Village of Lansing

Planning Board Meeting

November 26, 2002

 

The meeting of the Village of Lansing Planning Board was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by Ned Hickey.  Present at the meeting were Planning Board Members Doris Brown, Phil Dankert, Carol Klepack and Maria Stycos; Trustee Liaison Lynn Leopold; Attorney Bill Troy; Engineer Brent Cross; and Code Enforcement Officer Ben Curtis.

 

Public Comment:

Hickey opened the Public Comment.

 

John O’Neil, 53 Janivar Drive, addressed the Board first.  He is speaking on behalf of some of his neighbors regarding recent shooting of guns within the Village near the Sun Downs Farm.  O’Neil stated Oakcrest Road resident, Christina Finn, has spoken with Curtis regarding this issue.  The gentlemen shooting was caught and the police said they had no jurisdiction to do anything.  Subsequently, Curtis sent a copy of the Village Hunting Law to the undersheriff who stated that his department could enforce the Village Law and that he will provide this information to his staff.  Hickey stated the owners of Murray Estates are granted permission to hunt that area with bows.  Curtis also stated the Sheriff’s Department said they would call Finn.   

 

O’Neil also spoke for the Lemperts, 14 Cedar Lane, regarding lighting for their street.  Hickey stated some of the residents desire lighting and others do not. The first step would be to circulate a petition and see how many residents of the area want street lights and then, if most residents do want street lights,  present it to the Mayor to see if money is available.

 

 There being no one else who wished to speak, Klepack moved to close the Public Comment period.  Seconded by Dankert.  All aye.

 

911 Center – Continued Discussion:

Steve Whicher, County Administrator, was present for the County. Hickey stated some issues need to be resolved.  First, the southernmost driveway for the CFR parking lot should have signage or barriers to indicate access is restricted and employees directed to use the northernmost driveway.  Hickey is concerned about the safety issues of having three driveways so close together.  Project Architect, Tony Egner, stated there is a need for the driveway but he was in agreement that the northernmost of the proposed curb cuts can be dedicated for use on an emergency basis. 

 

Next, landscaping needed to be addressed.  Egner stated he had plans in his car tonight and would provide them for Board review.  The landscape plan indicates 8 maples (2 in. caliper), 4 hornbeams (7 ft. high), 17 dwarf burning bushes (3 ft. high),  3 white pines (6 ft. high), 4 japanese lilacs (8 ft. high) and 3 vibernum (3.5 ft. high).  Hickey asked about berming and Egner responded that he has run out of money. 

 

Curtis stated the parking setback for the existing CFR parking lot  from Brown Road is deficient.  Currently, the setback is 15 ft. and 25 ft. is required. Elsewhere in the park this separation has been bermed and planted to screen the parking lots.  Egner is open to suggestions but must hear from Cornell. Hickey stated the present parking lot is gravel and asked if it would be possible to obtain a letter of intent stating when the parking lot is paved it will be moved back and bermed. Discussion ensued as to who owns the property on which the parking lot is located – Cornell, County or Airport.  Hickey stated this will be addressed as part of  the Landscaping plan approval.

 

Hickey stated the Board has not received a response from the DEC.  Whicher stated no response has been received from them or the Corp of Engineers although the letters have been sent to them. 

 

Cross gave his presentation.  First, he has received the drainage report by TG Millers and it looks good and is in compliance with Village requirements.  Next, Cross reviewed the southernmost entrance driveway and felt it is long for the number of spaces served.  Cross noted it was only 18 ft. wide and that the Village usually requires 24 ft. widths for public access driveways though it will occasionally allow 20 ft.  Whicher stated it is limited with controlled access for security and would only be utilized by 6 cars.  Cross felt making it narrower than the Village standard would need to be justified.  Thirdly, Cross did not see a dumpster indicated and a screening or fence would normally be required if one were to located on the site.  Whicher stated the proposed site for a dumpster is located on the rear of the building and would not be seen by the public.  Hickey stated that if a dumpster is placed on the pad, it must be screened.  Cross stated he just noted that the site lighting has been penciled in. Hickey stated that complete plans and photometrics will be required for the Lighting Commission.  The last point Cross made on his review sheet dealt with utilities and he has since realized that the water line was included elsewhere. 

 

Hickey summarized that there are two concerns from Cross which must be addressed:  A Lighting Plan with photometrics must be provided and the width of the driveway must be resolved.  Curtis stated that Zoning Law Section 104.17(b)(2)(ii) states that driveways intended for two-way traffic shall not be less than twenty (20) feet wide.  Hickey stated the Planning Board can not grant a reduction in the width of the driveway and a variance would be required.  Although the radius would be tighter, Egner agreed to add 2 feet to the north side of the driveway making it 20 ft. wide.  Egner will also provide the photometrics as requested.   

 

The Board then reviewed the SEQRA.  Hickey had concerns about No. 8 on the first page.  It remains unclear as to who owns the CFR parking lot and whether it belongs to the County or the Airport.  This affects the setback issue.  It would also involve parking and whether it is on site or is on the adjacent property in which case an agreement needs to be in place.  Hickey stated this needs to be resolved. 

            

The Planning Board will complete the SEQR and will reference the one completed by Mikel Shakarjian, Tompkins County Capital Program Coordinator. 

 

The Planning Board then completed SEQRA Part II.  The Planning Board read through the comments provided by the County and added additional comments.A – No; B – No, it will receive uncoordinated review; C1 – No, as per attached.  Hickey stated the Board will await an answer regarding USACOE and NYSDEC jurisdiction.  Egner noted that the 30 people who would be receiving the training are currently receiving the training at the CFR building.  C2 – No, as per attached.  C3 No, as per attached.  C4 – No, as per attached.  C5 – No, as per attached.  The Board discussed the antennae.  Whicher stated a tower will be required but will be treated as a separate permit with a separate review.   C6 – No, as per attached.  C7 – No, as per attached.  D –No.  E – No.

 

Dankert moved that this proposed action will have no significant adverse environmental impact.  Seconded by Klepack.  All aye.

 

Hickey noted that the Planning Board has previously reviewed the General Conditions for all Special Permits in Section 304.05 of the Zoning Law and now conditions should be reviewed.  One condition would be a resolution to the issue of the required 25 ft. parking setback through a BZA variance or a letter indicating agreement to correct the deficiency when the site was further developed.    Another condition is the applicant must provide photometrics to the Lighting Commission for their review. A third condition is approval or waiver from NYSDEC and USACOE.

 

Klepack moved to approve Special Permit No.1789 for the 911 Center at the Tompkins County Airport subject to the conditions noted above.  Seconded by Brown.  All aye.

 

Tvaroha Subdivision:

Next on the agenda was the Tvaroha Subdivision which has a long history.  The property in question has previously been illegally subdivided.  Tvaroha divided the land into two parcels and retained the front portion and assigned the rear part to Kimarie Humphries. Tvaroha approached the BZA in 1996 for a variance for deficient frontage so that he could legally subdivide the parcel. He was granted a variance conditioned on an easement in perpetuity to access his property through a curb cut on the adjoining Dumas property or an agreement allowing access to his property using the one permitted curb cut located on what would become Humphries’ property.  Tvaroha currently accesses his property through a curb cut on the adjoining Dumas property and will continue to do so for his lifetime.  The Board has been provided with an easement from Humphries dated 9/15/2002 giving access to the front property owned by Tvaroha.  No new curb cut will be built and the driveway will be accessible by both Humphries and Tvaroha so there will forever be access to the front parcel from the existing driveway on the Humphries property.  The Board now needs to officially classify this as a minor subdivision.  Curtis stated the approved subdivision plat should indicate that no curb cut is permitted for Tvaroha’s parcel. 

 

Hickey stated this will be classified as a minor subdivision as it meets the Subdivision Regulations for a minor subdivision.  Klepack moved to classify the Tvaroha Subdivision as a minor subdivision.  Seconded by Dankert.  All aye.  Final Plat approval will be placed on the Dec. 9th agenda.

CLT Uses & Definitions:

Hickey provided members with the draft proposed changes, dated 11/19/02, to the CLT and CHT District regulations.  Hickey stated he would like a statement under intent for the CHT  stating that all uses permitted in the CLT will also be allowed in the CHT.  Hickey would like to ascertain the number of employees at the CFCU to help to determine the maximum number of employees to be allowable for Light Manufacturing/Technology.  Hickey will then go to the Board of Trustees meeting for their input prior to requesting Attorney Troy to draft the necessary legislation.

 

Hickey passed out Design Guideline Recommendations which would require changes to the current zoning regulations based on Kathryn Wolf’s suggestions.  Hickey stated the only one implemented thus far dealt with building facades being 25 ft. from the front property line. 

 

Curtis responded to the recommendations.  Regarding sign height for free-standing signs, there is currently no distinction between CLT and CHT and the Board might want to make a distinction.  Klepack felt it might be preferable to have the signs at 8 or 15 ft. rather than higher above the tree lines.  The Board felt 15 ft. would be preferable to recommend to the Board of Trustees but will make a determination at the Dec. 9th meeting. Curtis felt it is also important to discuss directory signage as he has received several inquiries from Sheraton Drive and Craft Rd. businesses.  Hickey stated directory signs will be discussed further with the N. Triphammer Rd. consultants.

 

Curtis stated maintaining side yard setbacks is crucial in getting people to the back of the buildings now that buildings are 25 ft. from the roadway and parking lots will generally be behind the building.  Wolf is recommending changing the required separation between curb cuts be raised from 20 ft. to 30 ft.  Curtis noted that to maintain a 30 ft. separation for access drives would require all driveways be placed on the opposite side of the parcel from the adjoining property.  Curtis would like to see incentive zoning used to encourage shared driveways and fewer curb cuts,  rather than increasing the separation distance.  Hickey stated that as part of the r.o.w. acquisition for N. Triphammer Road, Food Net was granted the right to have its own driveway separate from the insurance company.  Curtis felt the Board has discussed incentive zoning in the past and this might be an opportunity to create incentives to share a driveway in exchange for a decreased side yard setback, larger lot coverage, etc.  The Board would like to encourage shared driveways as well as shared parking. 

 

Cross asked about the  front yard parking setback and if it should be changed to prevent parking in the front of a building.  Hickey responded that the new CLT Guidelines encourage parking in the rear as the front of the building is placed 25 ft. from the road.  Cross is concerned about a large lot where the desire is to have parking alongside the building rather than behind it.  The Board will place front yard parking setbacks for all uses at 25 ft.     

 

On reducing yard setbacks, Curtis stated that reducing a side yard setback if sharing a driveway with an adjoining property might be an option.  Curtis stated the side yard setback is important for providing access to the rear of a building, particularly if that is where the parking is located  If the builder chooses to share a driveway with the adjoining property and each uses 10 ft. for a total of 20 ft. for the driveway, then the Board might want to consider reducing the setback  on the other side of the building and allowing them to build on it.  Similarly, if property owners are willing to share abutting parking lots, a reduction in yard setbacks might be appropriate. Curtis would like to see the reduction in requirements for side yard setbacks to 10 ft. and rear yard setbacks to 20 ft. not be carte blanche but rather an incentive for sharing of parking or driveways.  Hickey stated the law should be flexible to allow for this.  Hickey and Curtis will draft the necessary language. 

 

Hickey stated the Village Center is a dead issue but it will remain as a part of the Comprehensive Plan, separate from the Design Guidelines.

 

Zoning Map Replacement – Recommendation to Trustees:

Hickey stated Curtis is recommending replacing the obsolete 1974 Zoning Map with the more updated map produced by the Tompkins County Planning Dept.  Hickey stated the Board must now make a recommendation to the Board of Trustees.  Klepack noted that the proposed map labels the entrance off of Warren Road as Coventry Walk but in fact it is not and it has no name.  Board members decided each review the map prior to the next meeting to see if there were additional corrections which need to be made.  (This will be placed on the agenda for Dec. 9th. 

   

Open Space – Update:

Hickey went to the Board of Trustees and got a positive response.  Hickey has contacted the County and will be meeting with Commissioner Marx and Planner Joan Jerkowitz to devise a single contract for their help with this project.  This contract will be reviewed by the Planning Board for review prior to its being signed.

 

Klepack asked if Hickey discussed mandated clustering with the Board of Trustees.  Hickey stated he mentioned it and said the Village has two tools to promote open space:  clustering or purchase of development rights.  The Mayor responded that money has been set aside for the purchasing of property which might also be used for development rights.  Hickey stated no legislation is required to enable the Village to purchase development rights and there is no specific language for this in the Village’s law.  Hickey feels the open space plan may provide the basis for requiring clustering.  Hickey stated open space must also be defined.

 

Hickey attended a GIS open house at the County Library and spoke with County Planner, Tom Mank.  He has information and data on transportation which Hickey feels is outstanding.  The Village of Lansing statistical comparison from 1990-2000 based on Census data indicate public transportation participation has increased 129% in 10 years,  walking is down 89%,  carpooling is down 4%, and driving alone is down 18%. 

 

Hickey also mentioned the recent article in the Ithaca Journal discussing the park & ride to be located at Pyramid Mall.  This may also reduce the number of cars on Village roads.

Stycos and other Village residents are concerned if the proposed changes will decrease the traffic on the bridge and Stycos was told they would probably not.

      

Approval of Minutes -  November 11:

The Board reviewed the November 11th minutes. Regarding open spaces, there was discussion on the number of lots or dwelling units which could be developed at a location depending on whether single family residences or clustering is used.  Klepack moved to accept the minutes as revised.  Seconded by Brown.  Ayes by Brown, Hickey, Klepack and Stycos.  Abstain by Dankert who was not present at that meeting.

 

Reports:

Trustees:  Dankert reported the Nov. 4th Board of Trustees discussed the McLain escrow which they want refunded.  It involves a large boulder which is now on Village property and the escrow will be refunded when the Village is provided an indemnification for the boulder.  A design firm for N. Triphammer Rd. reconstruction has been chosen.  It is Fischer Associates, Rochester NY, and they will utilize Trowbridge and Wolfe as design consultants for landscaping.  Dankert stated a Public Hearing has also been set for Dec. 2nd regarding the deletion of storage and warehousing in the CLT District.  Dankert also praised Hickey on his presentation to the Board of Trustees regarding open space. 

 

Other Business as Time Permits:

Hickey asked Dankert about his report for parking requirements for CHT.  Dankert responded that he would work on it over his December break and would have it ready for the first meeting in January. 

 

Hickey stated the meeting for Dec. 31st is being cancelled and the last meeting of the year will be on December 9th.

 

Brown stated the new guide rails on Cayuga Heights Road are very nice and she recommended others look at them.  Stycos questioned whether Cayuga Heights Road would be striped and there would be room for walking.  Hickey responded that it will be done in the near future.  Klepack stated she received much information from the Planning Conference regarding walking, as well as a pedometer.  Klepack also noted there is money available from the Physical Activity and Health Initiative in Calif. for walkways.  

 

Cross has a sketch and presentation that would address driveway widths.  The Board will review it at the first meeting in January. 

 

Adjournment:

Klepack moved to adjourn at 9:55 P.M.  Seconded by Dankert.  All aye.