HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-03-20Tow'ri OF . .R DEI
Planning Board
March 20,2008
Members Present: Barbara Caldwell, Chair; Toni Hatfield: DaVSd Weinstein; Megan Whitman;
Martin Hatch
Excused: Joseph Laquatra, .I r. and Jo,Lieph Lal ley.
Others Present; Mary Ann Sunlnel -, ('own Supervisor; Joseph Solomon, `('own Hoard Liaison;
Dan K. va.mwski; En virorimental PIalliner; Patty Millard, R.ecordirlg Secretary; Town residents;
Bob clhindelbeck, Dawn Smith, Taney unkeribeck Behan Associates, Lawrence Bice and
John Bchan,
N4eetiljg called to order at 7:00-
South Hill Recreation 'Way exttmidon — Dawn Smith
The proposed trail include 4 town L,: Ithaca, Caroline. Dryden, and Danb . Most of the proposed
trail is in the Town cif Caro lirle with smaller areas in the other tons - Caro line has aareecl to take
the lead. We belicve Drydel,'s support of the projvx( would benefit the toval *ith little
Co ill ill 1 Uri el) t. ,Me project is important because it has [}he long terns potential of connecting urban
area w th a more rural area. The exisCirig trail conwes out of Ithaca on the old Wakawanick
ra11road bed. We're hoping to extend it out. in to Caroline, with a spur off in to the hamlet of
Brooki-ondale. Possibly even in the 1'uture we would be able to collnect to the Finger-1akes Frail- E
know how much I enjoy corning to the Jim Schug Ti•aiI here in Dryden- I think that's an
i nip ortarnt asset to Dryden- I think the continua ti on o.11' the Coddiilgtori Road Trail would he an
asset co not only Dryden but al so to surrounding towns. The exlsting ti -'sill 4itarts i11 the City of
Ithaca near Hodson Street on the South side oJ. Tthaea. It domes out to Burns Road kind of
parallel with 79. e ' d like to continuo it towards Caroline out past German Cross Road find
Funks Road.
On a motion made b , David Weinstin, seconded by Toln Hatfield. The Planning Board supports
[l,e spirit ofexterrding trails wherever possible throughout the county. All in f'avor. Motion
passed.
1 iri grant — Mary Ann Sumner
The Town o1' Dryden has been awarded a grant for the implementation of wireless internet
t�cccss, The grant actually goes to Clarity Connect. The project 1s estimated to cost a little over
l million, The grant program was looping speci f"iQalIy fo r pro grains in +,r4'hlch there, would be a
private entea-prise or municIpal or not- for - profit match. We don`t expect this to cost the to�rvn any
un bud got ed oash. It wIII ire mostly 1n kind contributions an the part of the. towel- I'll is is
incredible- It means that possibly every (louse ill the towel will have access to a Wireless inl.ernel
b road bylnd connection as a subscriber. Clarity C: oil nect leas comm1 tie d to makincr it cost S3 0 per
month plus a Tairly mi)dest start -up fee- It means possibly tip to 12 small towers and those towers
would be av�lilable fur aliv e Other c0nipanY Or municipality 0r whatever-
P 8 oard— Some reSi den [z� have alre�ldy Q0riMcCcd PI4nning Board members with questions.
There are sonic concerns thcll 101 nlZll processes are being bypassed.
1�r
�ww
�I
Ili&
1%bF
tr
,quo
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 2 of 17
M Sumner —The process isn't ready for Building Permits and such yet. They are only 100 foot
towers. They will go through the normal zoning process. Clarity Connect will go through the
same building permit process as any other company. They are the lead agency on this. It's not a
municipal wifi free. It's really not going to cost much, if anything, in tax payer dollars. "There's a
bit of town overhead. There's a substantial in -kind amount coming from the zoning department
and the recreation department. Part of it we already have, such as the online credit card system.
Part of the $600,000 is in -kind from the Town such as these things.
T Hatfield —These kinds of partnerships are critical in today's market. That's how phone
systems ended up being installed in the back woods years ago. ivtaybe someone can put together
a press release or something with some of these details for the public. People are excited and
nervous at the same time.
M Sumner — We've had educators and others telling us this is a great idea. The state grant is
going to cover the hardware Clarity Connect needs to put this together.
T Hatfield — I think it's important to let the public know as much as you can as quickly as you
can. The ability to see through things is critical in chopping off false rumors and the ability to
move this thing forward on a rational basis.
•M Sumner — If Clarity Connect hadn't already done a lot of the footwork, we wouldn't have had
a chance at this grant.
Discussion on the state grants process and the swift grant.
Progress Report — Dan Kwasnowski
Review of Progress on the Comprehensive Plan Implementation and Big Box Proposal,
Comp Plan adopted December 2005.
\Nt lhat's been accomplished'?
• Dryden/hreeville Trail — Mary Ann and Dan are reviving negotiations with The William
George Agency. RPM Ecosystems is helping with that.
• Farmland Protection — we have two farms, one under contract and one that should have a
contract by August — to buy the development rights on. The Lew -Lin harm and the Jerry
Dell Farm. Lew -Lin should close in a few months.
• New Park Land — We have 57 acres in Varna now. Just heard back from the Land Trust
about the Campbell / Meadows on the corner of Pinckney and Lower Creek. They're ok
with the language that the Town Board passed as far as a restrictive covenant. Moving to
close on that hopefully within a few months.
• Design Guidelines — we're going to talk about tonight. but that was also in here,
especially the Commercial section. That was a big part of the Comprehensive Plan, so I
think that was a good first step.
• Recreation klaster Plan — under way
PR 03 -20 -2008
Page 3 or 17
• The Open Space Inventory is due for an update. Working on getting that going with the
Conservation Board. And elevating that from an inventory to a plan. The law says you
should identify parcels for open space, but you don't have to go that far. The value of
updating that to a plan will be when we get in to zoning for suburban, conservation, etc.,
"zones, the ditTerent character areas of the town that you picked out, there's an open space
component to all of them. I think that's .what the plan should be, so updating that
inventory to a plan, if we can do that and say, whatever that zone is, this is the type of
open space that is required for that type of zone — town park or playground as opposed to
conservation open space. If people have bigger lots, maybe you focus on gorges or
wetlands or bigger pieces as reserves rather than active recreation areas. The plan could
just identify the open space needs based on the areas that you (the Planning Board) create
to help give guidance.
Mary Ann — Once you see the inventory, it's a lot easier to see the plan.
D Weinstein — if you orchestrate that, will you make sure every step of the way that it fits in the
Comprehensive Plan'? The last thing we want is two plans that are in conflict.
D Kwasnowski — It would be consistent with the work that you are embarking on now. So when
we look to the future, those are the higlilights of what's going on now. Things like the Riparian
Buffer Ordinance and the Stormwater Ordinance have been passed. They were small components
in here. There are also some things that have been done that aren't described in here, like
Renewable Energy. There's nothing in here, it's dust kind of an ongoing discussion, but we've
passed that as swell. Also the new Wireless initiative isn't in here, but is in progress. We're also
going to talk about the Zoning work and the Subdivision work — there's actual park development,
Farmland protection — we're going to submit a grant application each year if we can, Town Board
willing. That's ongoing for at least the next several years.
On the Zoning Subdivision work., the Open Space Flan are the ]rinds of things that will be
worked on for the next year or two, but then in 2010, we have to start thinking about updating
the Comprehensive Plan. ]'his is where the Big Box thing that we'll talk about next, what I've
proposed to the Town Board is to let you develop an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan.
Over the next year, the work that is ongoing right now:
• Conservation Board — Open Space Plan, Riparian Buffer (part of Stormwater Program)
and how those things fit in to Conservation Subdivision, Suburban Development
• Farmland Protection — which needs to be reviewed in the. Comprehensive Plan. There's a
whole lot there, but now tllat I'm actually doing grants, part of that Open Space Plan
could also be a Farmland Protection Plan because it is an Open .Space Resource. Just
revisit «fiat's there and update it to make it specific to the Farmland Protection Plan.
• Park Development — more regulated open space
By tile time we get these things done, I think we're going to be ready to start looking at updating
the Comprehensive Plan and include these things that we've done in it. You guys are really set
up for a very proper policy process. The only other place I know of that is really set up like this
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 4 of 17
is the Town of Ithaca. Of course, they have a huge planning staff, so i think that's really exciting
to me is that you guys are actually doing it right. I think it'll be much more organized and it'll
affect a lot of things in the town as far as development, I think you'll see an increase and more
organized land use.
T Hatfield — Anytime you can cut dowel development costs for a developer, time is money in
every sense of the word, so when you can give them a definition of what we want, this is going
to eliminate a three -year argument with everybody in the community starting with the
government down; you can compress that to an 18 -month process of permit, studies, etc., you
still have to go through the process, but if you have the process spelled out, everyone benefits.
Reviewing the Comprehensive Plan periodically to make sure what we're doing iits and making
changes when we see them necessary, that's great.
M Hatch — We haven't really fully implemented it yet in a sense that we don't have it articulated
in sways that are guiding people yet, so whey would we in 2 years want to revise something
already?
T i•latfield — It's a process. It needs to change as time and needs change.
D Kwasnowski — You're looking at a couple of significant amendments already. Once you get a
couple of amendments on there, you need to see what needs to be done to gel it all together.
• Implementation is very well under way.
T Hatfield — I think you're asking the wrong question. I think what we need to be asking at that
point is, does what we accomplished fit with what our vision was, and does the vision need to be
tweaked, changed, modified. In other words, it's a combination of what's going on with the
marketplace and what we want in terms of policy level. The major issue is, are we maintaining
the rural character of the community in a broad sense and how are we doing it as we make that fit
with what's going on over here and demands form the marketplace. Bringing those things
together.
B Caldwell — This would be a good time to take the pulse of the community again.
M Sumner — That 8 -year process of developing the Comprehensive Plan followed 25 years since
the last Comprehensive Plan, didn't it? The sooner you begin updating the next one, the easier it
should be. if there are good tools, it should take off.
B Caldwell —1 think the big thing is that all these pieces are in different hands and at different
stages, and communication between all the people is important.
M Sumner — Many of the things that Dan just described are in the Annual Report that's about to
come out the end of the month.
® B Caldwell — is there a way to get at least a summary of this annual report out to the comumunity
as a whole through the media?
1'B 03 -20 -20013
Page 5 of 17
rNI Sumner — We're going to mail it out. Were looking at what we can afford right now, ab'e'd
like to mail it out to at least every taxpayer. Every household would be nice, too, but we'll see
what we can afford.
B Cal6 ell — The ones that keep coming out of the woodwork are the ones that haven't been
following things all along. All we can do to keep people aware that they are part of the process is
important.
M Sumner — We see the Annual Report as the first step towards a quarterly newsletter. You do
three of those and follow it up with an Annual Report. We'll have a better website soon too.
D Kwasnowski — in your packet, you should have gotten a proposal that i wrote to the Town
Board. The proposed approach — I suggest that they refer to the Planning Board and give you a
budget to basically develop a Comprehensive flan like amendment — discussion — have a public
meeting to get public involvement about Big Box Development. And also (lie process for you
guys beyond this of what is involved.
D Weinstein — So anything like this would currently have to get approved under the Special
Permit process. So we have, regulatory wise, a Comprehensive Plan that clearly states this is not
the direction that we wanted to go in, and we have a process that requires Special Permit. You
feel that the combination of those two things is not strong enough to regulate this?
• D Kwasnowski — The Town Board, as long as I've been here, has never looked at the
Comprehensive Plan in relationship to a Special Permit unless 1 actually write them something
that says this is the Comp Plan, etc. I'm just being realistic with you guys. 'That's been my
experience.
M Hatch — And what you're saying is that any Big Box person, right now, goes right to the `fawn
Board.
T Hatfield — yes, because by current Zoning, they have Special Permit review power.
M Hutch — So we need to put something special in the plan in order to provide guidance to the
Town Board.
D Kwasnowski — You need to decide whether you want it at all. You need to exam the issues
because they are multifarious — it's beyond environmental. You get into economics and jobs.
T Hatfield — There are many sides to this thing.
M Sumner — ...the guy that came to tall: to us. He agreed that it would be really helpful if we had
a plan. Urn as anti -Big Box as anybody i know. This (his idea) did not sound like it was out of
the question. You can deal for some things that the town would like. It might not be too
•obtrusive, it might be lucrative. It seemed as though it was worth looking at instead of saying, we
Just don't want Big Boxes..And I'm not saying we do want Big Boxes, but it's just about looking
at the conditions under which we might consider it.
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 6 of 17
B Caldwell — i think another issue is if we say, ok, they might work, but they have to be in a
certain spit where it will also bring about Something else that we want — that particular location
you were talking about just turns me off. When we talk about that other little development that
the county was urging us to do something with — with multi-use — it might be a solution there to
help pay for all the roads and other infrastructure; and so on and so forth. We could treat it all as
a Planned Unit Development situation. That might be the way to treat Big Boxes,
T Hatfield — You've said it very well and I just have a couple of things to add to that. One: be
able to control the architectural look. Some of the things that these folks have presented to us are
acceptable. Most of the Big Boxes I've seen, I've objected to what they look like. And the other
thing is, in terms of transportation — if they can help us solve some of the parking issues, some of
the access point issues, a big enough core of economic activity coming together, then you can do
things with parking and road and access that will pay for it. 'They could help its clean up some of
the infrastructure issues that we've got, for instance, on 13. It would be nice il'they could take 4
or ti access points and turn it in to 1. Then we'd have sonic sort of unified access structure that's
off of 13 for access to some of these smaller facilities that could be co- located within it.
M Sumner —There were some appealing things about this site. There are some chunks along
route 13 that don't want that parcel. There's a wetland that they would have to preserve.
0 audience — or fill.
D Kwasnowski — You (the 1 "own of Dryden) doesn't have any regulation to prevent anyone from
filling in a wetland.
Discussion Federal vs. State wetland and regulations, permits, etc.
NI Sumner — There's possibility for access not on Route 13. There's a possibility that the state
will be rebuilding that bridge, and that could be part of the project. Anyway, there were a lot of
factors that, as much as l'm attached to that little piece of land, made this seem possible.
Big Box discussion.
D Kwasnowski — Those are the kind of conversations you guys need to have.
T 1- latfield — I can tell you, I don't know how the model's doing, but the argument for years
against the development of the Big Box strip down in Ithaca was, it won't work, but it is
working.
M HLrtch —But what do you do about the white elephant dying off because of another one
coming in, and do we really know that Wal -Mart or some of these other places...
® D Kwasnowski — Redevelop it. You have to have that requirement too. This might be a good
opportunity to start a transfer of development rights program. You could pick sites and say, we
could see it working here. if someone says they want to do something like the site off Lower
PB 03-20 -200$
Page 7 of 17
Creek, you could say, you know what, if you want to do a Big Box retail as defined by our law,
you have to match, acre for acre, in Farmland Protection. Or you could get points set up in a
bank and then the state buys the points from the town. if in S years, someone buys those points
from the town, thev've increased in value and have to be bought at the current rate, W the town
could actually make money and that money can either go back in to that pot or go in to sonic
other land protection program. There are unlimited opportunities out there, and this is the type of
development where you're going to get those opportunities. That's the level we're at now. The
regulations right now don't really protect the town. I think you need to have a conversation and
discuss what you want.
T Hatfield — Why wouldn't this fit in to what we're discussing now (Commercial Guidelines)?
Wouldn't it be a good jumping off spot to put that into the Commerical Guidelines in some
basis?
D Kwasnowski —
I think
it's a whole different
issue. Commerical
Guidelines are
for development
that is already occurring.
Box is a whole different category.
Stuff that the town is
already allowing.
More guidance.
M Sumner — When you say commercial guidelines are for people who are already talking to us,
that's not what you mean. Not specific developments, the type of development that already
happens here.
® D
Kwasnowski
—
I mean the type of development that's already occurring in the town,
M
Sumner —
Big
Box is a whole different category.
D Weinstein — What it
doesn't
address is what Tom
brought up about using this as a piece to
develop a larger piece
with a
lot more infrastructure.
T Hatfield — Exactly, That's what he's referring to. Incentives, credits, and you talk about that
Route 13 corridor and that's what particularly goes through my mind as you talk about all this.
One ofthe things we'd like to do is get some sort ofan anchor off one part of that commercial
development that will then allow the development of a single point of access and sonic
infrastructure and the commercial guidelines are already in the process of targeting things like
that.
M Hatch — If we make a separate category for Big Boxes than from commercial, we're sort of
saying — big box can go out here, and then there's all the other commercial stuff that's going on —
and I don't understand in terns of transportation and in terms of infrasth•ucturc why we want to
think that sway. Why don't we make it as a subset or integrate it with our idea ofwhat
commercial should be and where it should'?
D Kwasnowski — The Big Box retail, by definition, excludes those local businesses.
T Hatfield — Exactly. And Barbara hit the nail on the head with a PUD. it you do it as a Big Box
PUD, now you're talking about an area that has to be developed — you might put your Big Box in
P8 03 -20 -2008
Page 8 of 17
® there somewhere as an acre, but access and all those other things that go with it kind of all come
together.
D Kwasnowski — You'll have infill sites in the parking lot, then you can say have certain square
footage for local businesses to locate on their site,
B Caldwell — But I see this as part of the zoning rather than a specific thing spelled out in the
zoning for this type of thing as a commercial PUD or perhaps a multi -use. I like the idea of a
multi -use because 1 think we could do more with it.
D Weinstein — I would really love to see an example where this has actually been pulled off. I
look around and all the commercial PUDs look to me like Pyramid Mall. Where is one that
actually fits our mental image of where we want to go?
L Bice — For me, it's more a question of, if you want to have Big Box in the town, where do you
want. it and where definitely don't you want it. The market's going to determine to some extent
where local business will come, but if there are areas of the town where you definitely don't
want Big Box, this is the opportunity to do that by limits on square footage, etc.
M Sumner — One of the problems is that one of the best places is between I-Ianshaw and Lwoer
Creek Road, where you don't want it.
D Kwasnowski — But it's zoned commercial there.
D Weinstein — But if you go back to the Comprehensive Plan, the idea was more like commercial
office space, that was the concept, more research park kind of development.
B Caldwell — Low traffic.
T Hatfield —Then you've got identi Pied areas where. you want like commercial park, office park,
and where you want i.e. Big Box, something a little more retail, or commerce oriented, in terms
of how you develop that, and you define the PUD, not the people building it.
L Bice — Sometimes it's hard to zone just for office park, sometimes there isn't a good market
for that use.
M Suunner —There is a good market for that here.
D Weinstein — Especially with Cornell nearby.
M Sumner — If we looked at the whole length of the 13 corridor, I would assume no development
on that scale would be acceptable anyplace other than the. 13 corridor. So if you looked at the
length of that corridor, you could actually identify places where it would be tolerable and places
® where it would be out of the question.
P13 03 -20 -2008
Pate 9 of 17
M Hatch — And those places were actually in your slide show as part of the commercial
guidelines, so when we're talking about shared access or drives, we looked a lot at the Sunoco
station and BB farms. Let's say you have a Big Box somewhere near there, it sure as heck
couldn't be — it would have to accept that the Sunoco station was going to be there. You'd have
to integrate it in ways visually and conceptually, and it probably wouldn't want to be a retail big
box grocery store, because that does away with your local enterprise. I mean, because people will
go there and not to the vegetable. stand. I'm not raising protection for the vegetable stand, all I'm
saying is that these things are.
i\1l Sumner — Wouldn't we always weight decisions in favor of the local enterprise?
N Munkenbeck — I've seen people drive past Aldi's to get to the farmer's market. I'm not sure
what you're thinking of in this PUD, but I know a lot of students, that live out in gaslight village
precisely because it's located next. to all those commercial developments. Because they are
restricted to public transportation or walking, so having their apartments within walking distance
of shopping is important to them.
M Sumner — We might find if we looked at the length of the 13 corridor that we wanted to
encourage that closer to the Village,
T Hatfield — You keep adding `I'C3 residence halls up there, and there's going to be pressure
sooner or later for some sort of commercial aspect to service some of that demand.
M Sumner — Buses are improving.
D Kwasnowski — Maybe we can fold this in to the existing effort, at least at a certain level. The
fear I have is that l think this next phase is going to be hard enough. 1 don't want people to get
distracted with this as well.
T Hatfield — You might better address it up front and have it on the plate and have it working
forward as part of a process than to set it aside and put it on its own track. Then you end up with
the same thing we have now. Then you end up with two difTerent plans, do they fit together. I
think it night better be in front of us right now.
M Sumner — I agree.
D Kwasnowski — The other thing I was thinking, is if you guys are making the decision
tentatively now, that what was proposed, at least in spirit, in the corridor plan, then you guys
could pick that, and that could be part of this process, and you guys could master plan it
basically. Say, this is what we were thinking. hi gut feeling, from talking to people, is that we
have to have a separate public conversation just about Big Box development.
Discussion of attendance and discussion at the Public tMeeting the prior week and comments that
were made.
Big Box will return to the agenda, possibly as part of Phase 11.
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 10 of 17
D Kwasnowski —The Commercial Guidelines, I think are ready and could be implemented with
the current zoning. The Residential Guidelines could use a little more work, but could also be
implemented now.
D Weinstein — Flag lots are in there and we approve flag lots all the time. Not that we like to, but
we do. There's a huge emphasis on minimizing curb cuts and having shared driveways, but no
mechanism to encourage people that are willing to do that. We don't have any incentives. There
are things that I don't think we can really implement other than suggest to somebody, could you
do this?
T Hatfield — Let me make sure I understand this. Aren't these supposed to be guidelines to tell
people, this is where we'd like them to go?
D Weinstein — I agree, but he said we could implement these now, and I'm not sure 1 agree.
T Flatficld —1 agree with what lie says, but i think I'm looking at it a little bit differently. i .want
to make sure we're on the same wavelength. The next step after guidelines is them to rewrite
zoning, but meanwhile the guidelines go out now so that people; as they're coming in looking to
develop, they know what's coming.
•D Kwasnowski — And the key is, Henry really likes these, and lie's the one that is on the front
lines. He can tell people, if you follow these (before you go to the Planning Board) it's going to
go real easy; if you don't, then you're going to have to argue your way through it and it may take
a while. That's really the behind the scenes reality.
T Hatfield — My reaction to our meeting the other night was 2 members of the public... if
there's no more resistance than that; I don't see why we couldn't go forward with these in the
next month or two, when the Town Board's ready, and adopt some sort of version of these
guidelines.
D Kwasnowski — The amendments are written. We've just been waiting to talk to you tonight.
Still some concern From the public about public vs. private roads and the cost involved.
D Weinstein — I think
driveways, roadways,
going to get taken ov(
That, to me, is one of
that's a whole
and we don't
,r by the town,
the most hairy
can of worms. We're encouraging a whole lot of shared
oeally have any mechanism for how these are eventually
or what specs are they really going to have to come up with.
things involved in here. It feels like we're pushing
something that we don't really know how to implement.
M Hatch — The guidelines are also encouraging homeowner's associations, right'? (Yes). They're
discouraging subdivisions of 2 lots or less. They're eying to encourage bigger visions for large
® pieces of land than just cutting a piece out one at a time. The only experience I've had on the
Board up until now has been passing on developments which are one or two pieces being cut up
in that way. In what ways do these guidelines really work to discourage that, or work to
PH 03 -20 -2008
Page I I of 17
®
encourage somebody thinking bigger even if they can only start with one, such as that mock-up
� Y b �g } p
Of the Irish Settlement Road property? My point is, I don't it in your statement.
B Caldwell — if think the general design guidelines are just that, they're guidelines, but with
specific requirements. 1t %e could, for instance, require that yes we're going to allow sharing of
the driveway, but the driveway has to also allow so many feet wide for future road possibility,
and things like that. For instance, we talk about this lovely one at Snyder Heights, which
everyone said was wonderful. Well, it's not wonderful right this minute because they're having a
whale of a disagreement. (Shared driveway' ?) Yes. Plowing issues. These are things we don't
want to put our residents through.
X71 SLUnner — But this is offering the develop the choice, essentially, of saying, the price of the
property will make it possible for the homeowners to form a homeowners association and take
care of this road OR I'd rather put the extra money in to a road that can become a public road
and the houses will cost more.
B Caldwell — But the road right -of -way has to be good enough so that the town could take it
over.
M Sumner — Right. It will be more expensive to build a better road that won't require a
homeowners association. It'll be cheaper to build a private road that can be maintained by a
• homeowners association.
T Hatfield — But the tools that we have are the review process and to require a shared driveway
that has 120 feet of distance and one 15 foot path in the middle of it is actually setting yourself
up for a driveway that would eventually meet town standards if you needed it to. So just having
the vision statement in these guidelines and the existing tools that give us something to hang our
hat on when that proposal comes in from of us and they say, we want one or two, we're not
really sure, we say — you pick out one point. That's the access point. If you're going to have two,
you put your shared road path in here and you set aside enough land there so that if you need two
driveways that meet a 60 foot standard, so be it. 'Those tools are in place. We can do that as a
body right now.
O Kwasnoski — The point is for people to try and to now have to keep coming to you and being
turned away and coming back. Now people aren't trying.
T Hatfield — I had an opportunity to talk with Jack Bush the other day. 1 was curious about his
take on this private road development vs, public road development because I know we went
through a series of reviews on certain things, 8 or 10 years ago, and Jack was in the middle of
that. I was really pleased to hear what Jack had to say. I think it fits very well with the vision of
where \ve're going. (Summary of Jack's comments.) We seem to have a meeting of the rninds
here.
• L.. Bice —There are more standards that could be developed and worked in to the zoning
eventually, if you feel this is something that people use a lot and you really want to establish
some guidelines for shared driveways, like limiting the number of houses on a shared driveway.
P13 03 -20 -2008
Page 12 of 17
rHow you don't want shared driveways to be a tool to
overdevelop
the
land. it's more
like a tool
to avoid
road cuts and disturbance
for safety reasons.
For now, we're
these
going to call it
a shared
curb cut.
(Private roads) I know it's
not something you're doing a
lot
of right now in
the town.
D Kwasnowski — Every trailer park has a private road.
D Weinstein — People come to the board and we're encouraging this whole idea; and then
coming back and saying they can't afford it, or they can see how eventually this is going to get
them in to money that they're not interested in, and we're going to be at an impasse. I don't
know how to break through that impasse without more. Especially for people that are desperate
to develop a
piece
of
land,
but are
very afraid of the kinds of money that might be involved in
getting in to
some
of
these
shared
driveway things.
D Kwasnowski — You know; everything in there is for safety.
L Bice — There's always this grey area between guidelines and zoning and just how things get
done in the towel. I see your concerns too as you're encouraging things but don't necessarily
have the mechanism here to get it done. From what I understand, you do shared driveways now.
13 Caldwell — Some have reasonable agreements between the people who share and some don't. I
think this needs to be worked at and looked at carefully. Another concern I have, well two, in
terms ofprivate roads. That they all have to be marked as private. Signage. The reason I say that
is that 1 worked for over 30 years in the real estate industry. I know that agents do not necessarily
know or care whether a road is public or private when they are marketing a property. In terms of
public protection, we need to let people know. "file other thing is, will someone check with some
of the local lenders as to acceptability for mortgages on private roads that have no frontage on a
public road. Also, specifically check to see if they are FHA and VA possible.
T 1•latfield
—
The
answer to that is a
homeow7ncr's
association with shared ownership. That is a
critical issue
that
she's raising right
there, and this
solves it.
M Sumner — And that's not too new to the local banks?
'I' Hatfield — I'm a big fan of HOAs.
M Sumner — I've heard you say that before, I just haven't talked to any bankers about it.
N4 Hatch — So you're road is actually owned by the homeowners association.
T 1-1atficld — if there are seven (7) units on that road, you own 1f7 of the road collectively. It's
just like any other — you have a meeting once a year, homeovners assessed value Sets collected
through the tax process.
•N Munkenbeck — One of the things in the guidelines though is to develop the lots and then
develop this homeowners association so some people can purchase a property and not know that
this is coming.
PR 03 -211 -2008
Page 13 of 17
D Kwasnowski — Oh, no.
M Sumner — It would be concurrent with the development of the road.
N Munkenbeck — I'm thinking, like, with Ringwood Knoll, Cornelius still owns that.
D Kwasnowski — Let's not use that as an example.
N Nfunkenbeck — But it's an example of one that we have here in the town of Dryden, Floe it is.
B Caldwell — i•Ie came in to try and get that as a public road at one point. And of course the Way
he configured it in the first place, it just couldn't meet our standards.
N ittunkenbeck — 1 -le told me just last year that that was going to be a public• road some time, I
asked Henry about it, and he said, well, maybe it could someday. I don't know what he would
have to do to make it acceptable, but it strikes me that the slope is a little too much. He also
informed me that the field behind that — lie said he put in trust for his grandchildren, but then last
Year said that he planned this whop big subdivision up there. At what point is he eligible to start
a homeowners association?
• D
Weinstein — I-low
do these people
get
their road plowed?
N
N-11unkenbeck —
Cornelius does it.
He's
been doing it.
L Bice — Can 1 just make one comment about the guidelines here? I don't think — don't feel like,
if these get adopted, the town is going to change overnight. A lot of development will probably
occur similarly to the way it does now. I think they have to be used judiciously when
opportunities present themselves when they make sense. To some extent, you have to feel your
way as to when you can push it a little bit more.
D Weinstein — The one
thing that would change overnight is
this whole process you've
outlined,
which I don't disagree
with, of doing the analysis of the site
beforehand rather than as
a strict
response to a proposal.
That's a very different way of doing
business. I'm not even sure how you
actually pull that off, because we're so used to reacting to a specific proposal and saying-,
well,
what's wrong with this
proposal, rather than saying, what's
right for this sight. That would
be a
very drastic change,
'T Hatfield — A positive one. too.
M Hatch — I thought in the context of our discussion that we were thinking that some people
would go to planners in the town and they would provide the information. So you're saying you
don't know how you'd pull it off. I'nn just saying, in the context, I think there's going to be
guidance available — sites that people can go to in order to make suggestions about how they can
accomplish some of these things that .we're asking fur. I think the point is for us to do approval
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page lA of 17
Sfor some of these things so that. ewe can get on to the next step, which is translating it in to
zoning.
T Hatfield — Bingo.
B Caldwell — Would someone like to make a motion to forward this to the Town Board for their
approval?
On a motion made by Martin Hatch; seconded by Tom Hatfield, the Planning Board recommends
the final draft of both the Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines go to the Town Board
for review and vote.
DISCUSS1011 Of motion.
T Hatfield — There were some amendments mentioned. Before we vote, we need to hear more
about them. I'm in favor of moving this on to the `]*own Board. These guidelines are guidelines,
but then if i understood the process; it'll allow us now to have the opportunity to go back in and
adjust the zoning — instead of in global terms — we can go in and pick off sore of these things
like right now we don't have zoning per se that allows cluster development. That could be a
quick fix that the Town Board can hopefully taken action on without a lot of controversy,
underneath the guidelines. and in the context of our current zoning. The process of a broader,
global approach to zoning can be on one track, and fixing the existing zoning so that we can use
these tools and the guidelines can be on another. If we do that c's a process...
M Sumner — So the Town Board can pass something as simple as, the Planning Board has the
permission to make exceptions. Then we could go forward with these Design Guidelines.
T Hatfield — Exactly. And I think it allows us, then, to deal with a lot of the other issues that
require public education, public input, public discussion. Because this is a big, big process. If
you try to put this all together in three meetings and thin vote on it, it's gonna be a lot of fun.
Nol Hatch — I guess I don't understand why We would hold off in sending these.
T Hatfield — Because we don't have the finals yet.
L Bice
— It's
a draft that's
not
adopted yet. But
it's the
final draft. It could be the final
Planning
Board
draft
that is going
to be
sent to the Town
Board
for approval.
D Kwasnowski - We'd like to know if there are any changes that you (the Planning Board) want
to make, because I'rn happy with them the .way they are.
T Hatfield — I thought there was going to be some more discourse before we voted.
L Bice —
There were
a couple
of meetings. Some came to one and no the other, some to both.
• The final
versions of
these are
on the web.
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 15 of 17
D Kwasnowski — If 1 understand the motion that's on the table right now, you guys arc p retty
much done with these. You'd like the Town Board to read them. If they have anything they
would like to change, you request that they send them back to you for review.
T l- latfield — That's not a bad process. What we should do is rephrase the motion — we're
forwarding you our final draft for your input. Send it back to us. Then we'll make a formal
recommendation if there are any changes.
B Caldwell —They should only send it back to us if they have changes they would like us to
review.
M Sumner — I think we have a policy issue. We can send it back to you for details, but if there's
a policy issue, we would want more input on it.
D Weinstein —'The way Ton's phrasing it, we're not sending them a recommendation that they
adopt them, We're just saying, here, tool: at this.
D Kwasnowski — That is a second step because you send it to the Town Board. I assume the
Town Board would kick it to (lie Conservation Board and the ZBA for their review. That's what
We usually do.
M Sumner — I hadn't thought about that, but that makes sense. That way all three (3) boards have
reviewed them.
D Kwasnowski — If there are changes that any of the boards want to consider, it would come
back to the Planning Board for further review. In the meantime, awhile it's at the Boards, you can
be looking at Zoning Amendments. integrate this in to the process...
T Hatfield — Specific zoning amendments you need to so that You can implement some of these
things.
D Kwasno wski — The amendments of the law would then be forwarded to the Town Board, and
that's how you adopt it. Then there would be a public hearing.
M Sw-nner— 1 don't thinl: it would hurt to have a public hearing on the Guidelines.
D Weinstein — I could agree to that.
M Sumner — I'm not sure I understand what you're looking at as amendments.
L Bice — It would be a reference to the Guidelines, and then a simple change to the Conservation
Subdivision regulations that would permit the Planning Board to vary them. And then we can
develop a more elaborate conservation and possibly a set of conservation guidelines with the
® Zoning`' districts.
T Hatfield — Specifically, you've got to enable cluster subdivision.
JIB 03 -20 -2008
Page 16 of 17
M Hatch — We're talking about putting Big Box in to Commercial at some point. I don't know at
what point.
L Bice —That's something we're working on in Phase Ii of the project. So not really as part of
the Guidelines; but more in the form of a couple of amendments. Phase iI would be actually
doing Town Zoning.
M Sumner - The Guidelines and amendments and local law that says the Planning Board Can
make exceptions for something along the lines of cluster housing.
B Caldwell — That standard language that we can vary dimensions, etc., as long as we did not
change the overall density of the zone. There's a standard phraseology.
D Kwasnowski — "I"he densities that exist right now are completely unrealistic anyway.
M Sumner — Are we not going to review the public comments before we recommend sending
this to the'I "ovvvri Board?
L Bice — The main thing 1 got from the meeting was a question on how we're going to make it
happen. There was someone from the Village that liked the idea of the Village concept where
you could extend the Village feel to surrounding areas. He's a little worried that the Village
would become overdeveloped, but at the same time he was worried about some farm
preservation project on the periphery of the village that might prevent the village from growing.
(Mile Lane) Overall , everybody was very supportive. My sense was that there was support,
everyone thought it was a good idea. Having choice of types of places to live (in village vs,
country lots) Nwas good.
M Sumner — My impression of the meeting was that there was no reason to change anything in
the Design Guidelines based on comments from the public,
D Weinstein — Are you counting this development focus group as a public meeting? They had
some comments. They suggested a planning advocate.
D Kwasnowski — If Henry's not doing that already, he really does that, just without the label.
L Bice — i don't think it was that they thought we should create a new position at the town, it was
just more like — it would-be helpful if the people reviewing would see things from the
developer's perspective, but everybody here does that.
M Sumner — Tile), said that also. That they had worked with the building department here and
that they did a great* ob helping.
isL Bice — They also said it wasn't $o much the Village of the Town as it was at the State level
with stormwater and DOT, They liked what they saw.
PB 03 -20 -2008
Page 17 of 17
On a motion made by Martin Hatch, seconded b ; `l°om Hatfield, the Plan -nin Board recommends
} g
the final draft of both the Residential and Commercial Design Guidelines go to the Town Board
For comment and adoption. All in favor. Motion passed.
On a motion made by Tom Hatfield, seconded by Martin Hatch, the Planning Board requests that
the To�vri Board pass a resolution allowing the Planning Board the flexibility to make exceptions
to current Zoning (Mary Ann has language to take to Town Board). All in favor. Motion passed.
P Millard — I just wanted to make you aware of a training being held April 9`h & 10`h in Cortland
— the same place as last year. Henry will be sending you all a letter with the full information —
just letting you know to save the date.
D Kwasnowski — Isn't all this work with the consultant training?
B Caldwell — I think the tC)W1l should exempt .foe. at least, because he's teaching this material.
M Sumner — anybody can apply to have training they've taken (or given) elsewhere taken as
credit for their training requirements. I wouldn't make a blanket: exception for anyone, but they
can absolutely submit training information and have that count as their annual training,
On a motion by David Weinstein, seconded by Megan Whitman, the Planning board requests
that the Phase II Work Scope be forwarded to the Town Board for approval. All in favor. Motion
passed.
Meeting \vas adjourned at 9:10 pm.
Respectfully Submitted,
Patty Millard