next to you. You're just talking about dedicating some open space to serve that development. The cluster is built in because you can have ' /Z acre lots here. It's not really clustering. Where is the park for this development going to be'? That's all you're asking. Larry Frabboni: The remainder of the land is definitely a good candidate for clustering, but all we're trying to do is fill out what wwas already started. I hear you and it's a perfect candidate, but this wooded area would be a gorgeous place to cluster things and keep them away from the noise and just kind of work the whole property there. What we're trying to do here is just — the water's already in here, the road is already cut in. If this was a big, empty piece of land, then it would be a lot easier to give you the kind of cluster for the 10 acres you're talking about right here. Tom Hatfield: I think what you're hearing is that we feel like we have a transitional opportunity here. 1 think we're asking to see how that transition is going to work. You still have the character of the neighborhood issue to deal wwith. I think that's what's being said by Dan and others. This is sort of at the end of this piece, but part of this project requires us to tool: at: we've got this retention area and houses in transition in to the development eventually — either commercial or light industrial — in a cluster, preserve that woods because that woods can be preserved using the tools we're developing for cluster development. That will help deaden the noise and some of the other issues for whoever ends up in those future areas. Otherwwise, I don't care if you're running a commercial operation, you have to deal with airplane noise corning and going every few minutes, that doesn't go over too well. You have to have that dealt with on sorne basis. Joseph Lalley: One thing, this is very thoughtful, i just wanted to push that idea out a little bit. One of the questions we talked about was perhaps having 14 and 15 use some sort of shared driveway to get to Oriole Drive and to get to Meadow Lark perhaps, and since going over the proposal, i understand that only 14 and 15 would have a shared curb cut. Rather than act in to the quagmire of shared driveways, if we can't force them to go on to Oriole and Nteadow Lark, then we can tolerate that one curb cut on Hanshaw since there aren't going to be that many more, and then we can hope they lower the speed limit in that area. "Fom Hatfield: What prevents 14 and 15 form going through a shared driveway through 3 and 4? Did you say there were some transitional areas there in terms of topography'? Larry Fabbroni: The fill ends right in here, so making that transition from the lower level from the back of the lot to where the house site is going to be to where I want to run the sewer, to cut over 200 feet works a lot better here. You end tip with a 4 or 5 percent driveway. When you come out to the road, the fill starts way back from the road, so you're going to have a level site when you come out of that driveway. You're always going to come out head first. Unlike those every 100 foot things down the road there, these driveways are going to have a turnaround and come out frontwards. You're not Suing to be backing out on to Flanshaw Road. David Weinstein: $o where you're going to site the houses to be built, they might not even be visible from Hanshaw? PB 0147 -2008 Page 7 of 20 Larry Fabbroni: Its possible, because there's still a wooded area before that fill starts. I cant say you won't see the roofs, but you won't see the first story. We're talking about a split foyer. The first level is going to be 4 feet in the ground anyway. Barbara Caldwell: is that the way they were done primarily on Meadow Lark? Larry Fabbroni: A lot of them are, yes. Toni Hatfield: The point I was trying to drive at is a 200 foot driveway you're talking about for lots 14 and t5, if you took that line and dropped it in the other direction between lots 3 and 4, it's almost the same length and there's certainly prejudice to avoid curb cuts at all cost. Barbara Caldwell: And shared driveways. Joseph Laquatra: I'm with Toni. If you think about it, how fast are cars going along that curare? David Weinstein: There is a little height of land right in that area that it's really hard to see over. Larry Fabbroni: It's just West of where the new SPCA is there, so it's down the road. It's a bad example what's going on in the Town of Ithaca every hundred feet, yet it exists, so that's kind of my feeling for one driveway at a point where the sight distances are as good as it gets. SDavid Weinstein: 1 have a technical question. This is really on two separate lots, right? You have not combined these two lots. So don't we tecluiically have to commission this as separate subdivisions'? Barbara Caldwell: No, they can be considered as one subdivision. harry Fabbroni: Again, I'm looking at the first phase where we had the districts already formed. We'll have to get in to expanding that district over the whole subdivision. The area coded in yellow shows you what that addition was at the tine. This was already in the district. The other part. of it is not. This lot was already approved as part of the Meadow Lark subdivision. That's another thing. This lot was already approved anticipating its role. 50 feet was left there. Barbara Caldwell: Are there any other issues that we need to bring up at this point'? Henry Slater: I can't find anybody that will agree or disagree with what you're saving. Assessment doesn't even have a benefit district assessment in the right place on these properties. 1 found that out since you and I met last week. We're trying very hard to actually figure out where the 1981 amendment goes. Larry Fabbroni: (Larry indicated on the nap where he believes the boundaries are.) That is the boundary description that was in your... • Henry Slater: Exhibit C. Pia 0147-2008 Page 8 of 20 Larry Fabbroni: and what. the Town Board passed w her they formed the water a nd sewer district. , Henry Slater: Nobody agrees with that. So we're trying to confirm that and trying to read the description in the Exhibit C as it applied in 1981 as it is today. It is not the most easy thing to translate. So Mahlon Perkins is working on doing that. That's his charge right now. Larry Fabbroni: i was just going to say, ask Mahlon. Henry Slater: Well, lie was present in 1981 when that was formed. Larry Fabbroni: I•le's the one that drafted the resolution that the Town Board passed. Joseph Lalley: What's the issue here, Henry? Henry Slater: We don't know if Larry's right or wrong. We can't confirm it. I assume Larry knows what he's talking about, but until we confirm it, it doesn't: matter. iaavid Weinstein: The issue is whether or not the Cayuga Heights district will actually accept this as part of it? Henry Slater: "there's a sewer district that %vas formed in 1965 that accommodates the development on Meadow Lark and Cardinal as it is developed today. What we're having trouble doing is in 1981 the L,ucente's as represented by Larry then came forward with a district amendment; which they did. They amended the district. We haven't confirmed the Northeast and Southeast boundaries of this amendment. Joseph Lalley: My question again, Henry, are we going to again define the boundaries of the sewer district to incorporate the new lot'? going Henry Slater: Yes. We need to confirm that this is correct. Joseph Lalley: What would be the new sewer district when we're all said and done? Henry Slater: What you see here. Joseph Lallev: Then I'm wondering why were so focused on .where we might not be since we need to focus on where we're going to end up. Larry Fabbroni: I think the first Phase would be might affect I'm happy with everything Henry's saving because I'm absolutely sure of the boundaries the Town Board approved. Joseph Lalley: So we're not redefining the boundaries of any sewer districts in Phase I, correct? Henry Slater: Correct. When this was done in 1981, Cayuga Heights said they weren't going to is take any additional septic from this area. Well. in 2003, there was an inter - municipal formed PB 01-17-2008 Page 9 of 20 between the municipalities Larry mentioned earlier. Everybody was under the impression that the Town of Dryden could develop out here and participate and ship effluent off to Cayuga Heights. According to Cayuga Heights, Cayuga Heights has no say over what the Towwn of Dryden does. Actually the Village of Lansing does. They sold their rights to the Village of Lansing and Mahlon thinks that's correct. There may be an allocation of 5 hookups that could go to the ToNvii of Dryden, maybe a couple more than that. We're trying to ferret all that out right now. Larry Fabbroni: let me say that in my other life, l sat through 6 years of negotiations with municipalities. That was the most miserable thing I've ever had experience doing, but having said that, some of what is being said is a little confusing. There was an interim agreement between the two Villages so that the Village of Lansing could have more hookups. The Village of Lansing then went and tightened up their sewer and they proved that they have fully improved sewers that don't get water in them when it rains and that's what you were just referring to. It's not to the bigger agreement that allows the Town of Dryden sewer in this area. Josepli Lalley: So the sewer district will get resolved at some point and then you'll be back. Larry Fabbroni: The Village of Lansing does not control the Village of Cayuga Heights sewer plant. That interim agreement Henry Slater: What I meant to say what that allocations for Dryden have to be arranged through •the Village of Lansing. "That's what Cayuga Heights is telling us in our initial discussions with them. David Weinstein: is there an issue with capacity? Larry Fabbroni: What the agreement did was it enabled Cay -uga Heights to divert flow to the downtown plant that has all kinds of capacity so that they could stay within their 2 million gallon a day limit. David Weinstein: So if we asked them to take on these 16 more units, they could just divert what they needed to in order to make sure these 16 units could be accommodated? s Larry Fabbroni: if they had to, but they've already diverted a good chunk of the mown who is apart owner in the downtown plant as swell, so that capacity may already exist. There may be agreements that have to be struck to pay for O &hit for instance, but that's as much as I know right now. The envelope to make it possible is in place. Henry Slater: What you have to understand is that no on a has done anything with the Town of Dryden to speak of since the new Sapsucker Woods Ornithology was done. That was the last thing that we've done. So in the meantime, and that was around 2003, everything has kind of gone idle and everything is rusted up in the process here. low, my additional information is coming from Red Cross, so that's probably one place where you want to start. Joseph Lalley: As a %\T; .we're saying is it looks Hanshaw Road. That's to incorporate that area PB 0t-t7 -2008 Page 10 of 20 p tip, when the sewer district stuff-gets resolved, i think the main thing good except we would like to see the access for 14 & 15 not be on the main change that we're suggesting. Also whether or not you are going where the ponds are in the transition area is part of that project. Larry Fabbroni: I could probably tall: to staff about the open space idea. That would seem appropriate for down in here. Joseph Lalley: Or let us know if their intent is to contribute to the other recreation areas through a monetary contribution, David Weinstein: Also, since there is some question about drainage, we want to see some pretty good details to make us convinced that drainage is not going to be a problem. Larry Fabbroni: We'll have spot elevations for the whole road drainage system. When it comes to the lots, we can give you a typical grading plan for a lot. Dan Kwasnowski: This will be the first pond we have to deal with under the new stormwater law. The Town's policy is that we don't want long term management and stormwater facilities like that, so just something for you to think about. Larry Fabbroni: Do you have a model? 0 Dan Kwasnowski: No. We left it o en to be more flexible. Mavbe a homeowner's association, p maybe some other option, as long as the Tokvn doesn't end up having to maintain it. Larry Fabbroni: It takes a long time to get a homeowner's association through the State. We would prefer a district like a lighting district is structured. Henry Slater: I have to agree. What is the one organization that is always going to be here? The municipality. Make it a benefit district, tax those folks for it, and take care of it that way. ii�lartin Hatch: Chen the municipality should have some input into the shape of it as a part of the municipal good. Larry Fabbroni: We're willing to enhance the landscape along with what the state absolutely requires as part of that. After what I've heard, if you have suggestions, I'm certainly open to receiving. that. What I'm showing you is what we've been required to do f-or the past four years. Barbara Caldwell: You have our concerns. Please let us knoW when you're ready to come back. Presentation & Discussion regarding Design Guidelines: Behan Planning Lawrence Bice: Follow up on Residential Guidelines and present the Commercial Guidelines. Our next steps will be to refine the guidelines, identify some zoning amendments that are • relatively minor but that will go along with some of these guidelines. Try to fornlalize some elements in to the zoning. The idea is to start meeting with some focus groups next month, 11'B 01 -17 -2008 Page 1 I of 20 landowners and developers, get input from all sides of the equation. Get out to the public for a town wide public workshop and look at maybe an April public hearing and possible adoption, Dan Kwasnowski: I think the idea is that the Residential and Commercial Guidelines are based upon an overarching layer over our existing zoning. Instead of saying to people; "Meet our tuning," we're saying, "Give us what we want" so to speak. That's the advantage of them is that they demonstrate what we can't do with our existing zoning and that gets to the Comprehensive Plan recommendations and it really reinforces that there are certain things like conservation subdivisions that we can't pursue right now because we don't have a good base zoning. It's not realistic. These % acre lots that we were talking about tonight are a rarity in this town. So the Residential Guidelines, there are some we can apply now, they'll exist even after you guys start working on the zoning issues, but they really form a good case to say developers could do more but not with what. we have. We don't have a base zoning to calculate a traditional build out that's realistic because the county says you have to have a usable acre outside of the sewer district. If our minimum is a' /2 acre, then we're way off. We don't have anything to calculate bonus lots, or incentive zoning, because we just don't have that realistic base layer. Doing the guidelines first gives us a tool to use immediately that's not as controversial as changing the zoning ordinance and also demonstrates and bads into the reasons we need to address zoning.. so that we can do more, so that developers can do more in the long term. Barbara Caldwell: I see the Commercial Guidelines especially helpful for not necessarily for the person who is proposing to do something but for the bodies that will be reviewing to make it easier for them to say, you need this, or no way can you do that. It would help us to have clearly consistent views. I'm more comfortable with the Commercial Design Guidelines than i was with the Residential Design Guidelines that were proposed. Lawrence Bice: Please send your continents either through van or Patty or directly to me so that we can make sure we address all of your concerns. David Weinstein: So Nve will see a rewrite of the Residential Guidelines? Lawrence Bice: Yes. Also, if you have some ideas about who %ve should be sleeting with to get ideas from, please let Dan know. MaryAnn Sumner: Is Kevin still planning on meeting with developers in February? Dan Kwasnowski: Yes. That would be a good one to piggy back on. Lawrence Bice: We would probably.just hand out some maps and talk about some of the of and major goals to get their perspective on it. Martin Hatch: These two, drafts of the residential and commercial, they fit in to the Comprehensive Plan, right.' What you were saying about zoning and the timing of this would be how they would be put together in to something like this map. But this kind of map doesn't • appear in either of these, which makes me wonder if you're purposely leaving out something like this because you don't want. to get in to zoning. PB 01 -17 -2008 Page 12 of 20 Lawrence Bice: Part of the idea with the Comp Plan map is that its more of an idealized situation. Some ol.�those districts are going to be taking a little more coordination. The infrastructure needed for sonic of those districts isn't there at the moment to make some of those districts a reality. Some of that Comp Plan, it's a little more idealized at this point. We need to identify what the to%.Ngi goals are and look for realistic and doable changes to the zoning. I don't perceive that every bit that is in the comp plan is going to land in that zoning district in the future. I think we can use it as a guide, a departure point. That's kind of where we're at. Dan Kwasnowski: Mapping the districts is often one of the last thins you do. The Planning Board through the Comprehensive Plan did a really good job of creating the districts that they want. It's just a matter of deciding where they fit in the town. Lawrence Tice: We. have to make sure before we go too far with these districts... Martin Hatch: Basically we have to imagine that the Residential Guidelines will only fit in a few places in here because there isn't, for example, in the ones that require septic systems, there's nothing in our residential guidelines, like this cluster housing and all that other that we talked about. L Bice: I think that applies generally to the town today the way most of your development is happening and basically it's intended to give some different examples or ideas of how to do isthings maybe a little differently. When we get some of the districts mapped out and we know there's going to be some infrastructure and new areas of town where there could be more dense development; is where we might be interested in some clustering regulations and denser development. Some of the main points are to provide some guidance to developers and to the board and to the developers too. I think it helps a community when a develop comes in if they've got something a little visual that goes a step beyond what the zoning shows, more cut and dry, you may get stuff little closer to what you're looking for up front. That we've kind of talked about already. The Commercial Guidelines specifically the idea is to respect the town character, strengthen a sense of place where there is already some density. Shared parking and driveway access is a big part of this. I know the guidelines aren't going to make everything happen. I know there is a lot of coordination between DOT and all kinds of things that go on, but the provide a good framework for that conversation. The applicability is both to existing commercial uses in terms of improvements and also for new commercial construction. It's meant to be flexible, that's why it's not cut and dry zoning. So it does need to be applied sensibly to different conditions and different sites, and the opportunities to strengthen are going to be specific to those sites, but the burden should be on the applicants to justify when they're not going to comply with the guidelines. So the idea is; Obviously not every single thing in here is not going to apply to every single site, so basically the guidelines they apply to the town as a whole right now in a general sense. Let me break it down in to three character areas that you were just looking at on the map, They really kind of correspond to the corridor study that we talked about before. it's the Village PB 01 -1? -2008 Page 13 of 20 0 Hamlet districts or subarea; mixed use i medium density, and rural highway corridor; also it incorporates the comp plan in this. We're trying to have shared curb cuts and some kind of sensible relationship to development as it appears in the corridor, not just scattered building next to building next to building and driveway next to driveway next to driveway. We're trying to provide sonic nice pedestrian connections between sites, joint parking lots, these are just some of the highlights from the guidelines. We tallied about building materials, trying to avoid the big metal sheds. We're really looking for certain natural materials if possible, things that respond to the character of the town. The gas station is a good example of signage, but also for nice materials. The bigger the project, the more you can expect them to comply. A small business owner doing a small project might not be able to comply, it might not be Financially possible. Nlaybe you don't want to see dumpsters or things sticking up off the roof. Keeping signs to a minimum and being more unified, more aesthetic to the site, sometimes does more to sell than these gaudy things in the one example we looked at. We also discuss natural site design and mentioned the new stormwater regulations. The idea is to respect natural features where possible and look at using impervious materials, green techniques for handling stormwater, things like that. I know that you're asking for that a lot now too. We just cover a little on lighting and utility placement. We realize that there's things that are beyond the town's control and in the control of the utility companies, but it's a statement from the town that where possible, if they can be consolidated and not have .wires running everywhere. Maybe try to bury utilities in development where possible. It talks about landscaping too. Putting parking right up to the building and putting a little more buffer between parking and the road gives it a little more rural character and makes it nicer for the town and the environment. We also want to reference trails, and this came up in the development subdivision plan today, but when people come in with site plans, they should be looking at how it fits in the town trail system and just be conscious of that, opportunities for plugging in to those resources in the town. There's a photo Dan gave us here, the Jim Schug Trail. That's a very quick overview of the elements town wide. Then we want to get a little more focused on the Route 131366 corridor. Wee want to acknowledge some more unique areas in that corridor that maybe should be treated a little differently, so we don't have a blanket: treatment of the whole town. This basically 1 Lalley - i get the point about wanting Varna to look like Main Street. i'll share my first reaction. That would be very nice for Varna. Then I see the inset on the upper hand corner there. There Isn't the space to do those kind of setbacks in Varna, so already it seems impractical to me. Yes, it's lovely, we would live to do it, but you go down through Varna and everything is ON the highway. For me to get from where I am now to there, l need to — there's a lack of practicality for mc. Flow practical is this in Varna'? L Bice — It is somewhat of an idealized situation quid it's not going to apply to every site, but in Varna there are some buildings that. aren't going to be there forever. When and if these places get redeveloped, you could gradually move these buildings back away from the road. P 01 -17 -2008 Page 14 of 20 0 0 D Weinstein — There are 3 or 4 houses that are blocking the way from this happening, but there are a lot of places where there is a lot that could be done as far as set backs and sidewalks and butTers. J Malley — Yes, but there are some things that are in the way. Even the repair station is pretty close to the road. So in the end, we need to end up with something that's practical, I guess is what I'm saying. At the moment, 1 don't fee that that's a practical dream for Varna. L Bice: Would you be more comfortable if that wasn't in there at all, or is it ok that the guidelines acknowledge ledge that this is %vliere we want to go, but we're not sure it's possible in this area'' J LaQuatra — Could you take some pictures of Varna and maybe do something with those pictures to show us how there could be sidewalks and such in this actual area? J Lalley — There's barely enough room for sidewalks in places like the Village of Dryden and Freeville and Varna. You go to places like Poughkeepsie and they've implemented these kinds of guidelines, but I think in the process everything along the main streets has been torn down and rebuilt at some point. T Flatfield — Are you looking for something that's going to be immediate, or are you looking for something that sets a tone that you're going to be targeting? A lot of those buildings aren't going to be there in 50 years. D Kwasnowski — And the advantage of these. Joe, is you can say, look. This isn't feasible for this project, so we don't do it. But maybe you work in pedestrian somewhere else or around the side of the building or whatever it is, you guys have to make that decision. But what the town is saying with these guidelines is that if someone comes in and says, "10m going to tear doxvii these five houses. I'm going to put in a mixed use building with retail, etc." Maybe in 25 years it will happen and maybe it won't, but at least you guys will be prepared for it and you can say, "We want it to loot: like this." J Lalley — The cynical side of me says to just give up on Varna because traffic counts are going to continue to go up and up. Or we find out a practical thing that we don't have to wait 50 years for that is going to do that. And the moment when 1 see things like that, it just doesn't strike me as being practical. But I would leave it in the presentation. T Hatfield — But if you do start to have up being acquired by agencies that can some judgments and fitting it in that it' use. ft.'s going to have. So there are two join you on that. a transition, the prof make them conform s going to make that sides to that coin. If >erties that don't conform because now they can see property more appealing you want to give up, I'm could end by making to whatever not: going to H Slater — I think one of the things we need to keep in mind is that these guys have gone places and seen the actual places where these pictures came frorn. And I've thought about that too. What's the difference between where these pictures came from and where we are'? It's the state PB 01 -17 -2008 Page 15 or 20 of the economy from where those pictures are taken. It's a much, much higher state of economy than you have here. Well, you tall: about downtown Varna. Little by little, Steve Lucente is acgairing doxvntown Varna; and Steve Lucente is not developing a state of economy there that is going to support any of this. He's, in fact, he's taking that state of economy in a different direction, and maybe that's something you guys should know. He's taking it backwards, not forwards. So maybe you gotta think about how we're going to figure out who you're going to have purchase properties that can do these types of things, or w�e'rc wasting our time anyway. J Lalley — Case in point with Varna. L Bice — Goad points. Let's move forward. I.1 Slater — So we're just going to ignore the reality? L Bice — Were you looking for a response right now? H Slater — Well, yeah. Are we going to just have this dream that maybe in 100 years might work, or do we have some way of actually applying it? That's the reality of it. L Bice — I think the idea of the guidelines is that it's not going to force people to do anything. Of course, the marketplace is going to eventually provide something, but they're there so that if you get some investment, I know with Observatory Circle, there are some things coming in that — it could either: 1. attract — ware a town, we're open to this, this is what Varna's like now but we would like to see something nicer happen here — maybe it would attract people. 2. it just sends a message. J Lalley — I suggest there may be an opportunity if you believe what Cornell is saying irk sonic of the press these days as far as working with some of the communities. And I view this as the Eastern gateway to Cornell. And that if we came up with a practical plan that we can begin to do sonic things. I think one of the things that would help Varna immensely would be a stop light just to slow everybody down. L Bice — Actually your comp plan was very detailed about Varna and the in -fill, it had a whole in till plan, there's so much inspiration that comes from your comprehensive plan. I think it's actually a little more generalized than the Comprehensive Plan to be a little more flexible, but I think if someone comes in and wants t do something, maybe they're not putting a ton of money in or not doing a lot, but they're doing a little bit, even that balance can move it in that direction just a little bit maybe. M Surnner — Doesn't Steve think he could rent or sell those Observatory Circle places if the community was nicer? H Slater — He obviously thinks that those are two different pr( jects ... downtown Varna and 0 Observatory Circle Varna. Hundreds of years apart. P13 01 -17 400$ Page 16 of 20 D Weinstein — tit some point, he's got to do something other than take those old buildings and Iry to rent them to whoever will pay the lowest amount. Some of those roofs are going to fall in and he's going to need to replace those and is this going to give us the power to make sure that when he replaces them, we can actually force him to implement? J LaQuatra — Zoning only applies to major rehabilitation. B Crawford —That ! s about 3 steps beyond where we are. L Bice — I think the message — it's a good point — it also maybe helps to avoid doing something really bad. Someone might come in and just want to do something really crazy that's really equally out of bounds. Maybe you're not going to get them to do this, but you can say, look, that's completely opposite to what we want to do. D Kwasnowski — You're used to looking at things and saying, you have to meet this sLwidard, this legal standard. But face it, if everyone did everything under legal in this country, we'd be in worse shape than we are now. So what this does is this says, this is what we want. The people in this community, this is what we want. `phis is everything I've heard, Varna, drawings, everything has been asked for. Your job is to say, this is where V%re want you to start. if you can't give us this, you have to tell us why before we move on. Before we get to the legal standard, you have to tell us why you can't do this because we've adopted this as a policy and this is our first step. This is what we've adopted as our first step of review, and if you can't meet this first step of review, isyou have to tell us why. You have to justify it; not only verbally but in dollars and cents why you can't do this. L Bice — I think too it's like someone coming in they don't maybe the economy is getting people to not do these fancy things in Varna, but somebody comes in, for whatever they do, whatever they're going to propose, at least you move it in that direction a little bit with at least sonic of the principles or overall goals. It may not be that exact thing, but it moves it in that direction a little bit more for whatever level of investment that person's planning on doing. That's where you kind of have to match these — you're not going to force the market for someone to spend more money — in the guidelines, the idea is that the overall goals should be adhered to. You kind of match that to whatever that person is proposing. It's also, if someone comes in to do something, it allows you to say, maybe you should do it this way so that in the future, we can realize this more of what we want. We don't want someone to build something now that is going to totally preclude that from happening later. So maybe someone coming in who wants to do some not very nice project or something, maybe we don't put it right up against the road. We set it a little back so that at some point there may be an opportunity to put in a sidewalk. N Nelunkenbeck — So for instance ifsomeone wants to build on the same foundation, for instance, you could say no, we don't want that. So they come in with a design that calls for building on the old foundation, which is very close to the road. And you guys come up with these design guidelines that say, no no we want Ultimately sidewalks, so that's going to require you to build a different foundation and now you're saying that i have to come to the planning board with this, you're saying the planning board is going to refuse my plan or the planning board is just going to tell me they don't like it but still pass it, or they planning board is going to tell me they don't like PB 01 -17 -2003 Page 17 of 20 it and they're going to make me jump through more hoops. Am I legally bound by these design guidelines. J LaQuatra — The point is, you're going to be rebuilding a house. You wan to use the same foundation because you're rebuilding a house. There's a new setback requirement you have to adhere to. N Nlunkenbeek — OK. And I say I don't have the money to build a house, so now what do I do? I just have to give it up. NI Hatch — I think we're getting something in between. I take Joe's point about what exists now, but of course what gists now is a large mobile home park there and then right next to it there's a large fairly good size mobile home park right on the creek and it's a very nice area. I'm not damning those things. They exist and they probably will exist for a while longer. What we need to do though is Set something in between the ideal, and you've already said that you're headed in that direction, %.vhich says these are guidelines and they'll push us a little bit farther. As a planning person we can't just say, let's just write it off. There's no reason to do that to any area. But there is something, in between that and the very idealized view that we Nvant to get to. N Nkiunkenbeck — is this like law, you don't meet tine guidelines, you can just .walk away crying because it's done? la Kwasnowski — No. It's easy to say, for whatever reason, it's not feasible, then xwhoever's reviewing it says, well, yeah; you're right, it's not feasible. N Munkenbeck — So they could conceivably approve the plan to rebuild on the old foundation leaving no use for the front. L Bice — Moving forward. We talked a little bit about Varna being constrained with topography and such, if there comes a time when the mobile home park gets rebuilt or other things change, if there's new residential neighborhoods, they should be basically relate as much as they can to the hamlet core through connected streets and things like that. Obviously down in the lower right, the Village of Dryden is going to be a little more intense than you're going to see in Varna, but it's a little hard to see. Basically we're just talking in fairly general terms about the sort of fairly consistent setbacks when we're in the residential part, some of the historical scale. This is where we started to do a little simulation. 'Maybe some opportunities for shared mailboxes so there wasn't so much clutter along the street, changed the color of some of the houses, added sidewalks. 13 Caldwell — I think there is a question of how wide the state right of way actually is. It may go t.luough someone's front room already. L Bice — How much conversation has the town had with DOT? ® N !\4unkenbeck — I think those houses look almost as close to the road as they do in Belle Sherman. PB 01 -17 -2008 Page 18 of 20 • r r ' � 1 Lalley — The traffic count is not nearly as high m Belle Sherman as it is in Varna. Nor are the speeds. L Bice —The guidelines aren't saying that you have to have more setbacks. In fact, I think it's 70 feet now. Mixed use medium density, it's the pink areas here. There's the little top of it just north of the Village of Dryden and also centered on where Route 366 and 13, NYSEG, that whole thing combines there. The idea with this, the county plans include a new urbanist village. This just kind of soft peddles that. For now it just talks that this could be an area where you could have some mixed use. The idea is that it's important that there's really shared, organized, common driveways serving larger areas of development. There may be some opportunities along the road for some pedestrian amenities. Not necessarily everywhere. And those would tie in to more internal circulation. Inside these areas there could be almost a hamlet feel to them, good connections between buildings, things like that. Again, this is that famously unattractive area that we talk about. The problem again is no shared curb cuts. You can see the parking lots bumping Lip against each other, but no connections. We tried to show what it would look like if we combined the curb cuts and driveways into one. Theree are way too many signs. The canopies are almost a sign themselves. We talked about making those more sympathetic to the existing building — the building that they're serving so that they're not so glaring sign themselves. 0 Discussion of grand fatheri no, T Hatfield — These businesses are run under a Special Permit. So when the lease changes hands, they have to come back to the town board for approval and you get another bite at the apple. H Slater —Most of those signs are non - conforming, not approved, but when you deal with these large corporations, they ignore your mail, so unless you want to send the "Town Attorney to go fight them in a court of law, they ignore you. They know they're bigger than we are. M Hatch —1-low did they handle the Burger King and the Citgo in the Town of Ithaca on the corner of Ellis Hollow Road and ... H Slater — Ithaca must have fought it These signs all popped up after the fact at these places (in the Town of Dryden) and they were notified that they were non - conforming and they just throw the letters away because they know we're not going to spend the money to fight them in court to make them take that stuff down. B Caldwell — Can we move on? 1. Bice —This is just a conceptual image — trying to get common curb cuts in these areas. The medium density mixed use areas are closer to where the main structure is — it's more conceivable that you could have a larger scale development in the hiture. So we're trying to kind of plan for ® that. PB 01 -17 -2008 Vage 19 of 20 0 This is saying, internally here, once you get inside the site, that there's a nice environment; pedestrians are accounted for. This could be applied to a larger, more investment in a commercial site. It's not necessarily what you're seeing on Route 13 now, but you've got infrastructure in some of these areas. You might see some more intense development. Some guidance on how that could look, Here's the rural highway corridor. This is the largest part of Route 13. it's the green area. The building blocks are shared entries, a rural higliNvav buffer, some trees sprinkled along the frontage, and Using low hedges for buffers. Allowing some parking in the front, but doing what you can to minimize it. lire realize in this area you're not going to have structures like malls and things like that, so it's small ways not to overburden individual business owners. One zoning amendment that you might want to look at — the county had talked about tipping it to a 5 -acre lot along the corridor. Right now it's basically 30,000 square feet. You don't need infrastructure. Basically going to a 300 foot frontage. I think the idea really is so that you can have curb cuts spaced more along the corridor. We're looking at, we think tine 5-acre thing, we don't know that you necessarily need to go there right now, but maybe frontage might be something you might want to look at bumping up from the existing 125. You could do something to incentivize, you could have a 300 foot frontage, but allow that to go down to 125 or 150 if people were agreeing to share curb cuts. That's something we could put in to some dram language. 1 don't know what you think about that idea. We did a little analysis of how they might play out in the corridor. How many non - conforming lots that would make. We're still looking at that. We think it's important when you put zoning down that you want to anticipate any unintended consequences. You don't want to create any new problems when you put zoning in. You want to make sure it really Fits the town and existing conditions and you want to make sure it achieves what its goals are, so we're still kind of analyzing that. B Caldwell — Could you look at that in terms of. hey, there are no utilities there now, but this is a potential and what that particular development pattern would do, perhaps realizing that potential for water and sewer. Some of these transitional areas that aren't ready for infrastructure yet, but they might be some day. L Bice - What this does right now it says, its lower density right now, lower investment, kind of mom and pop kind of stuff, how can we make, based on that existing pattern that we know is going to continue for some time, how can we make it loot: nice? 1 think if infrastructure were extended in the future, you could probably revisit the guidelines and make it be come more like the mixed use because it would be more large scale, but you might want to still want to have setbacks and shared curb cuts and maybe some mixed use. You could revisit these. It just puts you on a trajectory and what would probably happen is that these smaller lots would probably get combined and reinvested into larger, more fancy kind of properties. At that time, you might look at changing the regulations to reflect that new potential. Right now, it's trying to guide development as to what is happening at the moment out there. Having some consistent trees along the road ei nd a consistent setback. Low monument style signs ® would be a feature of this area. Rural lighting levels, so not overlighting sights. Being sensitive to that sort ofrural landscape character. Here's an example of some new development in another PB 01 -1 7-2008 Paige 20 of 20 town we work with, there is a Subway and some other chain stores in there. too, but you can see how thev accommodated the more rural character of the area. The pitched root' makes it look a little more rural. The stone fence, simple bushes in front, all keeps with the character. It's a little out of the ordinary for the Town Board to be doing Site Plan Review. Most give it to the Planning Board. We're looking at proposing a change to that as well. We're still looking at this. We tried to apply some of the proposed County standards to see how that would effect existing zoning. All of the black areas are non - conforming under current zoning. Most of them are frontage issues. We want to look a little more at the proposed County standards and see how much this would cause non- conforming lots. That's a lot of grandfathering. As for setbacks, the recommendation by the County is 90 feet. The Town right now is at 90 feet from centerline. D Kwasnowski — The other reality of that is, with the volume on 13, what is DOT's plan? What are they going to do? Will they add a lane? If they have commercial development there; are they going to have to have a turning lane? A light? L Bice — if you could get nlc all your comments on the residential piece, we'll leave that for next time and do it all at once. J Lalley — Can we look at including information on alternate ways to get conservation easements 41 for farm sales that get the seller in the ballpark of what they want financially and keep the land in the use it has been? Some of these incentives are from the f=ederal and State government instead of from the local tax base. Discussion about options that are available. N Munkenbeck — A list of areas that the town would be interested in helping with this kind of incentive would be helpful. As well as areas where then would have no interest in. B Caldwell — Where are we on this'? L, Bice — We're going to deal with a little more of that zoning analysis. Next meeting, if we can get your comments on both sets of guidelines before hand so we can address those comments, we're going to do some wrap up and follow up on both of those. We're going to get me set up to do an advisory group discussion with Kevin to get some feedback. On a motion by Joe Lalley and seconded by David Weinstein, the Planning Board voted unanimously to move the February meeting to February 28"'. Meeting was adjourned at 9:20 pm. Respectfully Submitted, Patty Millard