Planning
Board Meeting
The meeting of the
Public
Comment
Brown moved to close the Public Comment portion
of the meeting as there was no one present who wished to speak. Seconded by Dankert. All in favor.
Landscape
and Lighting Plans - McDonalds and Parkview
Halevy reported that the Lighting Commission met
on February 28th and approved the lighting plans for both McDonalds and the
Parkview Health Campus.
McDonalds:
Waterman moved to accept the Lighting plan for
McDonalds. Seconded by
Klepack. All in
favor.
The Green Space Advisory Committee reviewed the
McDonalds Landscaping and suggested that the plantings be diversified by
substituting Linden trees for some of the Crab Apple trees, adding a Japanese
Maple and switching some of the low plantings with the trees in front to provide
an appearance of staggered planting rather than planting in straight rows. The GAC also suggested that the Planning
Board consider requiring landscaping plans to include considerations of the
three important factors in the selection of plantings - a) deer resistance b) adaptability to
poor soil drainage conditions; c) zoned for winter varieties. Curtis said that he had reviewed the
suggested changes in the landscaping plan with the
McDonalds representative and they had no objections. Dankert moved to approve the landscaping plan
as amended by the GAC. Seconded by Waterman.
All in favor.
Parkview Health Campus: The GAC recommended approval of the
landscaping plan for Building 4 but suggested that it be pointed out that the
surrounding properties have been damaged by the deer and they may want to
reconsider the planting materials they have chosen. Waterman moved to approve the landscaping
plan for Parkview Health Campus. Klepack seconded. All in favor. Dankert moved to accept the Lighting Plan for
Parkview Health Campus. Seconded by Waterman.
All in favor.
Green
Space Advisory Committee Budget Discussion
Halevy reported that he reviewed the proposed
budget items submitted by the GAC with
Sign posts and benches in Lansing Trails: approved by Reinhart;
Trash barrels:
Marcus clarified that while no municipality can give people things,
there are exceptions when it is considered to be a benefit to the public in
general and trash containers could be categorized as such. If the purpose is the beautification of the
Village and the trash cans have a Village logo on the side, the Village may
retain ownership and make arrangements to place the trash can on the owner's
property. The owners are voluntarily
agreeing to take care of the trash that is being collected. The Board decided to try placing two trash
cans in Cayuga and/or Triphammer Mall as a pilot program.
Soil Conservation Service Seedling: the Board felt that plantings seedlings would
be very labor intensive for a very low return and did not wish to pursue this
project.
Commercial trees and water jackets: Approved.
Path material:
Reinhart asked the GAC to research the type of material to be used.
NYSEG Trail:
There are legal issues that will first need to be clarified before
pursuing the project further.
Waterman suggested that
Arcview GIS Printer: this is part of the Planning Board budget for
the Village's use. Curtis said that
the County offices are encouraging municipalities to use Arcview and they have
offered to provide the training and support.
Halevy moved to recommend approval of the budget
as amended in the previous discussion to the
Design
Guidelines for Commercial Low Traffic District
EDR had been informed by the Planning Board that
their recommendations so far did not seem to respond to the Planning Board's
request. Crandall and Majestic were
present at the meeting to respond to that concern and to present the Board with
an outline of their report and a recommendation of general guidelines for the
development of the target area. The
report was divided into five sections:
1) Discussion of issues and concerns of the focus group; 2) the design
guidelines themselves for the areas within the CLT District that actually are
slightly different than other areas in the district; 3) Series of design standards for elements
that are likely to be inside the right-of-way;
4) Implementation strategies. (Marcus said that if the end product of
this process is a set of design guidelines, he recommended to the Board that
the end product be adopted into the Zoning Law.
A lot of what the Board is looking for is a recommendation for what the
Village will do with the additional space it acquires, most of which is in the
CLT District and would involve the sidewalk, green space and curb in the
Village right-of-way. That won't
necessarily be part of the Zoning Law because it's the Village property. The idea of getting input was largely derived
from the fact that the Village is going to be reconstructing
Their recommendation was broken into two
categories -
guidelines or tools to influence the direction of the site
development (such as placement of buildings and location of parking) and standards or details that should probably
be used in the public domain right-of-way (public signage, street furniture,
lighting, etc). They broke the study
area in several zones because they felt there were details that should be
incorporated into the guidelines in specific areas in addition to general
guidelines that apply to the entire area
In general, they felt that a pedestrian friendly
aspect is very important to this community.
They think that all the streets should be served by a pedestrian system
which should be more of a structured sidewalk system that is physically
separated from the traffic by at least a grass separation. Street trees are important to create a sense
of order and to offset some of the current irregularities of the building
angles and setbacks. If desired, they
will provide a list of street trees that would do well in this area. There are currently buildings which are angled
to the street, but they think that future buildings should have parallel relationship
with the street facade as a general rule, with some exceptions due to
topography. They recommend establishing
a build-to line along
The Planning Board felt that the recommendations
made by EDR were interesting and appropriate. There was some concern that EDR
had invested time in areas of the Village that were beyond the scope the
Village had described in its RFP and
that EDR had failed to recognize parameters such as the Triphammer Road
Reconstruction Plan and the existing permitted zoning uses which the Village
had clearly stated would not be changed. The Board agreed to ask them to
continue provided some accommodation could be developed for time that had been
spent beyond the scope clearly stated in the Village’s RFP. The Board will arrange for another meeting
with the Board and EDR after Ned Hickey returns. They felt that Trustee
Other
Business
Klepack reported that the Mayor had not
responded to the request that the issue raised by the Kensington Homeowners
Association be addressed by the
Leopold asked about the billboard by the new
Monroe Muffler. Marcus said that it is
within the State road right-of-way and is in an area where grandfathered
billboards are protected.
Minutes
December 13, 1999: Waterman moved that the 12/13/99 minutes be
approved as amended. Seconded by
Klepack. All in favor.
December 28, 1999: Klepack moved that the
12/28/99 minutes be approved as amended.
Seconded by Brown. All in favor.
January 10, 2000: Dankert moved that the 1.10/00 minutes be approved as
amended. Seconded by Klepack. All in favor.
Adjourn
Waterman moved that the meeting be adjourned at
10:10. Seconded by Klepack. All in favor