7575 Van Buren Road, Baldwinsville, NY 13027
August 2007 Planning Board minutes
August 13, 2007
The Regular Meeting of the Planning Board of the Town of Van Buren, held at the Town Building, 7575 Van Buren Road, Baldwinsville, New York, was called to order at 7:00 pm.
Those present joined in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
Roll Call: Harold Crandon present
James Virginia absent
James Ruddock present
Eric Knapp present
Fred Thomas present
Mary Frances Sabin present
Anthony Geiss, Chairman present
Also present: Ted Spencer, Attorney
Jim Billings, Engineer
Dave Pringle, Codes Enforcement Officer
Vera Cavallaro, Planning Board Secretary
MINUTES:
The Board decided to approve the July minutes at the September meeting.
Motion# 07-147 Mr. Crandon asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the July minutes at the September meeting. Ms. Sabin seconded the motion, there was no further discussion; motion carried, unanimously on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Motion# 07-148 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to move the September meeting to Wednesday September 5, 2007 at 7:00p.m. The Board agreed and seconded the motion, there was no further discussion; motion carried, unanimously
Mr. Geiss opened the Public Hearing for Connors Rd. Tract and explained to the audience how the Public Hearing would be conducted.
Motion# 07-149 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to waive the reading of the Public Notice. Ms. Sabin moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon, there was no further discussion; motion carried, unanimously.
CONNORS RD. TRACT - PUBLIC HEARING
Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 051-02-26
Mr. Mathew Freshette and Mr. Mark Edwards were present to address the Board.
Mr. Freshette said that they are proposing a 6 lot subdivision with four lots facing Connors Rd.; Lot 1 being 2.15 acres; Lot 2 being 2.15 acres; Lot 3 which is back off an easement is 8.8 acres; Lot 4 which is 9.39 acres; Lot 5 being 2.74 acres; and Lot 6 being 2.73 acres. These new acreage numbers are because the Onondaga County Planning Board did not want it at the center line of the road. There is a 60ft easement right around the mid point of the subdivision and that is for ingress/egress and a utility easement.
Mr. Geiss asked if there was anyone that would like to speak concerning this project.
Mr. David Patapow of 2617 Connors Rd. asked what type of housing was going to be placed there.
Mr. Geiss said that the zoning is for single family residences.
Mr. Geiss asked if there was anyone who would like to speak either for or against this proposal.
Motion #07-150 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to close the Public Hearing for the Connors Rd Tract Subdivision. Mr. Ruddock moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon, there was no further discussion; motion carried, unanimously.
The Board returned to Regular Session.
CONNORS RD. TRACT - SUBDIVISION
Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 051-02-26
Mr. Mathew Freshette and Mr. Mark Edwards were present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss asked about the reciprocal easement for the road.
Mr. Spencer said that they received a draft copy which was reviewed and suggested revisions were offered to the attorney for the applicant and Mr. Hunt received a voice mail the other day that said the revisions were acceptable but they have not seen a revised agreement but the agreement does cover ingress, egress and the utilities.
Mr. Geiss asked who was going to be responsible for maintenance in that agreement.
Mr. Edwards said Lot 4.
Mr. Geiss asked if they have approval for the driveways on Lots 1 and 6 from the Highway Supervisor Ed Parks.
Mr. Freshette said that the Highway Department did come and mark the road and Mr. Parks said that they were fine.
Mr. Billings asked where the driveways for Lots 1 and 6 are going to be.
Mr. Edwards said that the driveways can be located anywhere but they are proposing to put one where there is an existing driveway across the street on Lot 1 and the other close to the west end of the property and Lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 will have driveways off the 60ft easement.
Motion#07-151 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion with regard to SEQR for the Connors Rd. Tract Subdivision. Connors Rd Tax Map Parcel ID# 051-02-26 which is the division of the property into 6 lots with lots 2, 3, 4 and 5 which will have access off of a 60ft right of way and lots 1 and 6 which will have access off of Connors Rd. There is no adverse environmental impact with regard to this project. Ms. Sabin moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion, motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Geiss read the County comments aloud.
Mr. Geiss said that there is a total of 60ft of easement and asked if the Board was looking at two separate easements or one 60ft easement.
Mr. Spencer said that the way that they have it set up it is one strip but broken down in two separate; one for access and one for utilities in thirty foot increments.
Mr. Geiss asked if that meets the requirement for 60ft.
Mr. Spencer said that he believes so and the way that the reciprocal agreement was set up it does not distinguish between the two 30ft easements and the written agreement governs before the map.
Mr. Geiss asked that the final map show just the 60ft easement which has the reciprocal agreement because how they divide it up for the utilities doesn't matter to the Board but the 60ft needs to be shown for zoning purposes and the written agreement fits the requirements so just the map needs to be adjusted.
The Board and the applicant discussed the easement and the reasons why it was broken into two 30ft increments and they also discussed the reciprocal agreement.
Mr. Geiss asked if septic approvals have been completed.
Mr. Edwards said that they have the septic designs which were submitted to the Town and they have been submitted to the Onondaga County Health Department and they are unsure if the designs have been reviewed yet.
Mr. Geiss said the Board can approve the subdivision but the final subdivision can not be signed until there is septic approval.
Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain the following Motion# 07-152:
WHEREAS Town Code Section 175-5 (C) establishes the criteria for the reservation of parkland on residential subdivision plats or the imposition of a sum of money in lieu thereof; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of such a provision is to prevent deterioration in the quality of park and recreational services to residents in the Town of Van Buren as a result of a new residential development; and
WHEREAS, based on the present and anticipated future needs for park and recreational facilities in the Town relative to the projected population growth in the Town to which the Connors Rd Tract subdivision will contribute, a proper case exists for requiring that a park or parks be suitably located for playground or other recreational purposes within the Town; and
WHEREAS, a suitable park or parks of adequate size to meet the Town's requirements can not be properly located within the Connors Rd Tract subdivision, nor is there a need for such additional facilities in the immediate neighborhood,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that a proper case exists regarding the Connors Rd Tract Subdivision development for requiring the developer pay a park fee of $350 per lot.
Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion#07-153 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the subdivision for Connors Rd Tract Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 051-02-26. This is per the applicant's plan which is dated 4/30/07 and latest revision dated 8/08/2007. The latest revision does show the modified property lines which do not go to the center line of the road. This is for lot 1 of 2.15 acres, lot 2 of 2.15 acres, lot 3 of 8.88 acres, lot 4 of 9.39 acres, lot 5 of 2.74 acres, and lot 6 of 2.73 acres. This map is signed and stamped. The conditions of this approval are that the applicant will send a final map removing the two 30ft easements and show that as a 60ft easement on the map and contingent upon the Onondaga County Health Department's approval of septic system design. This approval is also subject to
execution and filing of the reciprocal agreement. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Ruddock. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
RIVERIDGE DEVELOPEMNT LLC - SUBDIVISION
River and Daboll Rd. Tax Map Parcel Id# 045-01-01.2
Mr. Jim Kelly was present to address the Board.
Mr. Kelly said that there were a few changes requested at the pre-agenda meeting on Wednesday so they have submitted new drawings to reflect those changes. They would like a referral to the ZBA for several variances; the variances would be for lots 24 and 26 for the 2½ to 1 ratio and if the Board looks at lots 24 and 26 they have a large drainage easement in them for retention and the western portion of the lot they can not build on due to the topography because of a considerable drop off and movement of the road to the west would make lots 19 and 20 unusable so they worked it by moving the road and shortening that depth. They had a conversation with the Chairman of the ZBA and he stated that his only concern with that depth ratio was just to ensure that the person who bought the property wasn't going to further subdivide in the future
and build another house there and if that is the ZBA Chairman's concern with going to the ZBA, they will put that in there as a deed restriction but that seemed to be the Chairman's only reservation in that regard. The other objective variance sought for is lot 19 for the 250ft minimum depth and if the Board looks at lot 19 it is sort of at the corner of this property and on both sides they have 290ft of depth on one line and 270ft on the other. The average depth would be the 250ft but at the shortest point at the center of the lot is 174ft in depth so they are looking for some relief in that regard because if they move the road because of the topography they lose two lots and it does not become a workable layout.
Mr. Kelly said that the next thing is that they need to determine if the Board requires a variance for lots 11 and 12 for the 250ft minimum depth requirement. If the Board looks at lots 11 and 12 it depends on what the Board says is frontage and what the Board says is depth because they, like the prior applicant have requested private access easements and the County had concerns about having these lots access off of River Rd. so the Board requested that they not have them access off of River Rd. so they have reoriented the lots and put in a private easement just like the prior applicant with a hammerhead to serve those lots so if the Board looks at the dimension of those lots Lot 12 has 345ft x 316ft x 507ft and then the short strip on River Rd is 67ft so it depends on what the Board calls frontage and what the Board calls rear lot; it
is an 86,000sf lot so size wise they are in good shape but if it is determined that the 67ft is the back line then they would ask for a variance. Lot 11 dimensions are 398ft x 316ft x 492ft x 176ft so depending on the Board's orientation as to which would be the back line and if that is determined to be the back line they would look for a variance in that regard also.
Mr. Kelly said that the additional things are the two private access points to eliminate any frontage or any access points other than their main drive from River Rd and having them two private access easements. One shows 297ft and the other drive is just under 500ft and he believes those are the only changes towards the things that were discussed as concerns in the pre-agenda meeting.
Mr. Geiss said that it covered some of them but lot 22 was also in there for length to depth.
Mr. Kelly said yes, one side meets but the other side doesn't so that lot is another one.
Mr. Billings said that the Town Code actually defines lot depth as the minimum distance between the front and the rear lot lines so the minimum distance on lot 22 would be the 442ft.
Mr. Geiss said that they have to go to the ZBA so the Board can have the ZBA check that but one of the big concerns that he has are the private roads and from the map the Board has to the map that the applicant just gave the Board the roads went from 60ft to 40ft.
Mr. Kelly said that he is not sure why that was changed but if the Town requires 60ft then they can change that.
Mr. Geiss said that there is also a question on drainage on these properties and especially how it affects the big parcel that is owned by someone else and there is reports that drainage or some type of detention is going to be needed there to prevent the drainage from impacting that property and he doesn't see any recognition or property sizing to allow for that drainage.
Mr. Kelly said that they reviewed this with Mr. Mastroianni this morning and on the south edge of the property there is a 20ft drainage easement coming along and running with the grade; it runs north and then it goes across to the road, then underground and then goes to the big retention and there are two of them set up to control and handle that run off.
Mr. Geiss said that the 20ft easement is brand new and asked if they were all going to be maintained by the common ownership of the property itself.
Mr. Kelly said yes.
Mr. Billings said that he is a little concerned about what they are showing for drainage easements simply because B&L has not seen a drainage report yet and he is concerned that these lot and easement lines could easily move and he met with Mr. Mastroianni on Thursday and conveyed some of these issues to Mr. Mastroianni so they are certainly in no shape to approve these by any stretch because he is concerned that these easements could easily change and B&L hasn't seen any drainage calculations and he doesn't know how big the ponds need to be or the ditches need to be so until they review a drainage report there is no way.
Mr. Kelly asked Mr. Billings if they needed the calculations to make a recommendation to the Board.
Mr. Billings said yes.
The applicant and the Board discussed a referral to the ZBA.
Mr. Geiss said that he has a difficulty with the private roads. The roads need to be 60ft and so many private roads in a new development and it seems as if they haven't been innovated enough in the lots.
Mr. Thomas said that he thought by putting in the hammerheads they were building them to Town specs so they could bring in the plows.
Mr. Geiss said that they are not proposing Town roads and as the Board gets in to developments they try to make as much of them Town roads and yes the Board had to address that just a while ago but that addressed some large lot sizes as well and it also took the driveways off of the Town road so there were conditions there that evolved over the last several months of their proposal but here the Board is looking at private roads and yes the County wanted the access road to Daboll but he didn't hear anything about a cul-de-sac or anything else that was reviewed in regard to this and how that would have impacted this to keep these as Town roads.
Mr. Geiss said that he is not in favor of starting out with so many lots off of a private road and people are going to be coming back to the Town later on saying that they want a road and they want maintenance because they have at least 5 lots coming off in this area.
The Board discussed how many private lots would be accessing the private drives.
Mr. Geiss said that as he looks at lot 19 it looks like they squeezed it in and he can see that as being a problem area in the future for who ever builds on it and yes it is two acres but it is almost like it is two separate lots the way the corner is and he thought there would be some movement of it after the last Board meeting but there hasn't been and he sees this plan as needing a little more work overall.
Mr. Kelly said to summarize they need to fix lot 19 and they need the drainage study and he asked if there was any way and he understands the Boards concerns about the private roads but if the people are buying them and they have deed restrictions and just like the prior application that there is a common easement and they have requirements of taking care of it and he doesn't believe and maybe the Town attorney could tell the Board better than he could if the people have any recourse at all on the Town.
Mr. Geiss said that the people don't but they have to realize when the Board looks at it pressure comes back to the Town and it is just like that bridge out west it doesn't belong to anyone but all of a sudden the Town and the State are going to rebuild the bridge. No one owned it when they built it a few years back and he spoke to some DOT people but now all of a sudden the DOT, County and State have come up with 1.7 million dollars to rebuild a bridge and that is how it happens later on if you enter into these things and they start to happen then later on pressure comes back to bear and what he is looking at is the Board really doing their job if the Board is not looking at private roads here for this amount of lots.
Ms. Sabin asked if the Home Owner's Association is going to be responsible for maintaining which means the plowing for these private access roads.
Mr. Kelly said that the lot owners that are accessing off of the road.
Ms. Sabin and the applicant had a discussion on having a Home Owner's Association and how the applicant was going to have the maintenance fees applied for the private access roads.
Mr. Geiss said that they could just have reciprocal agreements between the lots on the private access roads but that pulls a lot of stuff and are the private roads really necessary is the question.
Mr. Geiss said that with a Type I action the Board has the option to look at an impact statement for this project and there have been several environmental issues including drainage, the river, and other things have been raised in regard to this.
Mr. Billings said that he thinks the problem is the target is still moving a little and it is tough to call this anything when they are still moving on lot lines and private roads and there are still some drainage issues that they haven't dealt with yet and that is a major part of this.
Mr. Geiss said all of that work would go in to that if the Board did require any environmental work that would just be a part of that anyway.
Mr. Billings said that he thinks that they need to get to a point where everyone is comfortable with the lot lines and the roads and that is probably where they need to be next before the Board looks at an EAF.
Mr. Billings asked why they have a 90 degree bend in the intersection instead of a curve and that would show a stop sign condition and he doesn't think that is what they want and the last drawing that was submitted showed a curve.
Mr. Kelly said with the 3 roads coming together what does the Board think they should put there for traffic control.
Mr. Billings said that the third road is a driveway so they really have one public road and he would suggest they go back to the curve.
Mr. Ruddock said that he still has an issue with Lot 19 and he can't see anyone or could he approve a Lot that is that shape and he thinks that they really need to look at Lot 19 and after they have looked at drainage he thinks they should take a lot line from the corner of the white property directly up the street and chop Lot 19 in half and take away Lot 12 because now they would get an extra lot and slide them down and he would be more inclined to approve lot 19 to the south with a short side yard but at least a reasonable way to address the street with a building and start and move phase one line up north 50 or 100ft so they gain enough square footage to slide the lots because when they break lot 19 in half they will have 40,000sf and will have to add 40,000sf to each of those new lots and they have 86,000sf on lot 12 and if they
add phase 1 and push it north they can grab up the other 40,000sf they need to make that lot and now they would have two lots and he could better send a recommendation to the ZBA to some of those types of changes to dimensional things then to have a V shaped right angle corner come into the back of lot 19 and he can't recommend that at all because it doesn't make sense.
Mr. Kelly asked if there are any other points that they need to put focus and attention to.
Mr. Geiss said that they need to look at a drainage report, the private roads and he thinks there is still a lot that they need to look at.
Mr. Billings asked if they are private roads or common use driveways.
Mr. Geiss said that he is challenging if they should even exist so he is not ready to name them and they should also be 60ft wide and not 40ft that is being shown.
The Board discussed the private drives.
Motion# 07-154 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to table any action until the applicant submits revised drawings and documents. Mr. Ruddock moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
GLR - SUBDIVISION
Jones & O'Brien Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2
Mr. Scott Freeman and John Brennan were present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss said that there are fire comments on the Site plan that also need to be met.
Mr. Freeman said they had a discussion with Mr. Pringle and they do not have a formal plan but they could forward that to the Board within the week and what they discussed was a 20ft wide fire access drive around the rear of the building which would be an extension of the turn around and there were some minor building modifications. They have shortened the building a little bit on the service side of the building and they will provide that drawing within the week.
Mr. Freeman said that the turn around would go three sides of the building which essentially would have enough distance.
Mr. Geiss asked if that was agreeable to the fire department.
Mr. Pringle said yes, now that the fire department knows what the building is made out of, how big the building is, and to find out there are apartments in the basement as well so it is three stories from the rear and that is why the fire department wanted enough room in the back to reach the third story with a ladder.
Mr. Billings asked what side the access would be on.
Mr. Freeman said that it would be where the turn around is and they have a sketch started but they do not have a formal plan.
Mr. Geiss said that they do meet the fire requirements and they want the property lines to stay as proposed on the map that the Board has that dated 6/4/07 with revision date 7/9/07.
Mr. Geiss asked about the reciprocal agreement.
Mr. Brennan said that they just found out that was requested last Friday and in lieu of that the Town asked them to redraw the line so there would be no easement required for the driveway and then they were advised that they also needed an easement for lot 1 but that was not advised to them at the last Planning Board meeting.
Mr. Geiss asked if there was a problem with providing that.
Mr. Brennan said that they have provided it.
The Board discussed the speed limit and that the Town Board is working on requesting a change in the speed limit.
Mr. Geiss said there is no park fees involved in this project due to the fact that it is commercial.
Motion# 07-155 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency, a single agency, uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the subdivision at Jones and O'Brien Rd GLR Subdivision Tax map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2. This is the subdivision for the parcel along O'Brien Rd. into Lot 1 of 23.425 acres and Lot 3 of 5.062 acres; previously Lot 2 was subdivided off of the larger parcel and that is 23.714 acres. This is shown on the applicants map dated 6/04/07 with latest revision 07/09/07. This is for the development of a senior type home, a residence on this parcel and the remaining parcel has no plans for development at this time. There is no significant adverse environmental impact with regard to this
proposal. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion# 07-156 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to approve the GLR Subdivision at Jones and O'Brien Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2. This is per the applicants drawing entitled "Final Plot GLR Subdivision Amended" dated 06/04/07 with latest revision 07/09/07. This shows the formation of Lot 3 which is 5.062 acres and the remaining acreage being Lot 1 which is 23.425 acres; this all being taken from Lot 2 which is 23.714 acres. The applicant has delineated the wetlands on this and noted that they were verified and checked in which the County had commented on also that the road access directly across from Peck Rd. Extension which is also a request from the County. This is conditioned on the 60ft ingress/egress that there be a reciprocal easement going
between lot 3 and lot 1 such that lot 1 would have access utilizing the same road off of O'Brien Rd. This would be a reciprocal that meets the approval of the Town attorney. Reference 7 on the drawing concerning wetlands also needs to be removed or changed to show a current delineation date or be removed. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion, motion carried; unanimously.
GLR - SITE PLAN
Jones & O'Brien Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 60-04-02.2
Mr. Scott Freeman and John Brennan were present to address the Board.
Motion# 07-157 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to table the Site plan for GLR. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Knapp. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
EMPOWER CREDIT UNION - SITE PLAN
2265 Downer St. - River Mall - Tax Map Parcel Id# 034-04-6.2
Mr. Dan Todero and Edward Kiesa were present to address the Board.
Mr. Todero said since their last meeting with the Board they have gone over the drawing which has enlarged the area of the parking lot where the kiosk is going and has shown the direction of the cars and enlarged the island. In addition the owners of the property have sent a letter stating how the determination was made and why they chose that location for the kiosk.
Mr. Kiesa read the letter to the Board from the owner of the property.
The Board discussed the letter from the owner.
Mr. Geiss said that they have expanded the island and have shown the street light that is on that parcel and they have also made it so that there is room for stacking.
Ms. Sabin asked if they could clarify the traffic pattern.
Mr. Kiesa said that the situation with the kiosk is that people have to access it from the drivers side so it is designed if people are coming in the main entrance off of Downer St. they would have to loop around and take a left and then pull up to the kiosk. If people are coming off a Crego Rd. they would just take a right turn in and if people are coming from further in the shopping center they would come up the main driveway and just pull right over and in to the kiosk.
Mr. Geiss said that he is concerned with the exit out of there and as people come out of there how do the people see cars coming down; traffic comes straight down that way so how do the cars at the kiosk get out into traffic.
Mr. Kiesa said the same way anyone else would that is coming out of the movie theater.
Mr. Geiss said that these people are going to be at right angles and that is the Board's concern.
Mr. Kiesa said that people are going to be in the left hand turning lane and then wait to pull out.
Mr. Geiss asked if they had enough room to turn and line up.
Mr. Crandon said if they have paid any attention to the shopping center lately behind Movie Gallery and behind Pizza Hut they have drawn a double solid yellow line from the second exit from Rite Aid between the Rite Aid and the old Ames building and directly across from that driveway there is a stop sign there now and they are going to bring in cars from Downer St. and have them make a U-turn so what happens to the stop sign and who has the right of way.
Mr. Kiesa said the same way someone would enter any intersection.
The Board and the applicant discussed how people would navigate around the stop sign to get to the kiosk and also about the pavement striping.
Mr. Kiesa said that there are several ways that the kiosk can be accessed.
The Board discussed ways of entering and exiting the kiosk.
Mr. Geiss asked if they could extend the island further down and connect it so that they don't have a roadway there but he doesn't know how that would affect the Movie Gallery and it would also eliminate people trying to turn in front of the cars that are at the kiosk.
Mr. Geiss said that they probably need to talk to Philips Edison about that but he wants them to see where the Boards concern about traffic is.
The Board and the applicant discussed where the stop signs are located in the mall.
Mr. Ruddock said that he believes that the blue car shown in the drawing needs to be able to turn itself in a line perpendicular to that entrance or exit in front of Rite Aid so in order to achieve that they would have to push that island over farther to be able to get that turn would be one option and the other option would be to not build the upper part of the curbing space and fill in the space there which would directly impact Movie Gallery which is not a free stander however their door is from the street so he is not sure having direct access is all that great and then make people come down and they would have their stack distance and they can turn and come out that way and the advantage of that is that it keeps the kiosk on the main drag coming in and going out and the last option would be to go to the west of the light pole and give an
access lane going north bound and take the last couple pieces over there so that when people do come in the first entrance they will be going out to the west or the east and hitting that stop sign; the disadvantage of that is that it moves Empower 10 - 70ft off of the main drag.
Mr. Kiesa said that he doesn't know Movie Gallery's parking restrictions but they have to be a minimum of 600ft from P&C and he is not sure if Movie Gallery has similar restrictions.
Mr. Geiss said they could eliminate the extension and close off the driveway and they are actually moving farther away from P&C.
Mr. Ruddock said that would keep them in the flow of traffic and people can see it and it also makes people go out by the stop sign.
The Board and the applicant discussed the different kiosk locations and the impact on the traffic for the different locations.
Mr. Ruddock asked why they didn't pick the island that is immediately adjacent to that.
Mr. Kiesa said that they would have to turn through too many cars and that is the problem with trying to put kiosks in parking centers because parking spaces need to be removed and Town's have parking ratios.
The Board and the applicant discussed traffic pattern problems within the mall's parking area and what route people take in and out of the mall.
Motion# 07-158 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to table this application until the applicant resubmits. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
BITZ - SUBDIVISION
1198 Old State Route 31 Tax Map Parcel ID # 046-07-01
Mr. Ruddock recused himself from this discussion.
Mr. Mark Bitz was present to address the Board.
Mr. Bitz said that they have a 49 acre parcel and they are getting to the point where their cropping operations are becoming independent of the turkey farm and they would like to break off the two turkey barns which are about 6 acres and have the crop fields separate.
Mr. Geiss said Lot 1 is 5.56 acres and the remaining acres are the 49 acres.
Mr. Bitz said yes.
Mr. Geiss said the Town of Elbridge line goes right along the western lot line.
Mr. Bitz said that it splits the remaining 49 acres in half.
Mr. Geiss said that if this goes forward the Board will have to inform the Town of Elbridge but he doesn't see that as a problem; it is just as a courtesy.
The Board discussed the applicant needing a driveway cut and it was decided that it was not needed due to existing driveways that will be shown on the final map.
Motion#07-159 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Bitz Subdivision as a minor subdivision. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock recused
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Motion#07-160 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board lead agency a single agency, uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the Bitz Subdivision at 1198 Old State Route 31 Tax Map Parcel ID # 046-07-01. This is for the creation of Lot 1 which is 5.96 acres and the remaining lands would be 49 acres. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock recused
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Motion#07-161 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to refer the Bitz Subdivision to the Onondaga County Planning Board for their review. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon yes
Mr. Ruddock recused
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Mr. Ruddock re-joined the meeting.
HYACINTH LAND DEVELOPMENT - ZONE CHANGE
Van Buren Rd. & Ellsworth Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 031-02-03
Mr. Julian Clark and Jim Giancola were present to address the Board.
Mr. Clark said that they previously requested a zone change of a majority of the property to R-15 and the property on Van Buren Rd. to Commercial. This is a property that is on the corner of Ellsworth and Van Buren Rd. behind the Town Hall and after some discussion at a previous meeting the idea of a PUD was brought up and they are here tonight to make a formal zone change request to PUD versus R-15 what they previously requested. They have presented this to the Town Board and a Town Board member was selected to be on the PUD committee.
The Board discussed what Town Board members are on the PUD committee.
Mr. Geiss asked what they are thinking about for residential.
Mr. Clark said single family up front and some apartments or multi family.
Mr. Geiss asked what type of lots.
Mr. Clark said they are probably going to stick with the R-15 size up front and the PUD is really to achieve the apartments and multi family in the back.
Mr. Geiss asked if they were thinking of apartment buildings or duplexes.
Mr. Clark said they are still thinking about that.
Mr. Geiss asked when they would be ready to make a presentation to a committee.
Mr. Clark said as soon as a date is set.
The Board and the applicant discussed when the applicant would be sure on what they wanted within the PUD.
Mr. Giancola said that they are really not altering this all that much and two months back the Board said that they are in favor of the PUD and based on what they have been going through over the past year they thought they would take that opportunity. With R-15 the thought really hasn't changed, the lay out of the property sometimes makes some of the property unproductive with some lots smaller and some lots bigger and the PUD would let them change the configuration and he can't say that they won't have a few R-10 lots in there based on some of the geographic issues that they dealt with the first time but the predominant idea with the front section behind this building in going to be the R-15 15,000sf zoning. What he sees back there are a series of apartments and at this point he didn't know that he had to know that and he can give general
descriptions in terms of size and structure but he doesn't know at this point if it will be two or three stories.
Mr. Geiss asked if it will be one massive parcel or will it be divided up into parcels or sections.
Mr. Giancola said that he believes it will be divided up in sections.
Mr. Clark said that their initial thought was just one lot with some apartment buildings on it and then some duplexes.
Mr. Geiss said that is the kind of thing that they have to be ready to show the committee.
Mr. Giancola said they can be ready as quick as the engineers can get the drawings together because they know conceptually what they want there and they need to look at what the PUD regulations are.
Mr. Geiss said that the Board is willing to hear the presentation and with the commercial property the Board still has difficulty and doesn't agree with County Planning especially if they are going to put duplexes and apartments that there isn't a second entrance that will come off of Van Buren Rd. in to this development and he thinks from a planning aspect and a fire aspect if this is the only access it will not work.
The Board and the applicant discussed the previously proposed zone change compared to the one the applicant is currently proposing.
Mr. Geiss asked the Board members if anyone would be interested in being on the PUD committee.
Ms. Sabin and Mr. Thomas volunteered to be on the PUD committee.
Mr. Geiss set a PUD committee date for Monday, August 27, 2007 at 7:00p.m and asked that the secretary inform the Town Board and ZBA members.
The Board discussed with the applicant what they would need to present at the PUD committee meeting.
Mr. Crandon recused himself from the next discussion.
MARALEE MEADOWS - SUBDIVISION
E. Sorrell Hill Rd & Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 050-04-05
Mr. Charles Farrell was present to address the Board.
Mr. Farrell handed out new maps to the Board.
Mr. Farrell said what the second map does is shows the Board that they have a lot a problems with some neighboring wetlands and what is in red on the colored map are areas that are not suitable for septic systems by soil types and there are some areas where there are some wetlands and in other areas because of elevation in the green checkered area because the elevations are not suitable for septic systems and because of some pressures that are going on what the applicant has decided to do is to try to meet the Town Code requirements for lot depth by making what was originally lot 1 cut it into 2 lots with a driveway access over lot 1a to lot 1b. Lot 1b is an area which is primarily not developable because of the soil types and the elevations that are back there but dividing it into 2 lots would bring it into compliance with the 2½ to 1 ratio. In reality what they are going to be doing assuming the Board approves this is coming back with a major subdivision of the remaining lands.
They have lot 1 sold and they had lot 2 sold but his problem with lot 2 on the original plan was that it was 200ft along the road and very deep but they had a buyer who had an interest in horses and wanted depth. The colored map also gives the elevation and shows the large hill that cuts across that property; it comes along Connors and makes a 90 degree turn there is a large hill and he had pictures but forgot to bring them in but there is a large knoll in there that makes it impossible to develop more that one lot off of Connors Rd. but at the moment they would just like to do Lot 1a and 1b and listen to whatever comments the Board has on the overall project.
Mr. Billings asked why they didn't combine lot 1b with the remaining lands.
Mr. Farrell said that they would like to try and sell it to someone who would want to use it for hunting and there is also a creek that runs through there or someone who wants some additional land but that creates a problem because it has too much depth or they could do a very deep lot as shown on the colored map off of Connors Rd and comply with the Town code but someone would have to bring utility service over there because the closest telephone pole is about 1000ft away so they do not want to present that to the Board right now but they would certainly like the Board's comments on it because they are going to have to come back for some sort of a major subdivision for the balance of the land.
Mr. Geiss said that they have a 30ft access for the utility easement and that needs to be 60ft.
Mr. Farrell stated that they can change that but they would like the easement to only be for lot 1b not for the remaining lands.
The Board and the applicant discussed the hill areas on the property.
Mr. Geiss said that he thinks County Planning is going to ask for a build out of the remaining lands.
Mr. Farrell said that the colored map shows the build out and what they were struggling with was the proposed lot 2 on the colored map and then the big 17.15 acre lot. There is currently a farm access where the barns are on that parcel which is north of the house lot and there is good sight distance along this part of East Sorrell Hill Rd.
Mr. Geiss asked about sight distance on lot 1a and where the access is going to be.
Mr. Farrell said that they are fine there and the culvert for the creek is towards the north half of lot1 and they wanted to stay away from that if they could.
Mr. Geiss said that they are going to have to show access so they have to get with County DOT and get something showing access.
Mr. Farrell said that he has had preliminary discussions with the DOT and the DOT wanted more detail but the sight distance was decent.
Mr. Geiss said after they move forward with the larger parcel the Board is going to be looking to see if they are going to have any secondary roads in there, how many road cuts and everything else.
Mr. Farrell said that they are not conceptually real clear about what they are going to do with what was lot 2 and the 17.15 acres. They have had some discussions about moving the lot lines for lot 2 up to make it more than 200ft with the access to the lot above it being where the barns are.
Mr. Geiss said has any thought been given to cutting a road in there and making these lots more viable and also keeping all of the road cuts off of East Sorrell Hill Rd.
Mr. Farrell said that the elevation really makes that difficult and if he had the pictures it might make that a little bit clearer but on the colored map were they see the green area; that is the big knoll that cuts across the property and kind of divides the property. Someone can go back about 500ft on that property and do something but not all the way back because that knoll just cuts that off.
Mr. Geiss said the 17.15 acres could be cut in half and a road brought in there with reasonable lots also but he would have to look at it specific for that.
Mr. Farrell said that they also have the Crooked Brook that winds through there and that eventually feeds into the river so they have that problem as well.
Mr. Ruddock said is the 18.8 acre piece that fronts Connors Rd another lot.
Mr. Farrell said yes and it meets the code because of the length on Connors Rd but with the wetlands and topography there is only about one spot that someone could probably build.
Motion#07-162 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare Maralee's Meadows Subdivision as a minor subdivision. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Knapp. There was no further discussed. Motion passed on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon recused
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Motion#07-163 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency a single agency, uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for Maralee Meadows Subdivision on E. Sorrell Hill Rd & Connors Rd. Tax Map Parcel ID# 050-04-05.This is for the creation of a three lot subdivision with lot 1 being 8.05 acres, lot 2 being 6.55 acres, and the third lot being the remaining lands of 58.19 acres. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Knapp. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon recused
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Motion#07-164 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to refer the Maralee Meadows subdivision to County Planning for review. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Ms. Sabin. There was no further discussion. Motion carried on a roll call vote that follows:
Mr. Virginia absent
Mr. Thomas yes
Mr. Knapp yes
Mr. Crandon recused
Mr. Ruddock yes
Ms. Sabin yes
Mr. Geiss, Chairman yes
Vote 5 yes, 0 no, 2 other
Mr. Crandon re-joined the meeting.
PRAY - SUBDIVISION
West Sorrell Hill Rd. Tax Max Parcel ID # 033-06-01.2
Mr. Steve Crego was present to address the Board.
Mr. Geiss asked if they wanted to subdivide off Lot 1 of 4.07 acres taken out of the remaining lands which are 48 acres along W. Sorrell Hill Rd.
Mr. Crego said yes.
Mr. Geiss asked if they have road access.
Mr. Crego said they submitted a letter from DOT which states that a site would be approved and a septic design has already been completed also.
Mr. Ruddock asked if the County is going to ask the applicant to calculate the land minus the 40ft County dedicated right of way.
Mr. Pringle said that the County will ask him to move the line back.
Mr. Ruddock said that the applicant might want to get that changed before next meeting.
Mr. Crego said that he will mention that to the surveyor.
Mr. Geiss explained the 40ft County right of way to the applicant.
Mr. Knapp said that the surveyor should be used to it.
Motion#07-165 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Pray Subdivision as a minor subdivision. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Knapp. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion#07-166 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to declare the Town of Van Buren Planning Board as lead agency, a single agency uncoordinated review for the unlisted action under SEQR for the Pray Subdivision on West Sorrell Hill Rd. Tax Max Parcel ID # 033-06-01.2 which is the creation of Lot 1 which is approximately 4.07 acres and the remaining lands would be approximately 48 acres. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Crandon. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Motion#07-167 Mr. Geiss asked the Board to entertain a motion to submit the Pray Subdivision to Onondaga County Planning Board for their review. Mr. Thomas moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Knapp. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Mr. Ruddock asked that the correct date be shown for the septic on the second note from the end.
Mr. Crandon asked that Mr. Crego either change the application or give Mr. Pray a letter stating that the applicant can subdivide the property.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Geiss said that the Board received a letter from Mr. & Mrs. Laug about the park fees and they are claiming that they are going to use the two pieces of property for hunting and they are not going to make any residences and they would like to know why they have to pay a park fee and his feeling is that they can bring it up to the Town Board and have the Town attorney make the determination because they are creating a lot even though they claim it is for hunting but what could be done very easily is someone could come in with a septic system and a plan and build a house on there at any time.
Mr. Billings said that he thinks the language in the Code is causing the confusion and he doesn't have it in front of him but he thinks it references a building lot.
Mr. Geiss said that he thinks of those as building lots even if they are only going to use them for hunting or for woods.
Mr. Billings said that anything is a building lot as long as it conforms to the code.
Mr. Geiss said that these lots conform to code.
Mr. Billings said that they may want to ask the Town Board to look at the language in the Code.
The Board discussed the County Training Session that is coming up.
ADJOURNMENT
Motion
Mr. Geiss called for a Motion to adjourn at 9:34 p.m. Mr. Crandon moved to accept the motion, seconded by Mr. Thomas. There was no further discussion. Motion carried, unanimously.
Respectfully Submitted,
Vera Cavallaro
Planning Board Secretary
| ||
