Planning Board Meeting
The meeting of the
Hickey stated that the agenda included an item tonight (Lansing Trails Subdivision Phase II Sketch Plan) which might be controversial but the Board has received a sketch plan and discussion is between the developer and the Planning Board. The public will have the opportunity to be heard in the future. Questions and topics to be discussed during the public comment period tonight should not be between the public and developer Ivar Jonson or his engineer, Larry Fabbroni.
Hickey opened the Public Comment period.
Cliff Buck, 39 Janivar Drive, asked to have the Planning Board explain the subdivision process from sketch plan presentation to final approval. Hickey responded that the developer brings a sketch plan to the Planning Board and the Board reviews it and comments. Sometimes developers will bring three or four plans before there is a general agreement. Once the sketch plan is acceptable to the Planning Board, the developer prepares a preliminary plat based on that sketch plan. At that time, a public hearing is held. After the public hearing and comments are received, changes are made if necessary. A final plat is then submitted and another public hearing is held. At its conclusion, if the plat is approved, the plat is signed by the Planning Board Chairman. A SEQR review is also completed as part of the approval process.
Carol Brentlinger, 55 Janivar Drive, asked if the same procedure was followed for the 13 permits given to John Roy from Horseheads. Hickey stated that those lots are included in the Lansing Trails I final plat that was approved years ago, signed and filed with the county. The building permits are in the code enforcement department. Brentlinger wanted to know if Curtis considered the parameters before he gave Roy building permits for the 13 houses. She claimed that there are blocked views for 6 houses and residents were not notified in advance. Curtis stated he has no discretion over these items beyond enforcing the requirements for height and yard setbacks as set forth in the Zoning Law. Brentlinger stated she still has the problem of water in her garage and feels there is no one looking out for the interests of the residents. (Maria Stycos entered the meeting.) Hickey sympathized with Brentlinger but stated the Village must adhere to the requirements in the Zoning Law and the builder must conform to the Zoning Law and Building Code requirements but has discretion within those parameters.
Manesh Mewar,(Address),has spoken to the Board in the past about water drainage, and he is still concerned about the water from new lots coming onto his lot and he feels the Village should review this.
John O’Neill, 53 Janivar Drive, also expressed his concerns, as well as those of his neighbor, about water. O’Neill stated Chapter 125 [referring to Subdivision Regulations appearing in draft form on the Village web page] discusses slopes and drainage and he feels these regulations have not been met. O’Neill feels the language is adequate but the enforcement is not. With regard to Mewar’s concerns, Curtis asked if Jonson has returned to (Address) to re-grade. Mewar stated he has done some on the east side but it is hard to deal with him and he prefers not to because he can not get a response from him.
John Wisor, 9 Leifs Way, also expressed concerns about grading issues and wants to see drainage handled so it does not affect current residents.
Stu Bergman, 55 Bush Lane, asked to speak about the Millcroft development. Hickey stated the sketch plan will be handled on June 24th. Bergman talked about the proposed road from Craft Road to Bush Lane. Bergman would like to strongly suggest the road not go through. First, it is proposed to be located at the bottom of a hill on Bush Lane. It would have a great impact on their neighborhood because Craft Road is partially commercial. Bergman feels it would be a major hazard for their neighborhood to have a road go through. Hickey stated his concerns would be considered.
Barbara Bergman, 55 Bush Lane, added a concern about where the road would intersect Bush Lane. She stated that Bush Lane is used as a cutoff from Cherry Road and traffic goes by quickly. She stated there are many youngsters in that area now and she is concerned about their safety.
Rosalie Fontana, 149 Brook Way, spoke about the blind spot on Bush Lane near the proposed exit for the Millcroft Subdivision. Hickey stated it may be moved further to the east.
There being no one else who wished to speak, Dankert moved to close the Public Comment period. Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Lansing Trails Subdivision
Phase II Sketch Plan:
Hickey stated a conceptual sketch plan has been received for Phase II of the Lansing Trails Subdivision. Larry Fabbroni, engineer for Ivar Jonson, was there to give the presentation. Fabbroni stated the project was begun in 1986 and approval was given in 1987 for Phase I. Since then, the plat has changed 5-15 times due to market changes and delays with sewer permits. Fabbroni feels Phase II as proposed will reroute drainage from the lands to the east and assist with drainage issues about which current residents are concerned. Fabbroni stated the Board has reviewed 4 or 5 sketch plans for Phase II and this leads to the proposed sketch plan for discussion at tonight’s meeting. Originally there were 194 units proposed for the 73 acre parcel encompassing both Phase I and Phase II in 1987. To date, approval for 75 units has been received for Phase I. Fabbroni stated there are about 120 units available for the cluster subdivision proposed. The latest sketch plan calls for 70 townhouses, primarily for the elderly population, in the northeast portion adjacent to BorgWarner with the remainder to be larger lots and single-family residences.
Fabbroni stated the developer is interested in the density and the roads can be adjusted. Fabbroni felt two cul-de-sacs on each end would be a possibility in place of a through road. Hickey reiterated that the purpose of this initial meeting is to deal with the developer’s concept for the property and details can be worked out later. Hickey asked if the proposal would be for single-family residences on 20,000 sf lots without clustering, as well as clustered townhouses. Fabbroni responded that the developer is staying with the clustering concept for the entire Phase II area. Hickey then asked about the open space which is not indicated on the sketch plan. Hickey stated the Board must see it delineated and the primary reason the Village would consider clustering is to provide for open space to benefit the developer as well as the residents. The Village would not own the open space and information must be provided demonstrating an acceptable option for ownership. Fabbroni stated the open space would be attached to the townhouses and also include the drainage corridor that extends from the northeast to the existing development to preserve the wooded area. Hickey stated the open space must be specifically delineated on the sketch plan and dimensions would be required.
Hickey stated the proposed townhouses have 6 or 7 units in each building and the Village Zoning Law does not permit such multi-unit residential buildings in this zoning district and Board of Trustees approval would be required for this type of clustering. Hickey stated the Board of Trustees approved the clustering concept in 1993 for duplexes and single-family residences which are both permitted in the Medium Density Residential District. Dubow stated the developer can present a cluster plan and then the Board of Trustees must approve the Planning Board pursuing approval of the project as a cluster development. Dubow noted again, however, that townhouses such as those proposed are not permitted in this zone. Fabbroni stated if only four attached units are approved then the developer can work with that. The developer can have common areas owned by all residents and the individual townhouses owned by each resident. Fabbroni stated the developer would like to know what the Planning Board does and does not like. Curtis stated condominiums are also not permitted in this area but some townhouses are structured such that a townhouse owner owns the parking, residence and yard area with lot lines separating each single or double unit such that there is only a one or two family unit on each individual lot. Dubow stated this might have a better chance of gaining approval by the Planning Board. Fabbroni felt this might be easier to set up than a Homeowner’s Association. Hickey felt 4 to 6 family attached units with individual lot lines between each unit would be more acceptable and a letter should be presented to the Planning Board developing this concept for further discussion of roads, drainage, etc.
Stycos feels there is no open space shown in this project. Fabbroni would like to be more creative with the density and placing of the townhouses, single-family residences and roadways. Fabbroni would also like to invite the Planning Board and engineer to walk the land. Dubow stated the more information provided earlier on the sketch plan would be beneficial for discussion and review.
Brown feels a rearrangement of lots with clustering would be a good idea.
Dankert would like open space to remain.
Hickey stated the driveway into the townhouses would need to meet Village standards. Cross was unsure if a 24 ft. driveway would need a road ROW. Hickey stated this would be Cross’ call.
Curtis stated the ownership of the open space might necessitate a homeowner’s association regardless of how the town houses were configured. Hickey stated it could be set up as a land trust or be retained by the developer.
Cross wanted to know if drainage ways and storm ponds would be on private property or land dedicated to the Village. This has been a concern in the past. Cross would suggest to the Board that they be on land owned by the Village or be directly accessible to land owned by the Village rather than on private property. Fabbroni will work on this issue.
Hickey recommended that Fabbroni proceed with his plans and then meet with Hickey and Curtis for an informal review.
Open Space Plan Core
Committee:
Hickey stated that Leopold and Stycos are going to meet with Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge Associates, to work on the Open Space Plan. Hickey will set up the meeting.
Amendment to Subdivision
Regulations: Clustering:
Hickey
stated the proposed amendment to the Subdivision Regulation regarding
clustering is ready to go to the Board of Trustees for a Public Hearing on June
2nd.
Public Information Meeting
Comments:
Hickey
circulated the comments from the Planning Board meeting held on April 29th. Comments and responses were reviewed as
follows: (1) regarding the number of
egress connections from the Millcroft Subdivision to Janivar Drive and Leif’s Way. The Planning Board will be discussing this
with the developer at the June 24th Planning Board meeting; (2)
regarding connecting Janivar Drive to Warren Road via
the Bomax Road or Coventry Walk. Hickey noted at the April meeting that it is
necessary because if the connection(s) were not made then all the traffic
generated by the Lansing Trails Subdivision would be concentrated on N.
Triphammer Road via Craft Road and this is an unacceptable outcome; (3) there
is a need for traffic calming methods on Janivar
Drive/Bomax Drive when the connection is made. Hickey asked Brown to take the lead on
traffic calming for methods and devices which may be applicable and will place
this on the next agenda; (4) there is a need for an emergency connection to
Coventry Drive either from Janivar Drive or possibly
from Graham Road/Wakefield Drive for safety purposes. Hickey asked Dankert
to take the lead by reviewing this with the fire departments to see their
preferences for routes, paved surfaces and other requirements, and the
possibility of a locked, gated emergency entrance. Brown stated some areas (Harvard Yard) use a
chain hung between two posts which must be lifted to be accessible; (5)
regarding the park, Leifs Way could become a hangout
unless a lighted roadway is adjacent to the park; the park is too small to be
divided by a road, but a road could loop around the park. Hickey stated these comments would be
reviewed with the roadway review of Lansing Trails II; (6) plowing of an
emergency road may be a problem unless
it is blacktopped. Hickey stated it must
be paved for access by emergency vehicles; (7) number of Village residents on
sewer. Hickey responded at the April
meeting there are more than 2000 sewer units and nearly all High & Medium
Residential Districts are sewered; (8) direct connection from Craft Road to
Warren Road. Hickey does not feel it is
possible given the existing road design in Lansing Trails; (9) Millcroft residents will be able to use Bush Lane/Cherry
Road to connect to Warren Road; (10) Bush Lane will need some improvements if
it is to handle additional traffic from Millcroft
Subdivision and this will not be funded by developers; (11) Craft Road traffic
builds up at N. Triphammer Road intersection and during the reconstruction of
N. Triphammer Road all the necessary connections for a traffic light will be
made for future use; (12) traffic circles to slow down traffic are efficient;
(13) traffic lights cause delays on N. Triphammer Road inducing some drivers to
use an east-west road to Warren Road or Cayuga Heights Road. Hickey responded that this is another reason
to complete the Bomax Drive/Craft Road connection;
and (14) drivers will need some education if traffic humps or traffic circles
are used to calm traffic.
Approval of Minutes – April
14:
Brown
moved to accept the minutes of April 14th as submitted. Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Increase in Building Permit
Fees:
Curtis
stated the Village is looking at increasing the building permit fees. Dubow stated these
fees are in the Zoning Law and any amendment to the Zoning Law which does not originate at the Planning
Board requires a recommendation from the Planning Board. Curtis stated the permit fees have not
changed in 13 years although expenses have changed and the new building code
will change fire inspection requirements.
The proposed change for a new commercial building permit would increase
the current rate of $200 plus $2 per
thousand of estimated cost to $200 plus $4 per thousand of estimated cost, and
alterations from $100 plus $2 per thousand to $100 plus $4. The proposed change for new residential
increases the existing base fee by $100 relative to the size of the
residence. Curtis stated that existing
residential alterations will not change.
Apartment buildings will increase the same as commercial from $2 to $4
per thousand estimated cost (plus the initial $100). A new category has been added for temporary
commercial activities, such as the circus, and the new fee will be $50. Dankert moved the
Planning Board recommend to the Board of Trustees approval of proposed Local
Law A (2003) amending the Zoning Law Section 302.04 entitled Fees for
Building/Land Use for Special Permits.
Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Other Business
as Time Permits:
Hickey will contact Jonson to set up a time to walk the Lansing Trails II land although Board members may walk it at any time.
Hickey asked Cross about the new drainage regulations. Cross stated David Herrick, TG Miller Engineers, is working on it.
Adjournment:
Dankert moved to adjourn at 8:50 P.M. Seconded by Stycos. All aye.