Planning Board Meeting
The meeting of the
Hickey opened the Public Comment period.
As there was no one present who wished to speak, Dankert moved to close the Public Comment period. Seconded by Klepack. All aye.
Since there were Boy Scouts present, as well as members of
the public, Hickey reviewed the agenda for tonight’s meeting and gave a brief
explanation of each item.
Public Hearing: Special Permit No. 1903 – US Geological
The first item on the agenda was Special Permit No. 1903
for the US Geological Survey to construct a 480 sf storage building at 30 Brown
Road in the Business and Technology District, Tax Parcel No. 45.1-1-52.21.
Ed Bugliosi of US Geological Survey gave the
presentation. The proposal is to place a
storage building behind the current building to house equipment which is
currently stored outside. Hickey noted
that Board members have received revised maps to address the concerns of
Engineer Cross that the proposed location of the shed was incorrectly shown on
the plans originally provided. Klepack
said she liked the earth colors for both the roof and walls which were chosen.
Hickey opened the Public Hearing to the public. As there was no one who wished to speak,
Klepack moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
The Planning Board then reviewed the General Conditions
for all Special Permits in Section 304.05 of the Zoning Law.
Dankert moved that the applicant has met all the General
Conditions for a Special Permit under section 304.05 of the Zoning Law. Seconded by Klepack. All aye. Dubow stated
this action is exempt under SEQRA as the structure is under 4,000 sf.
Hickey asked if there was authorization from the
Klepack moved to approve Special Permit No. 1903 for the
US Geological Survey to construct a 480 sf storage building at 30 Brown Road in
the Business & Technology District, Tax Parcel No. 45.1-1-52.21. Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Sketch Plan Review Lansing
Trails 2 – Continued Discussion:
John O’Neill,
Hickey asked the Board to review the plan submitted by
Ivar Johnson in response to suggestions from the Board. The Board requested that the road connecting
Janivar Drive be offset, the park be shifted from the northerly boundary to the
westerly portion of the Lansing Trails subdivision, open space be delineated,
the trail system added, and a new stormwater management basin be provided below
Lance Way. Jim Thrasher, the project
engineer, stated
Regarding the road, the neighborhood prefers the extension
of Craft Road so traffic goes around rather than directly through their
neighborhood. Klepack asked about
placing the roadway on the southern side of the park. Thrasher stated it was
placed in the proposed location because that would provide the best road
alignment to Craft Road in a straight shot.
Hickey is concerned about the location of the 4 parks in the area
(Lansing Trails I, Lansing Trails II, Spitsberg Subdivision, and Millcroft
Subdivision) and feels there should be a coordinated effort on their
development. Since there will be 4
parks, they should be used to the advantage of all residents in the area and
could each function in a different manner, ie. one for senior citizens, one for
kid’s play, one for toddlers, etc.
Hickey stated cross walks could be placed at intersections along with
stop signs.
O’Neill asked if the Board was going to consider his
alternate plan. Hickey responded that he
would be attaching it to the documentation sent to the Board of Trustees.
Klepack was concerned about the phasing of subdivisions. Hickey stated there are about 6 acres for the
road system and 20% of the subdivision for open space (5 acres). There are also some trails as well as some
single family residences to transition between Lansing Trails I and the cluster
units. This serves to act as a
buffer. Klepack is just concerned about
the number of cluster units and would like to calculate the maximum density for
Lansing Trails II, rather than Lansing Trails I and II combined, to see how
many units would be allowable. Hickey
noted the open space in Lansing Trails II would be in one location and would be
maintained by a Homeowner’s Association rather than like in Lansing Trails I
where the open space is behind the residences and maintained by individual
residence owners. Klepack expressed
concern about there being 42 acres with 75 units in Lansing Trails I while the
Lansing Trails II development with 34 acres has 120 units.
Regarding
sending this on to the Board of Trustees, Klepack is agreeable to the road plan but is not pleased with the
density. Hickey agreed to meet with
Klepack individually and crunch the numbers for the 34 acres to determine the
maximum density for just Lansing Trails II.
In the meantime, this will go forward to the Board of Trustees with the
two proposed plans and with the density in question. The Board of Trustees will get the additional
documentation in time for their meeting scheduled for April 19th.
Cross expressed concern with the O’Neill alternate plan
that where the density is greatest in the cluster area and the only access will
be a significant cul-de-sac if the Millcroft Subdivision does not proceed. Dankert felt a blockage onto Warren Road
would constitute a significant hazard.
Cross also expressed concerns about the 90 degree turns.
Hickey reiterated that applying the cluster provisions of
the subdivision regulations must be approved by the Board of Trustees for the
plat in question and he will be attending their meeting to make a
presentation.
Hickey presented Board members with a draft copy of the
memo he would be sending to the Board of Trustees. Hickey recommended Board members review the
memo and bring comments to the Planning Board meeting scheduled for April 12th. Hickey feels it is important to explain the project
to the Board of Trustees to avoid confusion.
Public
Hearing: Preliminary Plat Approval for
Spitsberg Subdivision:
The next item on the agenda was a Public Hearing for
Preliminary Plat Approval of the Spitsburg Subdivision, a major subdivision dividing
a 7.11 acre lot into seven building lots and two residual parcels with a short
cul-de-sac road. The lot to be
subdivided fronts on Bush Lane and is located in the Medium Density Residential
District, Tax parcel No. 45.1-1-45.1.
Hickey
walked the area and feels it is an extremely wet area.
Gary
Wood, the Project Engineer, gave a brief presentation. This is a 7 lot subdivision proposed off of
Bush Lane. There will be a 500 foot
cul-de-sac with public utilities and a stream which will be relocated. Comments received in a public meeting about a
month ago have been addressed. First,
the drainage concern for the lots to the west will have a swale to help with
drainage. Relocating the stream will
also help with the drainage. Permits
must be obtained from DEC and they are aware of this. Concerns about the cul-de-sac have been
addressed and corrected after meeting with Jack French, the Town of Lansing
Highway Superintendent. The concern
about utilities under the pavement have been addressed also with their
relocation. The site distance at the
intersection of the proposed cul-de-sac and Bush Lane is 250 feet where 200
feet is needed for a 30 MPH zone.
Hickey
asked about the swale on the western end and its ownership and
maintenance. Wood responded that it
would be the homeowners’ responsibility.
Hickey stated this could be a concern.
Cross stated this is not a part of the stormwater design and is being
done as a goodwill gesture by the applicants.
Cross stated he is satisfied with the stormwater design. French drains were also discussed as a
solution to the swale area. Hickey wants
the developer to be aware of the drainage
problems for the homeowners who live downstream if the swale is not
maintained and hopes it will be possible to work out a solution between the
parties involved.
Hickey
asked if it is acceptable to place the water and sewer lines along the drainage
way since they are no longer under the roadways. Cross stated there are pros and cons to
this. Although having the lines in the
ditch line reduced the need to tear up the road, it also creates ditch line
problems with submerged manholes and causes the cover on the water main to be
lowered. Sedimentation could also be an
issue. Wood stated these concerns would be addressed on the Final Plat. Hickey recommended this be a condition of
approval that Wood return with a different arrangement or clarification on the
water and sewer lines and the drainage ditch.
Dubow stated that the customary conditions of approval for the preliminary
plat will include approval of the Village Engineer. Cross will work with Wood on this issue.
Hickey
stated there will also be the requirement for an erosion control plan to
stabilize banks. Wood stated there would
be a complete plan submitted at a later date.
Hickey
stated the Greenway Plan includes a trail to connect Bush Lane to Craft
Road. This has already been provided by
Miller for the west side of the Millcroft Subdivision. Hickey stated there is no need to have two
trails going to the same location.
Hickey does not feel this would be the best use for the 6% recreation
land. This would make for a very wide
trail as they would almost abut each other.
Another option might be to require a financial donation to purchase
equipment for other public parks in the area.
The amount would be $750 per dwelling unit or $5250. There could also be an easement strip built
from the cul-de-sac to connect to the trail on the Millcroft Subdivision.
Klepack
asked about the drainage proposed in the center of the cul-de-sac. Wood stated this is a cobblestone finished
area where snow melt and water goes into a drain which goes under the
road. Leopold asked if this could be
driven over by an emergency vehicle.
Wood stated it was not intended to be driven on. Wood stated that Dennis Reinhart and Jack
French met and drove trucks over the area to determine the cul-de-sac
radius. Another condition for approval
will be to get the Lansing Fire Department to review and comment on the
cul-de-sac.
Cross
is satisfied with the drainage and feels the water can be managed on the
site. Cross stated this developer is
responsible for not increasing the amount or velocity of run-off from this
property, but is not responsible for that which occurs above his property.
Hickey
noted that the Village has received a 239 letter from the County stating there
will be no adverse impact for County interests.
The
Board then completed SEQRA Part II. A –
No B – No C1 – No. Although problems
exist because of the relocation of 1000 ft of stream, an erosion control plan
to mitigate the problems, approved by the Village Engineer, will be a
prerequisite for final approval. Cross
stated the mitigation proposed will work and meets the requirements of the
Village, as well as the new EPA stormwater regulations. Cross stated the water from this site will be
collected in a swale and drainage ditch located on the property. Cross stated the rate of water exiting the
site will not increase. Regarding
traffic, for safety, signage will be required for a hidden driveway. C2 – No.
Some trees in the area will be removed and those over 6” in diameter at
breast height will be marked in the field as well as on the preliminary
plat. C3 – No C4 – No. C5 – None C6 – None C7 – None. D – No
Controvery: No.
Brown
moved the following resolution determining that this proposed action will have
no significant adverse environmental impact.
Seconded by Klepack.
VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR SEQR REVIEW OF PROPOSED ACTION ADOPTED ON MARCH 30, 2004
WHEREAS:
A. This matter involves consideration of the following proposed action: Preliminary plat approval of the Spitsberg Subdivision dividing a 7.11 acre lot into seven building lots and two residual parcels with a short cul-de-sac road; the lot to be divided fronts on Bush Lane and is located in the Medium Density Residential District, Tax Parcel No. 45.1-1-45.1; and
B. This proposed action is an Unlisted
Action for which the Village of
Lansing Planning Board is an involved agency for the purposes of
environmental review: and
C. On March 30, 2004, the Village of Lansing Planning Board, in performing the lead agency function for its independent and uncoordinated environmental review in accordance with Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), (i) thoroughly reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part I, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) thoroughly analyzed the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), and (iii) completed the Short EAF, Part II;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOW:
1. The Village of Lansing Planning Board, based upon (i) its thorough review of the Short EAF, Part I, and any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) its thorough review of the potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), and (iii) its completion of the Short EAF, Part II, including the findings noted thereon (which findings are incorporated herein as if set forth at length), hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”) in accordance with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action, and determines that neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required; and
2. The Responsible Officer of the Village of Lansing Planning Board is hereby authorized and directed to complete and sign as required the Short EAF, Part III, confirming the foregoing Negative Declaration, which fully completed and signed Short EAF shall be attached to and made a part of this Resolution.
The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:
AYES: Ned
Hickey, Doris Brown, Phil Dankert and
Carol Klepack
NAYS: None
The motion was declared to be carried.
Hickey
then opened the Public Hearing.
Wood
spoke first regarding the concerns he heard about the soil type and
wetness. Wood stated this might be good
information to place on the plat to alert potential buyers of the need for
special precautions when building.
Hickey would like to see it on the plat.
Wood stated the trees would be labeled once the brush is removed. Thirdly, Wood has two drainage studies
completed. Hickey stated an approved
drainage plan would be a condition for approval of the subdivision.
Stanley
Biskup, a Bush Lane resident opposite the proposed entranceway, spoke of his
concern of the visibility and feels 200 feet is too short a sight distance
especially with the hill and the therapy business on the corner of Bush and
Brook Drive. There is a visibility
concern. Biskup has spoken with Dennis
Reinhart about modifying the road.
Hickey stated the road and bridge will be widened at some point in the
future. Biskup is concerned about
parking at the therapy business. Ron
Furry also stated he has called the sheriff about the parking and nothing
happens. Hickey recommended residents
continue to call the sheriff’s office for resolution. Curtis stated he will also call the sheriff’s
office and report the concerns. Brown
stated that when approval was given for the business, conditions were placed on
the business. If they are not being met,
then the approval for the home occupation should be revoked. Dubow stated there would need to be documentation
to do so, but it would be possible.
John
O’Neill asked about the possibility of a three-way stop at that location. Hickey stated this will be reviewed at a
later date. Cross stated the Village
would need to provide documentation to justify a three-way stop. A traffic study would be required. Hickey stated the residents of the
subdivision might complain that it is hard to exit and something might be done
at that time.
O’Neill
asked about why a stop sign is required for one location and not another, such
as in Lansing Trails I, and where traffic studies were not completed. Cross responded that Bush Lane is an existing
roadway rather than a proposed roadway and the requirements would differ. Hickey stated a proposal for a three-way stop
on an existing road would require a traffic study and the Village would be
capable of performing one.
Anne
Furry spoke next regarding drainage on her property and how wet it is because
of the clay soil. The adjoining property
already has a swale and is extremely wet.
Furry feels Bush Lane will need additional services of a police department
with the increased density in the Village.
Ron Furry spoke of the western lot line which is treed and wanted to
know if additional trees would be planted.
Wood stated the area would have to be reviewed before a determination is
made and he will be doing so next week.
Furry was also concerned about the sheet flow of water in the area and
felt grass does not stop or adequately slow the flow. Furry also stated that septic systems are a
problem in this area. Cross stated that
the rate of storm water leaving the site after construction is completed can
not be greater than before. Cross stated
Wood would need to figure the soil type and provide calculations. Furry is
concerned about the increased concentration of water run-off. Furry is also concerned about the slope of
land. Cross stated the slope would
remain the same as it is today and will not be changed. Since the Village will not be taking
recreation land on the western portion of the subdivision, Hickey asked about
the possibility of making the stream wider so there would be less erosion. Furry also mentioned the possibility of
stair-stepping the creek bed to provide for lesser erosion damage. Wood will consider both of these
suggestions. Hickey thanked the Furrys
for their comments and felt they were technical and would be addressed by the
engineers. Curtis stated the Furrys have
a good point and the subdivision regulations do provide that development in a
subdivision shall not adversely affect down slope residents. Furry also noted that his property has damage
every year due to the size of the plows clearing the cul-de-sac and wonders
where the residents of this smaller cul-de-sac will put their snow. Cross stated it is the DPW who determines how
to plow an area and possibly using smaller trucks would be an option.
Jan
Gibbs, 147 Brook Way, read her concerns regarding drainage behind her property
where it continues to get wetter and wetter.
She has contracted to have drainage issues corrected on her property and
it remains a concern of hers.
Klepack
moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded by Dankert. All
aye.
Klepack
moved the following resolution approving the Preliminary Plat. Second by Brown. Hickey noted that copies of
the approval and conditions would be available to audience members if so
desired.
VILLAGE OF LANSING PLANNING BOARD RESOLUTION FOR PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL ADOPTED ON
MARCH 30, 2004
WHEREAS:
A. This matter involves consideration of the
following proposed action: Preliminary plat approval of the
Spitsberg Subdivision dividing a 7.11 acre lot into seven building lots and two
residual parcels with a short cul-de-sac road; the lot to be divided fronts on
Bush Lane and is located in the Medium Density Residential District, Tax Parcel
No. 45.1-1-45.1 (the “Spitsberg Subdivision”); and
B. This proposed
action is an Unlisted Action for which the Village of
Lansing Planning Board, in performing the Lead Agency function for
its independent and uncoordinated environmental review and in accordance with
Article 8 of the New York State Environmental Conservation Law - the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQR”), on March 30, 2004 (i) thoroughly
reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form (the “Short EAF”), Part 1, and
any and all other documents prepared and submitted with respect to this
proposed action and its environmental review, (ii) thoroughly analyzed the
potential relevant areas of environmental concern to determine if the proposed
action may have a significant adverse impact on the environment, including the
criteria identified in 6 NYCRR Section 617.7(c), (iii) completed the Short EAF,
Part II, including the findings noted thereon; and (iv) made
a negative determination of environmental significance (“Negative Declaration”)
in accordance with SEQR for the above referenced proposed action and determined
that an Environmental Impact Statement would not be required; and
C.
On March 30, 2004, the Village of Lansing
Planning Board held a public hearing on the Spitsberg Subdivision preliminary
plat, and thereafter (i) thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the issues raised
during the public hearing and otherwise raised in the course of its
deliberations, and (ii) addressed such issues and appropriate remedial measures
related thereto, including possible conditions that might be imposed in
conjunction with any preliminary approval to be granted for such plat;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT
RESOLVED AS FOLLOW:
A. The Village of Lansing Planning Board, based upon all of its foregoing review and action, hereby grants approval of the preliminary plat (dated March 30, 2004) for the Spitsberg Subdivision, subject to the conditions and requirements set forth on the attached Schedule A.
CONDITIONS OF PRELIMINARY
PLAT APPROVAL
FOR
SPITSBERG SUBDIVISION
1. Approval by the Village
Engineer of the Final Subdivision Plat and supporting design/specification
documents, including, but not limited to, plans and specifications for drainage
ways, storm water management/retention areas, erosion control, public
utilities, and street and intersection layouts (including the cul-de-sac
design), emergency access and snow removal.
2. Approval by the Village
Attorney of conveyance and/or dedication documents in favor of the Village,
including, but not limited to, documents providing for the conveyance and/or
dedication of streets, storm water management/retention areas (and easements or
rights-of-way thereto), utilities, recreational areas, parklands, trail areas,
open space and easements, together with any restrictive covenants or other
conditions related thereto.
3. Approval by the Village
Attorney of any restrictive covenants applicable to the subdivided parcels.
4.
Compliance with the Village Land Subdivision Regulations and New York
Statutes as to recreational land requirements or monies in lieu of dedication
of parkland as determined as part of final plat approval.
5. Compliance
with the general requirements and design standards and other conditions of
Article 300 and Article 400 of the Village Land Subdivision Regulations.
6. Compliance with Section 306
of the Village Land Subdivision Regulations as to letter of credit and related
financial security requirements.
7. Availability for the
proposed residential development of (i) sufficient sewer units/permits and (ii)
sufficient capacity by all other utility providers (e.g., Southern Cayuga Lake
Intermunicipal Water Commission, NYSEG), and the inclusion of the following
note to be set forth on the Final Subdivision Plat:
A building permit for an approved lot on this Final
Subdivision Plat shall be issued only if the necessary sewer unit/permit is
available for the residential improvements proposed for such lot. The approval by the Planning Board of this
Final Subdivision Plat shall not be deemed to constitute or be evidence of the
current or future availability of any such required sewer units/permits.
8. Approval by the Village
Engineer of infrastructure (e.g., streets, public utilities, etc.) construction
plans and schedules, including, but not limited to, ingress and egress of
construction vehicles and equipment, signage, scheduling, and the coordination
of all work related thereto with the construction of storm water
management/retention and erosion controls.
9. Special Permit from the US
Army Corps of Engineers and any other required approvals for the proposed
relocation of the Unprotected Class C stream on the premises.
10. Approvals from all other
required governmental agencies, including, but not limited to, the Tompkins
County Health Department.
11. Prominent identification on
the Final Subdivision Plat of the demarcation line marking the westerly
boundary of the Airport Combining District (as such District is set forth on
the Village Zoning Map) and the inclusion on the Final Subdivision Plat of the
following note as to (i) those lots and property which are situated within the
Airport Combining District and (ii) the restrictions and conditions applicable
to such lots and property, including, but not limited to, those set forth in
Sections 202.13, 305.03 and 604 of the Village Zoning Law:
Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, all of which lots are identified
on this Final Subdivision Plat as being situated, in part or in whole, within
the Village of Lansing Airport Combining District (as such District is set
forth on the Village of Lansing Zoning Map), shall be subject to the Village of
Lansing Zoning Law restrictions and conditions applicable thereto, including,
but not limited to, those restrictions and conditions expressly set forth in
Sections 202.13, 305.03 and 604 of such Village Zoning Law. Building permits for all such lots shall be
issued only in accordance with such Village Zoning Law restrictions and
conditions, including the requirement for a special permit approved by the
Village Planning Board. A condition of
such special permit is the Village Zoning Officer’s obligation to inform in
writing any applicant therefor of the noise and hazard conditions which are
possible in the flight path of the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport.
12. Inclusion on the Final
Subdivision Plat of the following note:
The approval by the Village of Lansing Planning Board of this Final
Subdivision Plat shall not be deemed to constitute or be evidence of any
acceptance by the Village of Lansing of any street, easement or other open
space shown on this plat (see Section 313.01 of the Village of Lansing Land
Subdivision Regulations).
13. The Final Subdivision Plat shall be deemed to have received final
approval only upon compliance with
Section 312.01 of the Village Land Subdivision Regulations.
14. Recording in the
Tompkins County Clerk’s Office of a copy of all conditions of final subdivision
plat approval, which copy shall be (i) recorded concurrently with the filing of
the Final Subdivision Plat, and (ii) indexed to the deed to the subdivided property
recorded in the Tompkins County Clerks Office in Liber 634 of Deeds at Page
226. In addition thereto, the following note shall be set forth on the Final
Subdivision Plat:
See Conditions of Final Plat Approval recorded
concurrently with the filing of this Final Subdivision Plat in the Tompkins
County Clerk’s Office.
Proof of the filing of the Final Subdivision Plat
and the recording of a copy of the conditions of final subdivision plat
approval shall be delivered to the Village Zoning Officer immediately following
such filing and recording.
15. Submission of Preliminary Subdivision Plat for review by the
Lansing Fire Chief and implementation
on Final Subdivision Plat of all modifications required as a result of such
review.
16. Approval by Village Planning
Board of Landscape Plan (i) indicating all trees greater than 6" in
diameter at breast height to be removed and (ii) new plants to be installed.
17. Inclusion of a note
approved by the Planning Board and Village Engineer
as part of the Final Subdivision Plat
approval regarding soil and
surface and ground water
conditions.
The vote on the foregoing motion was as follows:
AYES: Ned Hickey,
Doris Brown, Phil Dankert and Carol Klepack
NAYS: None
The motion was declared to be carried.
Leopold
noted that the Spitzberg Subdivision is in the Airport Combining District. Dubow stated this would be one of the
conditions, along with Landscape Plan, Fire Department approval, etc.
Approval of Minutes – March 8th:
Klepack
moved to accept the minutes of March 8th. Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Adjournment:
Klepack moved to adjourn at 10:05 P.M. Seconded by Dankert. All aye.