TOWN OF JOHNSTOWN PLANNING BOARD

OCTOBER 10, 2017
6:00 P.M.
TOWN HALL
MEETING NOTES

PRESENT:

RICHARD GOEBEL, CHAIRMAN

ERIC VANALSTYNE, VICE CHAIRMAN

RICHARD LYNAUGH,

ERNEST NIFOROS

GARTH BRUCE

TONY AMBROSINO, ALTERNATE

SEAN M. GERAGHTY, SR. PLANNER

I. CALL MEETING TO ORDER:

The meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m.

II. APPROVE MINUTES OF LAST REGULAR MEETING:

MOTION: To approve the minutes to the September 12, 2017

meeting.

MADE BY: Ernest Niforos

SECONDED: Garth Bruce

VOTE: 6 in favor, 0 opposed

III. TIMOTHY DELANEY – LOT LINE AMENDMENTS FOR ACRES WILD SUBDIVISION:

Background:

On April 14, 2015, the Town of Johnstown Planning Board conditionally approved Mr. Delaney’s Acres Wild Subdivision along the east side of Norboro Road in the Town of Johnstown (Tax Map Parcel Nos. 118.-1-23 and 118.-1-22.11). The subdivision involved the creation of seven (7) new building lots along a private road leading from County Route 146.
The subdivision also included a substantial amount of acreage left as forever wild. As part of its conditional approval, the Planning Board asked for the following issues to be addressed:

1. The location of percolation and pit tests must be identified on each of the seven (7) building lots.

2. The approximate location of a septic field and well on each of the seven (7) building lots must be shown.

3. Classifications of the streams running through the property must be labeled on the drawing.

4. The Homeowners Association formation documents titled “Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions, Restrictions, Easements, Charges and Liens” must be finalized and approved by the Town Attorney and included as part of the submission of the final plat.

STATUS: All of the issues that the Planning Board asked to be addressed have been taken care of by the applicant. As a result of the preparation of the Homeowners Association document, there have been a few lot line amendments that have taken place on the property.

PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Geraghty explained that when the Planning Board granted Mr. Delaney’s subdivision approval in April 2017, it was understood that there were likely going to be some final amendments made to the subdivision plat as a result of the final revisions to the Homeowner’s Association documents. Mr. Geraghty explained that the biggest change on the drawings involved the stump burial area along the south side of the entrance road to the development. Mr. Geraghty explained that the stump burial area was originally on Lot #1 which was 9.061 acres in size. Mr. Geraghty indicated that the stump burial area is still in the same location, but the property line has been moved so that the stump burial area is now within Wilderness Area #1. As a result, he pointed out that Wilderness Area #1 is now 32.164 acres in size, and Lot #1 is now 5.917 acres in size. Mr. Geraghty also explained that Lot #’s 2 and 3 have also seen minor alterations to lot lines. The Planning Board had no comments or questions regarding the revised lot lines in the Acres Wild Subdivision.

Planning Board Action:

MOTION: To approve the lot line adjustments to the Acres Wild Subdivision.

MADE BY: Richard Lynaugh

SECONDED: Garth Bruce

VOTE: 6 in favor, 0 opposed

IV.AIRPORT MASTER PLAN:

a. Background:

In 2015, Fulton County hired Passero Associates to prepare a Master Plan Update for the Fulton County Airport. The existing Master Plan for the Fulton County Airport was completed in 1993. Passero Associates conducted the Airport Master Plan Update in two (2) phases.

· Phase 1 included an inventory of existing conditions at the Airport and a detailed forecast of current and future aeronautical demand at the facility. The forecast for aeronautical demand was reviewed and eventually approved by the FAA.

· Phase 2 of the project included an analysis of design criteria for aircraft facilities and airspace components. As part of this effort, a proposed Airport Development Plan for the Fulton County Airport was prepared, along with a detailed development phasing and capital improvement program.

PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Geraghty explained that the Fulton County Airport is a Non Primary Entitlement (NPE) Airport and, as such, receives access to $150,000 in funding each year. Mr. Geraghty indicated that the funding can be used to pay for 90% of a project cost for improvements at the Airport. New York State assumes a 5% contribution for eligible projects, leaving a local share of 5%. Mr. Geraghty indicated that, for years after the Airport was constructed, Fulton County regular pursued projects at the facility. He pointed out that the County then went through a timeframe of several years where it was not using its $150,000 yearly allotment. He indicated that the County is able to carry over its yearly allotment for three (3) consecutive years before losing the funding. Mr. Geraghty pointed out that, in recent years, Fulton County has transferred some of its unused NPE funding to other airports. He pointed out that, hopefully, if Fulton County needs additional funding for a particular project in the future, it may be offered left over funding from another NPE Airport.

Mr. Geraghty talked briefly about how Passero Associates phased the Master Plan Update. He noted that, after Phase 1 of the report was completed, it was several months and a few minor revisions to the document before the agency authorized Passero Associates to proceed to Phase 2 of the Master Plan Update.

b. Summary of Draft Airport Master Plan:

· The draft Airport Master Plan identifies a series of issues that should be addressed at the Airport, as well as a series of projects and initiatives to address those. The project/initiatives are shown to be implemented in three (3) phases:

Ø 2017 – 2022 : Near Term

Ø 2023 – 2026 : Mid Term

Ø 2027 – 2036 : Long Term

· The facility key projects/initiatives identified for the year and midterm include:

Ø There are several trees or grouping of trees that have been encroached into the navigable airspaces around the Airport. It is recommended that:

1) Additional avigation easements be required.

2) Both on and off-Airport obstructions be removed in order to comply with FAA Guidelines.

Ø Access to the apron area is not controllable along the FBO Building. It is recommended that:

1) New fencing and bollards be installed on the east side of the FBO Building.

2) The walkway be reduced to 4’ in width for security purposes.

3) Access onto the apron be controlled by a sliding gate along the access road that would be controlled through a card reader system.

Ø The connector taxiway 1,000’ from the Runway 10 end no longer meets FAA Taxiway Connector Design Standards because it provides direct access from the apron to the runway. It is recommended that this connector taxiway be relocated to comply with new FAA Guidelines.

Ø The runway, taxiway and apron pavements should be rehabilitated soon. It is recommended that the pavement in all three (3) areas be rehabilitated in the short-term.

Ø There is a lack of clear span hangars at the Airport. Clear Span Hangars are fully-enclosed buildings capable of holding multiple aircraft and larger aircraft that can’t be stored in a T-Hangar.

Ø The existing 2,000 sq. ft. of terminal space inside the FBO Hangar is outdated and needs to be upgraded. It is recommended that the County either pursue a new standalone terminal building or seek funding from NYSDOT to upgrade the terminal space in the existing FBO Building.

Ø The underground fuel tanks are over 20 years old, are nearing the end of their life expectancy and need to be constantly monitored. When these tanks need to be replaced, it is recommended that they be replaced with aboveground self-service fuel tanks with appropriate secondary containment.

Ø The current 4,000’ runway poses some limitation on the size and type of aircraft that can use the Airport. Based on conversations with the FAA, there currently are not enough departure operations of larger aircrafts to warrant extending the runway. It is recommended that once there are close to 250 annual departures for the family of aircraft that warrants a longer runway, a Runway Length Analysis be conducted.

PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Geraghty quickly reviewed several of the key findings and proposed projects that Passero Associates has incorporated into the Airport Master Plan Update. He pointed out that, initially, the County’s consultants spent a great deal of time focusing on the potential for a runway extension that would allow larger jets to use the County’s facility. However, he noted that because of the lack of air traffic needing a larger runway at the Airport, this type of project has been pushed out for several years.

c. Airport Capital Improvement Program:

Fulton County recently submitted to the FAA its annual Airport Capital Improvement Plan (ACIP). All of the near term projects identified in the Airport Master Plan Update are already included in this ACIP. The Master Plan does not include any additional near-term projects that should be added to the ACIP. The development phasing and Capital Improvement Program outlined in the Airport Master Plan Update specifically notes that, “If Federal or State contributing funds are unavailable for a certain project, the project will almost certainly be unaffordable using only local money and the improvement project will not go forward until appropriate FAA/NYSDOT funding is available.” It is anticipated that the FAA will take several months to review Fulton County’s draft Airport Master Plan Update.

PLANNING BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Geraghty explained that, each year, Fulton County is responsible for filing a 5-year ACIP with the FAA outlining the projects it would like to undertake at the Fulton County Airport. He noted that the projects are suppose to coincide with the development plan outlined in an Airport Master Plan. Mr. Geraghty indicated that, as a result of Passero Associates’ work on updating Fulton County’s Airport Master Plan, a detailed ACIP has been filed with the FAA. Mr. Geraghty pointed out that there are many projects outlined over the next five (5) years at the Airport. He indicated that, currently, for fiscal year 2017, the County is working on the design of the Airfield Lighting Project. He indicated that each year the County will add projects to year 5 of the ACIP that have been discussed in the Airport Master Plan Update. Mr. Geraghty pointed out that several of the projects on the County’s ACIP will far exceed the available NPE funding for the Airport. He indicated that the County will have to rely on the FAA to provide some type of discretionary funding to make up the difference in the project costs or else those projects will simply not take place.

V. OTHER BUSINESS:

A. Chairman’s Update:

Planning Board Member Ernest Niforos asked if the County is responsible for addressing any potential terrorist threats at the Airport?

Mr. Geraghty indicated that the County files an Airport Security Plan every three (3) years that essentially outlines some practices that are incorporated into the day-to-day activities at the Airport in the hopes of providing a secure facility. Mr. Geraghty pointed out that the Airport is not manned 24 hours a day so it is difficult to have any intense security procedures.

Planning Board Member Eric VanAlstyne pointed out that the County’s effort to secure the Airport apron area will be a huge security improvement at the facility.

Planning Board Chairman Richard Goebel started a conversation concerning the sign that was installed at the First Choice Credit Union property. Planning Board members spent several minutes speculating as to whether or not the sign is in violation of State and Federal Regulations pertaining to scenic byways.

Mr. Geraghty pointed out that, according to Town Code Enforcement Officer Ryan Fagan, the Credit Union has complied with local regulations by obtaining a variance from the Town Zoning Board of Appeals. He indicated that, if they are in violation of any State or Federal Regulations concerning scenic byways, then that will be an issue that they will have to address with the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT).

VI.CLOSE OF THE MEETING:

MOTION: To close the meeting at 6:48 p.m.

MADE BY: Eric VanAlstyne

SECONDED: Richard Goebel

VOTE: 6 in favor, 0 opposed