Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout12-16-14 Planning and Development Board Special Meeting Agenda CITY OF ITHACA 108 E. Green St.—3rd Floor Ithaca,NY 14850-5690 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING,ZONING& ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Division of Planning& Economic Development JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING &DEVELOPMENT PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT r Telephone: Planning Division—607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA—607-274-6559 Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityof"ithaca.org Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558 If you have a disability&would like specific accommodation to participate, please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 by 12:00 p.m.,the day before the meeting. NOTICE OF MEETING The regular meeting Of the PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD will be held at 6:00 p.m. on DECEMBER 16T", 2014 in COMMON COUNCIL CHAMBERS, City Hall, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY. AGENDA ITEM Start Time 1. Agenda Review APPLICANT OVERHEAD PROJECTOR NOTE:: 6:00 The City only has a VGA plug/cable 2. Privilege of the Floor(3-minute maximum per person) available to connect to our overhead 6:01 projector. If you need to connect another 3. Site Plan Review way, you will need to provide your own ADAPTOR. (Macs & many newer, lighter laptops may not have a VGA port.) A. Project: TC3 Culinary Center—Coltivare - ; 6:13 Location: 235 S. Cayuga St. Applicant: Tompkins Cortland Community College (TC3) Actions: O Conditions of Final Approval &Screening for Vents B. Project: Downtown Marriott 6:30 Location: 120 S. Aurora St. Applicant: Matt Jalazo for Urgo Hotels Actions: O Signage Review/Sign Variance Review C. Project: 3-Story Apartment Building 7:00 Location: 114 Catherine St. Applicant: Jagat Sharma for Nick Lambrou Actions: O Consideration of Approval of Transportation Demand Management Plan [UNDER SEPARATE COVER] O Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval The applicant proposes to construct a 3-story apartment building, with a footprint of 1,974 SF and containing one 5-bedroom and two 6-bedroom units. The project site contains an existing apartment building and a 13- space parking lot with 7 spaces in the back yard (to remain) and 6 spaces in the front yard (to be replaced by the new building). The project also includes removal of one curb-cut. The project is in the CR-4 Zoning District, which requires either: (1) off-street parking in accordance with §325-45.5 F; or (2)full compliance with the NYS Building Code or Residential Code for new construction and a Transportation Management Plan (TDMP) approved by the Planning Board. The project received Design Review. AGENDA ITEM Start Time D. Project: 15,700-SF Retail Building 7:30 Location: 500 S. Meadow St. Applicant: Wegmans Food Markets, Inc. Actions: O Determination of Environmental Significance O Consideration of Preliminary& Final Approval The applicant proposes to construct a 15,700-SF retail building. The project site is a 17.7-acre parcel that contains an existing 115,000-SF retail building (Wegmans), associated parking, and an access road from Meadow Street. The new building will be located on an existing 201-space parking area. Project development will include parking for 77 cars, sidewalk along access road, crosswalk striping, lighting, and landscaping, including six tree islands in the parking lot. The project is in the SW-2 Zoning District. This is a Type I Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, §176-4 B. (1) (i), and an Unlisted the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review. E. Project: Chain Works District GEIS— Update&Schedule 8:00 4. Zoning Appeals 8:25 ■ #2967,Area Variance, 114 Heights Ct. [summary under separate cover] ■ #2968,Area Variance,424 Dryden Rd. [summary under separate cover] ■ #2970,Area Variance, 742-744 S. Meadow St. [summary&worksheet under separate cover] S. Old/New Business(if any) 8:40 6. Reports A. Planning Board Chair(verbal) 8:50 B. Director of Planning& Development(verbal) 9:00 C. Board of Public Works Liaison (verbal) 9:10 7. Approval of Minutes: 10/28/14 9:20 8. Adjournment 9:25 ACCESSING MEETING MATERIALS ONLINE Site Plan Review&Subdivision Applications(and Related Documents) Site Plan Review application documents are accessible electronically via the"Document Center"on the City web site (www.citvofithaca.org/DocumentCenter),under"Planning&Development">"Site Plan Review Project Applications,"and in the relevant year/month folder. Subdivision application materials can be similarly located,but in the"Subdivision Applications"folder. Zoning Appeal Materials are also accessible electronically via the"Document Center"portion of the City web site,under"Planning&Development"> "Planning&Development Board">"Zoning Appeals,"and in the relevant year/month folder. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with a commitment to workforce diversification." 2 RAMSGARD 1 O 8) (�• A5.4 (a. ARCHITECTgR�L A5.4 1 O _ D k§IGNv,_j ., 4074 \ i Level 4 Lever 443'-5" � , � 443'-5' t G es Street I aneate 1315 w rams ar co 9 Level _ _ Level B_ 315 85.0263 l 486'- 1" - - - 486 -1" 6 Le vel3 _ Level3 Lev ! 1 Level 7 432'-9" - - - - - - - - - - - - 432'-q - - J 4l5'-5,� 4'15'-5" 9 ev I Level 6 L e 6 - - - - --- 464'-9" - Print J 464' 9" - I A3.5 I Level 5 Level 2 Level 2 454'- 1, :. - 421'-5" 421'-5" 454' 1" I I 60 Level 4 Level 4 443 -5" 443'-5" 2"X2"MESH - 15 ' EA RAILING TOE 5TEEL TUBE GUARD RAIL ATGH RAIL AT NEW;. XTERIOR EXI FIN15H MAT HE5 m EXISTING EXIT STAIR HAND RAIL m m Level Level -1 432'-9" 2' 2 Lu . 2 3'_q, 3 9�, 3'_9' 2'� 3'_q,� �� ,_q�� 2�� 3'_q�r_ 2,� . _, 3,_q„ 2„ w 1 0 ? i= F X 5TEEL TUBE FRAME w SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS FOR ,-u j FOUNDATION DETAILS m First Floor Plan _ - Q _First Floor Plan Level.2 -'X42 evel2 - - 405'-5" z 405'-5 1' � � _ - CONCRETE GUARD RAIL, RETAINING WALL GA5TIN PLACE CONCRETE 5TAIR5 AND RETAINING - WALL5 8 FOOTINGS I in m CONCRETE STAIR mod + CONCRETE SLAB East Exit Partial Elevation First Floor Plan - First Floor Plan A5.4 SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" 405'-5" 405'-5" TFF BLAB ON GRADE GOMPAGTED FILL 2 J 3 East Side Exit Building Section East - West 2 East Side Exit Building Section North - 5outh A5.4 A5.4 5GALE: 1/5"=1'-0" A5.4 5GALE: 1/5"=1'-O" 0" IL jolt RETAINING WALL NOTE:THE INTENT OF THE PLAN BELOW 15 TO EXTEND THE EX151TNG PLANTING AREA TOWARD GUARD RAIL FIELD VERI Y THE EXISTING BUILDING WITHOUT ADVER5ILY THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL A5.4 EFFECTING THE EXISTING PLANTINGS THAT ARE DIMEN51ON5 AT THE 51TE AND 6'-2" 8'-3" 6 _2 EXI5TING.THE CONTRACTOR WILL FIELD VERIFY PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN ALL DIMS AND NOTIFY GG OF EXACT FIELD WRITING OF ANY D15GREPANGIE5. LANDING 4 LA NDING CONDITIONS A3.3 ALL PRAWING5 AND 5PECIFICATION5 NEW/REU5ED CURBING 5TOP5 SHORT OF THE ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE o ------- - EXITING BUILDING TO MAINTAIN SURFACE RUN ARCHITECT AND 5HALL BE U5ED ONLY p it —-—-— OFF OF RAIN/SNOW MELT TO CONTINUE TO 1 ON THE JOB DESIGNATED. ______________ _'_ t r FLOW TO STORM SYSTEM LOCATED ON F CLINTON 5TREE GUARD RAIL DRAIN I" Stair Run _ - p I I PART 69.5(b)OF TITLE VIII OF THE - 'I 6 - 1 I I I 3 REMOVE AND EDUCATION LAW OF NEW YORK ------- -- PROHIBIT5 ANY AND ALL ALTERATON5 f _ �I - 1 'T Q I REUSE A5 MUCH OF A5.4 EXISTING PLANTER I I II GUARD RAIL I I I . I .I- �I-, GONG I ❑ EXISTING CURBING TO TH15 DRAWING OR DOCUMENT BY -r --- ANY PER50N, UNLE55 ACTING UNDER 5TAI I A5 P0551BLE THE DIRECTION OF A LIGEN5ED_ - - - - - f- - -- - 5HALL BE NOTED, SEALED, ANDS r ----------L T Tread r - J - ,� 51GNED BY THE ALTERING ARCHITECT Q I GUARD RAIL _ _ -yp- EW RAILING MATCHING IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ry 18 - 1 NEW AREA FOR EXISTING NEW RAILING MATCHING w i REQUIREMENTS OF PART 69.5(b). � I I I a I I GUARD RAIL AT NEW CANTER TO BE EXPANED GUARD RAIL AT NEW o EXISTING PIER 10 EXTERIOR EXIT / / /„ XTERIOR EXIT + - I / 24'-2 I VIF o REVISIONS ------- EDGE OF GRADE EDGE OF MAT q -` '-- -- Q ---- --- --------- - r----- iA BEAM BELOW FOOTING BELOW F-—I r-- I � � n I �---,, I I -- I `� I `� �' I `�I I �' i ��- � � # DESGRIPTION DATE -------------------1-_-_ _ r_ `,,, I I F_ �T x y ~ 6 Revision OS/30/14 iX _ Revision I 06/09/14 LLLA 15 Revision 15 9/22/14 - a m Q LINE OF 5GREEN ABOVE Ll Exterior Details 15 1312 N .2) I�.8) 1 O 11 DRAWN BY: cpk SCALE: As indicated N 1 Enlarged Plan Exterior Stair Retaining Wall DATE: 22 OCT 2014 50ALE: 1/4"=1'-0" x c PROJECT TRUE T'l;l T 10/2-7/2014 11:5G:52 AM RAMSGARD ARCH TECTqRL A5.4 A5.5 EXTERIOR DUCT WORK FOR A3.5 MAKE UP AIR-SEE HVAG e DRAWING5 34'-0" 16'-0" 18'-0" Oil Level 2 jo EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ EQ Level 2 - 421'-5" 5TL Beam _. 5TL Beam 1, -'5TL Beam STL Beam 5TL Beam 5TL Beam TL Beam 1 m 1 SPRAY ACOUSTIC INSULATION t 65 es Street STEEL TUBE SEE aneate 1315 6"MTL STUD WITH 5/8" —STRUCTURALw ram5 ar Go 9 _ Level 2 GWB AND ACCESS 315 85.0263 421'-5, PANEL TO BE 1 1/2"STEEL PGU-4 PGU-2 GU-1 LOCATED BY THE GU-5 ZONE OF EXTERIOR DUCT — - - GRATING CONTRACTOR n - EE STRUCTURAL WORK FOR MAKE UP AIR- SEE HVAG DRAWINGS 0 TUBE STEEL COLU O (TYP)SEE STRUCTURAL _ +/-33,- 10 1/4" o MTL LOCKERS STEEL BEAM SEE LENGTH MALKIN FREEZER/COOLER STRUCTURAL 4 4" DUCT WORK SCREEN STEEL o �, A4 4 TUBE AND 2X2 WIRE MESH 4"CONCRETE SLAB 2"X2"MESH MATCH EXISTING FINISH OF '- 2"RIGID INSULATION , LL EXISTING 5GREENING STEEL TUBE GUARD RAIL ELEMENTS FREEZER/COOLER 4"CONCRETE 5LAB o PANEL o FIN15H MATCHES EXISTING o m EXIT STAIR HAND RAILS � - _ First Floor Plan e e 405'-5" BUILD UP CURB A5 NEEDED FOR SLOPE IN GRADE 15 2° 3'_'I" 2" 5'-q" 2" 3'_"I" 2° 5-"1" 2„ 5 -q„ 2, 3' q„ 2" V 5 nlar ed Eaet Elevation 2 5ection at Walk-In Freezer 4 Goolm N A3.3 GALE: 1/4"=1'-0" A3.3 SCALE: 1/4"=1'-0" O 11 (Do 4" QL CIO qZp 0 I OL Level S tu 4b6'- 1' LU � i J O I I I IIII i I z =+�5e1 5� . I z � j I I I I ' 1— zn- 464'Level-q, i � � EXTERIOR LED LINEAR - BUILDING ACCENT LIGHTING _ Level 5 I j 454'-1" _ 30'-0" w LINEAR LED LIGHTING 1 -- O I i Level 4_ - - - - 443'-5' r : THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMEN51ON5 AT THE 51TE AND EXTERIOR DUCT WORK FOR PROMPTLY NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT P IN MAKE UP AIR-SEE HVAG WRITING OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. DRAWING5 ALL DRAWING5 AND SPECIFICATIONS _ ARE THE PROPERTY OF THE 1 ARGHITEGT AND SHALL BE USED ONLY Level 3 ON THE JOB DESIGNATED. COPYRIGHT BANNERSL 52 GRAPHIC T PART 6q.5(b)OF TITLE VIII OF THE EDUCATION LAW OF NEW YORK PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL ALTERATIONS 4'-6" TO TH15 DRAWING OR DOCUMENT BY ANY PERSON,UNLE55 ACTING UNDER o THE DIRECTION OF A LICENSED 1 ARCHITECT.ANY SUCH ALTERATIONS m ' � II REMOVE PORTION OF EXISTING I SHALL BE NOTED,SEALED,AND Level 2 -_ - �_ E `_ SIGNED BY THE ALTERING ARGHITEGT 5GREENING TO ALLOW IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ZONE OF EXTERIOR DUCT I REQUIRED EXIT-REST OF REQUIREMENTS OF PART 6q.5(b). WORK FOR MAKE UP AIR- - GREEN AND VINES TO REMAIN SEE HVAG DRAWINGS I 1 1 I RE�/1510N5 3 DUCT WORK SCREEN STEEL TUBE AND 2X2 WIRE MESH SGRIPTION ,4 A3.3 I � DE D TE MATCH EXI5TINS FIN15H OF EXISTING 5GREENING 1 Revision 1 04/04/14 f Revision-7 O6/oq/14 ELEMENTS - 15 Revision 15 q/22/14 First Floor Plan 405'-5' Exterior Elevations PROJ#: 1312 DRAWN BY: GPK SCALE: As indicated 1 Eaat Elevation C, F7 DATE: 12 SEPT 2014 A3.3 SCALE: 1/5" 1'-0" A�3.3 9/22/2014 10:22:25 AM -_:.., . - _ _ :_ : i I-- i-� r.•' �-�-ram, r�:rr - -_ r ram^-.�. 'f�a... - a-- : -_._-__. rs �.�:. _ - � �_.-- 'k. I � �. - _ _ I L f- _ i_�_._._� �_ _-�_._ _-_-� � _..._-' � -s I � � - �-'[ - � _...- c a ELEVATON-n p3 ... -. ...-�. ... .. .... ... _. � � coovER Cnapa G .. e� r.. - V.NPea . 1 Y ��' � �T7� � �� ���a � �%� nJ��.�� 111 Ilrr a... : - - - aaa-r. ��lll [rr�, 'Y - - � �� - ---' 'JL--'---�- � - - -�- s.= - �.. ==� _�_ � a ELEVATION-woRrR 3 . .m � cwr � •wua wu�s¢v. w-+,m COOPERC:ARRY Q RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of November 5,2O14, Appeal#2966,a20 South Aurora Street,Marriot Hotel Board members present:Steven Beer, Moriah Tebo r,Teresa Deschanes, Marshall McCormick,8<Phyllis i Radke,Director of Zoning Administration. The proposed Marriott Hotel at 120 South Aurora Street is in the CBD-140 zone where signs area i permitted use. However,Section 272-18 requires that the applicant receive variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals for the non-compliant number and size of signs before a sign permit can be issued. Board members had many questions for Mr.Jalazo who was representing Urgo Hotels.When asked to tell the Board why there is a need for six signs and why so large he said because of the location of the site,the size of the building, and requirements of the brand he Is working with.Two of the signs are for directional purposes to take people to the Green Street Garage and then into the Marriot.The other ' four are directional,two on top of the building so people coming in from out of town can locate the building and are also required by the brand.The other two signs are pedestrian signs so people can find the building. Due to the location on the Commons it leads people to the hotel.As far as the size goes the one on the ground level that is 60 square feet,which is slightly larger, is so that the name and address can fit The two larger signs, due to the size of the property,are on the tenth floor and are set back four feet.Size is a program requirement so people can see it from a distance. Mr.Jalazo was asked what the size was on the directional signs For the Green Street Garage.They are 2 feet by 2 feei 6 inches.There will be a restaurant at the location and one of the signs will be for that restaurant. Placing the address on the sign is mainly for deliveries so vendors know where to stop and unload supplies. In discussions with the Fire Marshall it was made clear chat the address should be on the building.Signs will be back lit, which is part of the branding that is required by the Marriot.There was discussion of large signs on top of the building that appear to be like a billboards. Mr.Jalazo stated that these signs are to help people � coming down Rt.96 and Rt.79 find the hotel. Discussion followed with Board member Marshall McCormick believing that the signs on top of the Marriot will not be seen coming down from Ithaca College. A Public Hearing was held with no one in favor of the project and no one opposed. The Board members discussed the two larger signs and all seemed to agree that they are too large,and they were not convinced that their serving the purpose of helping anyone identify the building, but seem to be more of an opportunity to advertize.There were also concerns about light pollution. Mr. McCormick made a motion to grant the appeal for 120 South Aurora Street From Section 272-66(2), ' for ordinance which allows only two walls signs per business on a building in the commercial zoning district and limits each sign to a maximum of 50 SF.He would also like to reference Design#12-1BSR8 In that document the Board wishes to approve variances to size for the signs in reference guide B, D, E, F. 1. Size of signs were considered and the distance from which they need to be seen.There are similar signs in the neighborhood so there will be no undesirable change in the neighborhood. 2. The character of the neighborhootl will not be affected by these four proposed signs. 3. They believe that these four signs are in the public's best interest to allow guests as well as local residents to find the hotel and they do not impede the open spaces,views or vista of the community. 4. The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by any other way for the four signs. 5. The four signs are not substantial. 6. There will be no adverse impact on the neighborhood in fact the signs will help direct people � to the hotel. 7. The other two signs referenced in the design#12-1852-R8 design A ffi C the Board would encourage the applicant to provide adtlitional documentation as to the reason for needing these signs of such size and facing such directions,or to provide the Board with other ideas. 8. The Planning Board supports granting this appeal. The motion was second by Ms.Tebor and the appeal for 12D South Aurora was granted with a vote of four(4)in favor and none opposed. Mr. Beer—yes Ms.Tebor—yes Ms. Deschanes—yes Mr. McCormick—yes - ¢ em w _._._._._._... -.�.._ .. ._I R - _-_._-_._._._ _-< yay _._ _._._._._._ ..__ - z.'... � .___. _-..'. T, e p _._.._ 1 - _ _a_ _._ _ o 4i J rEL[VATION-cRem+s�aEe� 3 ._ _. _ _ ...__ _ I _ 68 8 - ... .. n . ., ..�.... .. -i. Co4vFU C'nauY dx$YL 1_ -----Original Message-- Fram:JoAnn Cornish[ 'I -✓C I hrla ! fi h 7 Sent:Monday,November I�20I4 4:40 PM To:Mathew Jalazzo Cc:Phyllis RodXe,-Lisa Nicholas � Subject RE:Marriot Signage Matt, I understand from Phyllis Radke that your signage proposal was not successful in getting you the desired variances at the BZA meeting. In reviewing your sign package,I am not sure I understand what you are proposing.Are the letters individual letters, internally illuminated with LED lighting or are the letters in a "plastic"box that is internally illuminated?The detail states the letters era mounted flush to the wall and the detail shows them having some depth so I am guessing they are individual letters internally lit Do you have a Footcandle level for the sign?We are worried about light spillage and disruption from the light on neighboring buildings. Would you consider using targeted uplighting for the sign rather than interior Iighting7 It would be a much more sophisticated look and would not be a beacon as many fear. Let me know your thoughts. JoAnn —Ortgtna!Meseog¢--- ' From:Mark Ginocchio[mailm:morke�a]m .coml Sent Moxday,November 24,20I4 I2:I4 PM Oz To:Mafhew Jalazo Ce:Bob Spence Subject:Sign ge llhzmixation,Marriott Ithaca RE:Marriot Sigxage Hi Matt, Ms Cornish identiFes several important items with regard to signage lighting and dark-sky principals which are addressed in many outdoor lighting codes.Outdoor lighting codas have been developed in many jurisdictions with support of the International Dark-Sky Association(IDA).The intent of these codes in general is to curtail the degradation of the nighttiane visual environment,reduce light trespass and glare and to minimize energy use. Outdoor lighting codes typically establish light zones with maximum total lumen counts per property. Light levels For signage era measured in lumens or£oot lamberts which are measures of light emitted or reflected(luminance)rather than£oot candles which measure light levels on a surface at a distavice from the souroe(illuminance). Wa have requested testing on a similar Marriott sign cursently in production and �� can provide the levels upon receipt. i In most outdoor lighting codes,eMernal illumination of signs is discouraged and vp lightivg of signage is i Frequently prohibited as it is not easily focused and typically results in light spill and trespass and contributes to sky glow.The codes typically favor internally illuminated signs with light letters on a colored or opaque background as they provide the best visibility legibility with the lowest]amen levels. In fact most lighting codes exclude the light from intemally illuminated signs from the total allowable lumen count For a property as it is a negligible source o£hzminaflon. Tha proposed signage for the Marriott is intemally illuminated individual letters mounted directly to the wall. Each letter is composed o£a 5"deep aluminum channel forming the outline o£the letter,a translucent Face or baffle at the front of the letter and LED lamps mounted inside the back of the latter, shielded from view.At night the logo '•M•'is red and the'•MARRIOTT" is white with all letters on a dark/unlit background. The LED modules produce the most evev light with the lowest energy requirement per lumen thereby reducing the lumens and energy required per square foot of signaga.The Marriott signage proposal is in keeping with Dark-Sky principles and outdoor lighting codes. Follow the link below to the IDA glossary of lighting terminology for more information;I have also attached a few documents as resources should you wish to research any flzrther.The Flagstaff Zoning i Code is very interesting as Flagstaff;AZ was designa[ed International Dark-Sky City by the IDA and the code has clear illustrations of preferred signage illumination principles.Let me know if you have any questions or would like me to get on a phone call to explain any ofthe principles discussed. Regards, � i Mark Ginocchio PS I would also note that in addition to using the most conscientious strategy for illumination of building i signs,we have chosen not to illuminate street level signage and have reduced the building lighting from the levels previously proposed by the architect and lighting consultant. From: Mathew Jalazo [Mattaew.Jalazo@UrgoHotels.com] it Sent: Tuesday, December 02,2014 11:03 AM To:JoAran Cornish Cc: Phyllis Radke;Lisa Nicholas Subject: 12E: Marriot Signage Thanks JoAnn.Below is the information on the light levels. Please let me know if you need anything else from us. Should I plan on being at the meeting on the 16th7 Phyllis,please let me know if you need anything else as well and if we can make the January meeting.Thank you both for all of your help with this. " Mark here is the resi4ts for our light output test for standard hospitality lighted letter sets identical to the ones we produce for Marriott full service hotels. At 12" from the face with a letter that has 400 nits,which is our standard on Hospitality letters,the measure of foot candles would be 113.7. With vinyl on the front of these letters, which they all have,the measurement would be 80 foot candles because of a 30%reduction in light out-put because of the vinyl. � Hope this is useful info for you. Please let us know if you have questions,comments or need anything else. T1+A++>«, Bill" Best, Matt I 113.7 foot candles,even reduced to 80 as a result of the vinyl front, seems excessive and not � likely to be looked upon favorably by the Board. Lvov I, tangy EXTERIOR SIGNS STUDY ITHACA MARRIOTT 11 / 12 / 2014 maeCxO. 2010200.0 —E ui1212M wm ITHACA MARRIOTT MR Irha�q New Pork ■Y COOPER CARRY WWF T6k VA K 1Ad d Nr g i w �J ! A �i_ �n n -ii �n- a n� n �i ■��1 i� �� 'i` ' � n n �i �n n n_ n n ■�9 n o n n �i �n n �i€ n n ■1 n n �i �n a �i n n ■Id' ��. � � n n �i i n n �i_ n n ■1 COOPER CARRY 1. Des on IF Up of View Corri d are View I is taken from approximately 220 yards from the building, on E. State Street traveling west. The grade at View 1 Is approximately 16 feel higher than the grade at the east fagade of the building. The Sign (A) is approximately 102 feet above grade at the east fagade of the building. View 2 Is taken from approximately 160 yards from the building of E. Green Street traveling east. The grade at View 2 Is approximately 6 feet lower then the grade at the west fagede of the building. The Sign (C) is approximately 110 feet above grade at the west fagade of the building. The locations of views were determined to be critical based on initial visibility from the street travelling in a vehicle. 2. Confirmation of Sign Sizes The sign sizes are the same as the previous package, Including the new sign facing Green Street. Please refer to Pages 8 and 9 for dimensional Information. 3. Justification of Signs Sizes The sizes have been determined to be the Ideal dimensions for legibility from the locations that we have determined to be critical. Also under consideration Is the fact that the signs would be viewed while In motion, as they would be seen mostly from a vehicle traveling on E. State Street heading west and from E. Green Street heading east. 4. Additional Considerations The fallowing are additional considerations that we have factored Into our determination of sign sizes and location. A. Size of sign. The purpose for which the Sign is erected and the distance from which the sign Is Intended to be or can possibly be read and the character of adjacent streets has been taken Into consideration. In all cases, the smallest Sign that will suit the purpose has been the guide, taking into account the legitimate commercial or other Interests which are Intended to be promoted by the sign and the speed limits and traffic conditions on adjacent streets. B. Number of letters. It Is understood that a sign with only a few letters need not be as large as one with many letters to be seen from the same distance. C. Other signs. The context of existing signs In the vicinity of the proposed sign has been taken into consideration. D. The character of the neighborhood. The proposed use shall not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character so as to cause a devaluation of neighboring property or material Inconvenience to neighboring inhabitants or material Interference with the use and enjoyment by the Inhabitants of the neighboring property. E, Public interest. The protection of the public interest and the desirability of maintaining open spaces, views and vistas have been considered Insofar as possible. Any person aggrieved by any decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals may have the decision reviewed by a Special Term of the Supreme Court In the manner provided by Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. PRwecrxo. 2014020.00 DATE 11/12/a014 rrm CLARIFICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS ITHACA MARRIOTT raw Ithaca,New York ®! COOPER CARRY � 111 of OI ➢ ➢ ll � to � li � ii II ii ll ➢ ➢ Ilillll ll II1111 ➢ ➢ ➢ ll ii ll li 71 II II 11 ➢ ll ➢ _ � - - t ------------------------0----------- 11A MARRIOTT ------------------- 7 J 54E F 7kA----Iff 1 1 Ei I III ��{ � - _ - it 5 i - AURORA ST.ELEVATION +ne+•r.r PRWIFUwo U10200o DATE 1111E11114 N NIGHTTIME RENDERING ITHACA MARRIOTT No Ithaca,New York ER o FCOOPERCARRY M A R R I OTT O CNIWNEL LETTERS/LOGO scxu:v.•-ra ,n sn xeouixeo-rum.0 sIN.. vaz.e mwurm ...a "V...,x..xonexn.ven I=—f aNr r=-f w:�aK`,°";V. 1+rci":mIVVN.ms.sr xis N. uua uLMU WS 101, {Yxu RiW1Y®� LOGO SECTION M/ARRIOTT LETTER SECTION um 1-1VIONI REMOTE .or.oecun REMOTE xm T.swe PR CTND. 20140200.00 DATE I1112/3014 mm NIGHTTIME RENDERING ITHACA MAAAIOTT ra I�ha�q New York RR COOPERCARRY mw"um,,... i n.n..s„a:x.."x.uxo.•:i..,..�mM.N>a ... .. - I M A R R I OTT O CHANNEL LETTERS/LOGO .:+/a•=+o' (1)SET RELLIIIREII-AWNI MMIRE 6INETRLL 108.8 SQMRE EET n"XXN.OHPXXELU9 . - IE.-OIMIOE .B.E MIMEO fMMwS M U99933]a BIPCR SPNN H $,LFBPIIE YGIM�MXIPHONO WMIrt WJMw� MXGwxITF eFMiNX 1."II EEI B.O. IMMOE IT11331 PFalPA11w919 >3wHaECBX.Mc31W1M n.CV.MC D.wwPvlxrL vmnovuuv 11.Pemlt°iEP....NaBE. E . hO.W/ .IR inN9mur POEBM mxn NO 1a DIM Blawat 9O. AMBMIXOM BnTMm 11-.Ia FLEcsIE ',B1ouT`�"ltuucPmuxuvTONEMOTErowEn E I.B.XrtToxw.mE. IIIPLY IN .halt Box BEHIND MOO SaNX IN N R4I.BOX I.M.MS PS REaaIPEO. umaP PEE.. Vll@ IIIIOS IN .DFIU.7O WFEBHOIES IXPLL LOW VOINV E� Mw CW- ANCHORS 6N N-OOPROSNE wa wDW B UE.WELB YEWIPFO UL W6E NWIYO LOGO SECTION nm uwmlwFnOwl MARRIOTT LETTER SECTION IIER w .., REMOTE .—ON. REMOTE NOTro S... H11AELirvo. Z0HUE00.04 DATE 1111212014 Mm NIGHTTIME RENDERING ITHACA MARRIOTT ®! Ithaca,New York COOPERCARRY u z a wz zo u� a� 9 zp oN zz u Cn Ynr 6F F 8' 0a Z U 6 ww CF 00 QNN p I.MY w ittw 0' N C e u 31 — mwnwnnu.w, i t I ' M ONN$f(B 30 y zu I I 1 2 i n U p 8° / z 'B W W p tt0 um1 I V m A N I I I J N p j I 6 II I 4 d C I 8 t G r I I I R I d orm, u I 2 n 4 Srtrt / Om nU xw z I n z wz yC w it q wo n \ WN 3 wo lu SSE UN 1I8" = 1' 0" Ap P.Sharma amhhW APARTMENT BUILDING BmN B'1R11Y 7ltftaSc&Sx� S1L IA'=I'd Y 041 1 ratwmr�t 4Calheioe5lleei , I�aa, NewVok DIE NmW&M RoImrana l @ 1 WPM ff m'. ll071BmM NEW e sluRlo faoz 0 N PAC In affix _ 0WIX I VPWS i " mVNWS PNXI RIB 10 i �fIPM.0 IfmLS T RI (I)IN( VfI➢10.'lIC INUFIUAt W. � ,LJI P P = { - PR[GSIPW FROOR 2e � 4 ��� tGOSO PRfGSI VR CATIONES1REF SOUTH EELEVATON J�atP,Sha�re ash APARTMENT BUILDING "u"m ° "° mxa�roXi� 114CaN4reSS¢e(, Mhaca, NewYOrC lu¢ oc�nmu ma axf 3 , 01 X0V89PWmIW T1 -- .. ... .. 716d -- -- aOCG M1Si WE PC HROOR xRX COlux x AM m Flu 1RN Om P 2NJRWR (—r- a I R PN616aaIf a WaxCMIIUiK --- WTWuz 6 MCP W P F - FEE b OUR �e ma�wP EAST ELMON :x��2 WxP To. '.PaCI P4S4 ";a'i P;NS a i m xNaE WRo PN® 9RDROOR sca �P auhRPNa wRsm n Wax CROP OP lNWAa WaWR 2NOROOR w m Mg INK i � tt W PPiGM I F �I= IFRO U VAG (Rasa[ , WEST ELEVATION JagdP,ShemW acMW APARTMENT BUILDING KID MENSMRo 114CatheOeSireel , kca, New YO DIE h2wrYtdll �6 -rp 31 �2 � mmin N4k',AlP2IMI WE CCIOR.9$All �apmm RM DM64,Nil JAGAT P. SHARMA u A R C H I T E C T December 10, 2014 Lisa Nicholas Senior Planner City of Ithaca Planning Department 108 E. Green Street ARCHITECTURE Ithaca, NY14850 RE: 114 Catherine St, Ithaca, NY Dear Lisa: SPACE PLANNING Transmitted herewith please find one copy each of the following revised documents: Let me know if you want me to bring additional copies at the PB meeting. INTERIOR DESIGN 1. TDMP dated 12/10/14 2. Material color selection 3. SK-1: Outdoor Bike Shelter U R B A N D E S I G N Thank you for your time and help in this matter. Sincerely, 312 East Seneca Street Jagat . Sharma cc: Nick Lambrou Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone (607) 272-9361 Fax (607) 272-0505 Web www.sharma-arch.com Email info@sharma-arch.com December 10, 2014 City of Ithaca Planning & Development 108 E. Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 RE: 114 Catherine Street Traffic Demand Management Plan Members of the Planning & Development Board: Please review the following Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP) for 114 Catherine Street. This plan has been developed to seek relief from a parking deficiency of 10 spaces as a result of the proposed new building occupying the parking lot on the project site. The following is information regarding occupancy of the new building at 114 Catherine St plus the existing building. Project Description: The existing lot contains a 3 story apartment building consisting of (3) 3BR and (2) 2BR units with a total occupancy of 13. Off-street parking is provided in the front yard as well as in the rear yard. The proposal consists of adding a new three story addition/building located at the existing parking area in the front yard. The addition will contain (1) 5BR at the first floor and (1) 6BR unit each at the second and the third floors. Total occupancy, existing + new: 13 + 17 = 30. Off-Street parking: existing parking spaces 13 (7 + 6) Required existing building 6 spaces Required new building 11 spaces Total required 17 spaces Provided 7 spaces Deficiency 10 spaces Under the new zoning for CR-4, parking spaces are not required for buildings that comply fully with the New York State Building Code or Residential Code for new construction provided a transportation demand management plan is accepted by the Planning and Development Board during site plan review. aA R C x I r E�T 312 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone:(607)-272-9361 FAX:(607)-272-0505 Mitigation measures in response to City's TDMP Guidelines: The new project will have a parking deficiency of 10 spaces. Several measures are proposed to mitigate the demand for parking spaces. First, the new building at 114 Catherine Street will comply fully with the New York State Building Code. Parking Management Best Practices recommends reducing parking requirements based on proximity to a variety of best practices shown to reduce parking demand. As outlined below the reduction of parking spaces for this project equals 16 spaces. 1. Transportation impacts of the project. The proposed apartments on 114 Catherine Street in Collegetown requires mitigation measures for the removal of parking and the potential removal of stairs that connect to adjacent sites. Due to Applicant's (Nick Lambrou) current related ownership of several adjacent properties, the mitigation proposed is within the project site itself: it essentially serves as a larger through-block pedestrian way system for Applicant's tenants that connect Eddy Street to College Avenue via Catherine Street. Another existing pedestrian system has a second through-block connection that runs North-South, connecting to Dryden Road. The owner intends to retain this pedestrian connectivity for his tenants and for any of his tenants in related adjacent properties. However, in the following events (but not limited to only these events), as of right, the applicant reserves the right to restrict or to deny pedestrian access through applicant's properties: a. Future development or reconfiguration of the site. b. Sale or transfer of one or more buildings. c. If the traffic thru the site becomes noisy and creates loitering, trash or disturbance to my tenants. High walkability reduces the demand for parking spaces by 5%. Reduction 1 space. 2. Transportation alternatives available to residents. Numerous transportation alternatives are available for residents in the Collegetown Area. The project is located in the heart of Collegetown. As such, walking is extremely viable transportation option. When travel for further distances is required, residents will have access to the TCAT bus system running along College Avenue just a short distance away. The residents will have easy pedestrian access both to Eddy Street and to College Avenue. Both indoor storage and outdoor covered parking facility is provided for bicycles. Also, Catherine St has no municipal street parking available, so discouragement of potential tenants who own a car already exists and now may be slightly amplified. Additionally, Carshare already exists on Eddy St and College Avenue. A w C H I T r 312 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 Ph one:(607)-272-9361 FAX:(60 272 05 05 Reduction for project location within quarter-mile of frequent bus service = 10% = 1.7 spaces Reduction for Residential Density: 1% per resident per acre resulting in a 60% reduction based on the Collegetown District's average density of 59.7 residents per acre. = 10.2 spaces. 3. Number and location of any off-street parking spaces. Seven spaces are provided on the property. Additional parking is available for lease at the adjoining parking lot with more than 50 spaces under related ownership. Parking is also available for lease at other properties in the immediate area. It should be noted that the monthly rent for the apartments does not include parking space. Parking spaces are separately leased and the rates for parking spaces vary with the size of the automobile. Reduction of parking space requirements based on pricing parking = 10- 30% Unbundling cost of parking from residential rental units = 10-30% At 10% for each of these categories reduction is 1.7 + 1.7 spaces = 3 spaces. 4. Number and Location of any bicycle parking spaces and bicycle storage. Indoor storage will be provided for 6 bikes in the existing building. In addition, covered bicycle parking facility is provided for three bike racks near the entrance. The bike racks will be inverted U-shaped, each three feet tall and two feet wide spaced 30 inches on center. 5. Number and location of any loading and delivery spaces. Existing parking area and drive will be used for loading at the turnover times. Tenant's arrival time will be by appointment only avoiding crowding. The building will be fully furnished at the project completion time which will eliminate the need for large deliveries. 6. Availability of sufficient handicapped parking in the area that is located on an accessible route to the project. One handicapped parking space is provided in the rear parking lot. 7. Steps that will be taken to encourage use of alternate modes of transportation (other than single-occupancy vehicles). The project is located within walking distance from College Avenue which is on TCAT's bus route. A new project on College Avenue at the intersection of Catherine Street and College Avenue will include a TCAT bus stop. Additionally, Carshare location exists Eddy Street nearby to the proposed project. t AR x7r'E` 1 312 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone:(607)-272-9361 FAX:(607)-272-0 8. If residential, management of move in and move out of residents. Management will assign tenants specific move-in times. The apartments will be fully furnished reducing the move in time. Existing parking area and the drive will be used for the loading and unloading during move in / move out periods. 9. Site Improvements: a. Proposed new building will replace existing parking lot along the street and in so doing will add to the overall residential character of the neighborhood. The new building fagade is designed in compliance with the new CR-4 zone. A recessed entry and a porch are incorporated in the fagade. b. Existing fence will be removed and existing steps on the 114 Catherine St property will be repaired or reconstructed to facilitate pedestrian movement primarily for applicant's tenants and between applicant's adjoining properties. This will add and reinforce the pedestrian connectivity which currently exists between different properties connecting Eddy Street to the Collegetown Center and then to Dryden Road. c. Trees will be added in front of the adjoining building also owned in part by the applicant. I greatly appreciate your careful attention to this matter and your consideration of this TDMP and other materials in support of the Site Plan Review for the new project at 114 Catherine Street. Please contact me if you have any questions. This TDMP is submitted on behalf of the applicant Nick Lambrou. Respectfully submitted 4Jagatl Sharma cc: Nick Lambrou A R C x I 1 E r 312 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone:(607)-272-9361 FAX:(607)-272-0505 FPO Of Moo mom go ROOF SHINGLE A( GRILL STUCCO MY HARDIE PANEL P 11Ypt"1♦��NAn .o YYf��i'41 1 WINDOWMAMES PRECMTCONCRETE BRICK APARTMENT BUILDING MATHIA1. WK5 DAT WOO 20,1014 HEDDmEB9,1014 %" PLYWOOD ROOF DECKING 2"x8" @ 16" OC ° (2) 2"x10" pI 2„x8t, 16 " OC L U 1 (2) 2"x10" 1"x4" I � I � 4"x4" POST EXISTING CONC. PAVING 8" CO CONC. COL �� 6'-0" i i I I I I ELEVATION 1 ELEVATION 2 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I 21 I I 4"x4'[ POST I I I I I I I I U I BIKE RACKS I I (EXISTING CONC. PAVING) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -u 10'-0" L- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I PLAN Jagat R. Sharma _ _ _ _ Architect APAR I MEN I BUILD TITLE: BIKE SHELTER DWG.N0. 312 East Seneca Street SCALE: 3�8°=1'_0" Ithaca,New York14850 114 Catherine StreetSK1 Phone:(607)-272-9361 Ithaca,, New York DATE: DECEMBER 9, 2014 PROPOSED RESOLUTION Site Plan Review Approval of TDMP City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board 114 Catherine St. December 16,2014 WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Review for an apartment project proposed by Jagat Sharma for owner Nick Lambrou, and WHEREAS: applicant proposes to construct a 3-story apartment building, with a footprint of 1,974 SF and containing one 5-bedroom and two 6-bedroom units. The project site contains an existing apartment building and a 13-space parking lot with 7 spaces in the back yard (to remain) and 6 spaces in the front yard (to be replaced by the new building). The project also includes removal of one curb- cut. The project received Design Review, and WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act for which the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in Environmental Review made a negative determination of environmental significance on November 25,2014, and WHEREAS: the applicant is proposing seven parking spaces on the project site. Total occupancy on the project site will be 30 residents with a parking requirement of 17 spaces, and WHEREAS: in accordance with district regulations in the CR-4 Zoning District the applicant will achieve full compliance with the NYS Building Code or Residential Code for new construction and a Transportation Demand Management Plan(TDMP) approved by the Planning Board, and WHEREAS: the Board has on December 16, 2014 reviewed and accepted as adequate a Transportation Demand Management Plan(TDMP)titled and dated: "FINAL 3- Story Apartment Building 114 Catherine Street Traffic Demand Management Plan As amended by the Planning and Development Board on December 16, 2014" now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby approve the aforementioned TDMP for the apartment project on 114 Catherine Street. Moved by: Seconded by: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0 PROPOSED RESOLUTION Site Plan Review Final Site Plan Approval 114 Catherine St. Apartments City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board December 16,2014 WHEREAS: an application has been submitted for review and approval by the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board for an apartment building to be located at 114 Catherine Street in the City of Ithaca, from Jagat Sharma, applicant for Nick Lambrou, owner, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to construct a 3-story apartment building, with a footprint of 1,974 SF and containing one 5-bedroom and two 6-bedroom units. The project site contains an existing apartment building and a 13-space parking lot with 7 spaces in the back yard (to remain) and 6 spaces in the front yard (to be replaced by the new building). The project also includes removal of one curb-cut. The project is in the CR-4 Zoning District, which requires either: (1) off- street parking in accordance with §325-45.5 F; or(2) full compliance with the NYS Building Code or Residential Code for new construction and a Transportation Management Plan (TDMP) approved by the Planning Board. The project received Design Review, and WHEREAS: this an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and is subject to environmental review,and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on October 28, 2014 declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review, and WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 B. (4) and 176-12 A. (2) (c) of the City of Ithaca Code, and WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on November 25,2014, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, did on November 25, 2014 review and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3, prepared by Planning staff, and the following drawings: "Rendering-Catherine Street (R.01)," "Location Plan, Site Photos, Survey (1.01)," "'Demo Plan, Disturbance Plan, Utility Plan (1.02)," "Parking Plan, Project Data, Site Plan, Details (1.03)" (version with plantings labeled and "Planting List" added), "First Floor Plan, Typical Floor Plan (2.01)," "South Elevation (3.01)," and "East and West Elevations (3.02),"with a latest revision date of 11/4/14; "Site Plan (1.03A)," dated 11/17/14; and"Materials Samples,"dated 11/20/14; and all prepared by Jagat P. Sharma; and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, did on November 25,2014 make a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board did on November 25, 2014 review a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDMP), prepared by Jagat P. Sharma and dated 11/24/14, and agreed in principle on a strengthened TDMP to be formally approved on 12/16/14, and, WHEREAS: the Planning Board did on November 25, 2014 grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the project, subject to the following conditions: i. Written approval from the Fire Department, and ii. Submission of a revised site plan indicating restoration of curb, and repair of sidewalk to original condition, if damaged during construction, and iii. Submission of revised elevations noting integrally-tinted colored concrete foundation, and of revised "Material Samples"sheet, adding sample of aforementioned tinted concrete foundation, and iv. Submission of project details, including building materials, lighting,paving, signage, stairs,railing, etc., and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, did on December 16, 2014 review and accept as adequate: revised drawings titled "Site Plan(1.04A),""South Elevation(3.01),"and"East and West Elevations (3.02),"with a latest revision date of 12/4/14; and a revised Transportation Demand Management Plan(TDMP), dated 12/1/14,prepared by Jagat P. Sharma, and WHEREAS: the Board determines that conditions i., ii., and iii. have been satisfied, and that condition iv. has been partially satisfied, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the Planning Board does hereby grant Final Site Plan Approval for the project, subject to the following conditions: i. Submission to Planning staff of updated materials sheet, and ii. Submission of project details, including building materials, lighting,paving, signage, stairs,railing and covered bike storage, and Moved by: Seconded by: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0 From: Jeanne Grace Sent: Wednesday, December 10, 2014 8:24 AM To: Lisa Nicholas Subject: [Wegmans SPR] Utility conflicts: There are two existing maples on the West side of the site. Appears they will be in conflict with the proposed UGE line. They will probably need to be removed to install the line. Perhaps the line could hug closer to the building and the tree could remain. South side of project has some storm sewer hook up points. They appear to be in the formally paved area so should not impact the existing trees. Maybe some could verify that for us. The UGT line enters the property in the NW corner. Appears to be running down the current Wegmans service road. Will the line be new or does that already run down the road and the only new portion will be within the new deveoplment. If it needs to be run down the entire service road, all the existing trees on that road will be impacted. Many are in very poor condition already. Tree replacements (and soil improvements) should be considered. Plant list: Viburnum trilobum is highly susceptible to Viburnum leaf beetle which kills the plant in 1-2 yrs. Should be switched to a different species. Viburnum juddi, also in the plant list, is resistant to Viburnum leaf beetle. Planting Specs: For filling the tree island in the parking lot, the planting specs state "backfill with approved planting mix, see specifications or landscape notes". The only language I found there relating to soil/fill is #14 which directs 4" of top soil or 6" on berms. What is the approved spec for backfill? The planting island will have approx 1000 cu ft of soil (actually less because I figured for a rectangle 35x10x3 and actual islands are round and mounded). The spec we are proposing require min 720cu ft for 1 large tree. This project is proposing 2 large trees in 1000cu ft. The detail for "typical tree planting island in a parking lot with Struc soil" in the appendix of our proposed revisions show how increased soil volume could be achieved. Also included in that detail is a drain pipe to storm sewer. Which would be a good thing to recommend too. Wegmans has replaced other islands in their current parking lot and I noticed that when excavated the planting islands were full of water, so providing a drain would alleviate that problem for the new islands. Without drainage the planting island can be saturated with water after a storm/flooding event which drowns the tree roots. These specs are not official yet so I don't know how much you feel the city can hold the developer to at this point, but it would be a great opportunity to start improving parking lot plantings. Jeanne Jeanne Grace City Forester City of Ithaca Department of Public Works Division of Parks and Forestry PROPOSED RESOLUTION Site Plan Review CEQR 500 S.Meadow St. Wegmans 15,700-SF Retail Building City of Ithaca Planning&Development Board December 16,2014 WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Approval for a retail building, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to construct a 15,700-SF retail building. The project site is a 17.7-acre parcel that contains an existing 115,000-SF retail building (Wegmans), associated parking, and an access road from Meadow Street. The new building will be located on an existing 201-space parking area. Project development will include parking for 77 cars, internal sidewalks, crosswalk striping, lighting, and landscaping. The project is in the SW-2 Zoning District, and WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: State Law specifies that, for actions governed by local environmental review, the Lead Agency shall be that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, and WHEREAS the Planning Board, being the local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on October 28, 2014 declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review of the project, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, and WHEREAS: in a letter dated 10/28/14 from Ed Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning to Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner, Marx states: "To facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian travel from the sidewalk on South Meadow Street to the Wegman's supermarket site, we recommend the City require that the landscaping proposed to the south of the parking lot and north to the existing tree lawn be replaced by a sidewalk connecting the currently proposed sidewalk heading west,"and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, in agreement with the Commissioner's recommendations, requested that the applicant provide such a sidewalk, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, did on December 16, 2014 review and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 2 prepared by Planning staff, plans entitled "Topographic Survey for Wegmans Food Market, 500 South Meadow Street (Sheets 1 and 2)," prepared by C.T. Male Associates, P.0 and dated 8/25/11; "Overall Master Site Plan (C-1)," "Demolition Plan (C-2)," "Site Plan (C-3)," "Utility Plan (C-4)," "Grading and Erosion Control Plan(C-5)," "Landscape Plan(C-6)," "Lighting Plan (C-7)," "Construction Phasing Plan(C-8)," and"Construction Details 1-5 (CD-1, CD-2, CD- 3, CD-4, & CD-5)," dated 2/1/14 and all prepared by T.Y. LIN International; and other application materials, now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board determines the proposed project will result in no significant impact on the environment and a Negative Declaration for purposes of Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law be filed in accordance with the provisions of Part 617 of the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Moved by: Seconded by: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0 PROPOSED RESOLUTION Site Plan Review Preliminary&Final Approval 500 S.Meadow St. Wegmans 15,700-SF Retail Building City of Ithaca Planning&Development Board December 16,2014 WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has one pending application for Site Plan Approval for a retail building, and WHEREAS: the applicant proposes to construct a 15,700-SF retail building. The project site is a 17.7-acre parcel that contains an existing 115,000-SF retail building (Wegmans), associated parking, and an access road from Meadow Street. The new building will be located on an existing 201-space parking area. Project development will include parking for 77 cars, internal sidewalks, crosswalk striping, lighting, and landscaping. The project is in the SW-2 Zoning District, and WHEREAS: this is an Unlisted Action under the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review Ordinance and the State Environmental Quality Review Act, and is subject to environmental review, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, being that local agency which has primary responsibility for approving and funding or carrying out the action, did on October 28, 2014 declare itself Lead Agency for the environmental review, and WHEREAS: legal notice was published and property posted in accordance with Chapters 276-6 B. (4) and 176- 12 A. (2)(c)of the City of Ithaca Code, and WHEREAS: the Planning and Development Board held the required Public Hearing on October 28, 2014, and WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council, Tompkins County Planning Department, and other interested parties have been given the opportunity to comment on the proposed project and any received comments have been considered, and WHEREAS: in a letter dated 10/28/14 from Ed Marx, Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning to Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner, Marx states: "To facilitate safe and convenient pedestrian travel from the sidewalk on South Meadow Street to the Wegman's supermarket site, we recommend the City require that the landscaping proposed to the south of the parking lot and north to the existing tree lawn be replaced by a sidewalk connecting the currently proposed sidewalk heading west,"and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, in agreement with the Commissioner's recommendations, requested that the applicant provide such a sidewalk, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, did on December 16, 2014 review and accept as adequate: a Full Environmental Assessment Form (FEAF), Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 2 prepared by Planning staff, plans entitled "Topographic Survey for Wegmans Food Market, 500 South Meadow Street(Sheets 1 and 2),"prepared by C.T. Male Associates,P.0 and dated 8/25/11; "Overall Master Site Plan (C-1)," "Demolition Plan (C-2)," "Site Plan (C-3)," "Utility Plan (C-4)," "Grading and Erosion Control Plan (C-5)," "Landscape Plan (C-6)," "Lighting Plan (C-7)," "Construction Phasing Plan (C-8)," and "Construction Details 1-5 (CD-1, CD-2, CD-3, CD-4, & CD-5)," dated 2/1/14 and all prepared by T.Y. LIN International; and other application materials, and WHEREAS: the Planning Board did on December 16, 2014 make a Negative Determination of Environmental Significance,now, therefore, be it RESOLVED: that the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board does hereby grant Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval to the project, subject to the following conditions: i. Submission of a revised landscape plan with tree protection and soil remediation specifications in accordance with recommendations of the City Forester, and ii. Submission of revised elevations and materials board replacing EIFS with fiber cement lap siding, and iii. Submission of revised site plan showing continuous sidewalk crossing curb-cut on access road, and iv. Applicant to investigate adding an entrance at or near the southwest corner of the building, and V. Installation of inverted U bike racks to be verified before Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Moved by: Seconded by: In Favor: Against: Abstain: Absent: Vacancies: 0 Chainworks District Scope Schedule as of l 2-9-14 SCOPE TIMELINE December 9, 2014 - Work session of P&DB to discuss scoping document(6 pm) December 16, 2014—Revised Scope due to staff December 18, 2014—Work session with staff/consultant/project team 10 am December 22, 2014—Recirculation of revised Draft Scope to distribution list January 5, 2015 —Comments on revised Scope due to Lisa January 6, 2015—Comments on revised Scope distributed to LA January 13, 2015 - Issuance of Final Scope by P&DB City of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals Worksheet Appeal Number BZA-2967 Address 114 Heights Court Use District R-U Date 1/6/2015 Applicant Zurenda&Hoppenrath Owner Top Cat Biker,LLC Application Type: Area Variance Cohimn 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14/15 16 Number Accessory Off-Street Off-Street Lot Area Lot Width Number of Height in %of Lot Other Side Rear yard: %of depth Minimum Column Title Use Frout Yard Sidc Yard or number of feet, Building Use Parking Loading (Sq.Feet) (Feet) Stories Peet Coverage Yard whichever is less Height Existing Single Condition Family w/3 3 5009.4 50.13' 3 27' 19.50% 17' 18.6' 4.5' 27%or 36' and Use Unrelated District Multiple Regulations 2 10,000 75' 4 40 30% 25 10 10 25%or 50',but not None for Existing Zone less than 20' Note Non- Conforming OK OK Def. Def. OK OK OK Def. OK Def. OK Conditions Proposed Single Condition Family w/5 3 5009.4 50.13' 3 27' 19.50% 17' 18.6' 4.5' 27%or 36' and/or Use Unrelated District Multiple 25%or 50',but not Regulation 2 10,000 75' 4 40 30% � Zone 25 10 10 None for Proposed less than 20' Note Non- conforming Conditions OK N/A OK N/A Def. Def. OK OK OK Def. OK Def OK For Proposal Notes: CITY OF ITHACA BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS APPEAL ' , i iq BUILDING PERMIT # APPEAL NO. HEARING DATE RECEIPT APPLICATION FOR: 1 . Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: ( ) An Appeal of an action, decision or interpretation of the Zoning Enforcement Officer ( ,) A Special Permit under the Zoning Ordinance ( l An Area Variance from the Zoning Ordinance ( ) A Use Variance from the Zoning Ordinance 2 . Appellant: pen ro-+k (Name of appellant) t,oA e" WAq 41aLx NI 14<9 5z) (Addresg of Appellant) (City) (St te) (Zip Code) (Telephone # of appellant) (Fax # of appellant - optional) 3 . Location of Property l t+ Hoiih-fs W � (Number & Street) (Use District on Zoning Map) Property Owner 'l (Name of Owner) (Address of Owner) (City) (Stake) (Zip Code) 4 . Provision (s) of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate the article, section, subsection and paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance being appealed, by number. Do not quote the ordinance . ) AV BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS O 1 201111 � Page 2 5 . Previous Appeal : A previous appeal ( )has ( . ) has not been made with respect to this proposal and was (were) made in Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal No. dated 19 6 . Reason for Appeal : Attach sheets that describe the interpretation that is claimed, or the use for which a special permit is sought, or the details of the variance or exception applied for and the grounds for which it is claimed that the variance should be granted, as the case may be. You should describe fully the use contemplated, and the physical characteristics of the property as they relate to zoning issues, giving figures for numbers of tenants, employees, users, and off-street parking spaces, as required. A dimensioned plot plan clearly illustrating the location and outlines of all buildings on the property, and lot lines is required, as well as elevation drawings for new construction may be required. Unless these drawings and/or plans are on 8-1/2" x 11" sheets, suitable for reproduction, you will need to provide 8 sets of the drawings . Please refer to the information sheets and the Zoning Ordinance which describe the factual information required for each type of appeal for evidence to be presented as well as the Zoning Ordinance and attach your facts as exhibits to this application. BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS;' li II Page 3 Appea=l No.. �. I certify that the information submitted with the appeal is true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I have read, and am familiar with those sections of the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance that apply to this appeal, (including Section 325-40, which describes the powers and duties of the Board of Zoning Appeals) . I also acknowledge that the Board of Zoning Appeals may visit the property and specifically permit such visits . Signature of Appellant* Sworn to this % day of Eliargeret Head /1 ✓ d (Votary Public,State of New York 2 0 No.01 HE6157733 G Qualified rn Tioga County IVIy Commission expires 01-22-20i57 Y —otary Public * Appellant must be the owner of the property, unless an Owner's Authorization form designating an authorized representative is filed with the appeal. PLEASE SUBMIT ORIGINAL APPLICATION TO: City of Ithaca Building Department Phone: (607) 274-6508 108 E. Green St. Fax: (607) 274-6521 Ithaca, NY 14850 use Application of SEAR determination: Type 1 Type 2 Unlisted Environmental Assessment form used: Short Environmental Assessment Form Long Environmental Form Lead Agency Determination of Significance Building Permit Application # (if any) Date Received Date 1st Hearing Dates Subsequent Hearings Zoning District Revised 6/99 NOV November 1 8,2014 GP Zurenda, Jr and Terri Hoppenrath are the owners of 114 Heights Court. This is a six bedroom single-family home in the RU zoning district. Originally,this property was in the R-2a zoning district, which restricts unrelated occupancy to no more than three individuals. Zoning in the RU zone does not restrict the number of unrelated occupants. However, our property at 114 Heights Court is deficient in lot size. The lot is 5010sf. The RU zone requires a lot that is 10,000sf in size for a single-family home. When a property is deficient in lot size, a zoning variance is needed to increase the number of occupants. This means we need a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals before we can increase the occupancy at 114 Heights Court from three (3)individuals to five (5)individuals. The house is equipped with working smoke detectors and has a fire escape off the second and third floor back bedroom. This was painted in 2012 to control rust. Thank you. i December 8, 2014 Deal Neighbor, We are the owners of 114 Heights Court. This is a six bedroom single-family home in the RU zoning district. Originally,this property was in the R-2a zoning district, which restricts unrelated occupancy to no more than three individuals. Zoning in the RU zone does not restrict the number of unrelated occupants. Therefore, we would like to make better use of the property by renting the house to five individuals instead of three. However, our property at 114 Heights Court is deficient in lot size. The lot is 5010sf. The RU zone requires a lot that is 10,000sf in size for a single-family home. When a property is deficient in lot size, a zoning variance is needed to increase the number of occupants. This means we need a variance from the Board of Zoning Appeals before we can increase the occupancy at 114 Heights Court from three individuals to five individuals. Thank you, GP Zurenda, Jr. and Terri Hoppenrath �'b �i, CITY O IIIIACA SPI®][�T ENYI]l�®I�II�IEI�TAI1 ASSESSM-ENTFORM-(S A +) �` r 1 M1 Pfloiect Inforrmation (to be completed by applicant or project sponsor) I'V61 1. Applicant/Sponsor: 2. Project Name: GP ?mot ay)M J r. Mi-i 3. Project Location: 4. Is Proposed Action: ® New ® Expansion Modification/Alteration 5. Describe project briefly: 6. Precise Location(road intersections,prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map): 1 (4 k h-15 7. Amount of Land Affected: Initially: 5.0kQ Acres or Sq. Ft. Ultimately:010 Acres or Sq. Ft. 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? ® Yes allo If no, describe briefly: 9. What is present land use in vicinity of project: )d Residential ® Industrial ® Agricultural ® Parkland/Open Space ® Commercial ® Other Describe: 10. Does action involve a permit/approval or funding, now or ultimately, from governmental agency (federal/state/local): ® Yes A No If yes, list agency name and permit/approval type: 11. Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? A Yes 11 No If yes, list agency name and permit/approval type: 12. As a result of proposed action, will existing permit/approval require modification? ® Yes M No I certify the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. �i�L�a Lit t PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: I� DATE: (� PREPARER'S TITLE: kk" REPRESENTING:`&o a 6 LC SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORD Part II To Be Completed By Staff In order to answer the questions in this Short Environmental Assessment Form(SEAF),the_preparer is-to-use- -- currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. Yes No 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter ❑ x more than one acre of land? 2. Will there be a change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site or to any ❑ X site designated a unique natural area or critical environmental area by a local or state agency? 3. Will the project alter or have any effect on an existing waterway? ❑ x 4. Will the project have an impact on groundwater quality? ❑ x 5. Will the project affect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ❑ X 6. Will the project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ❑ x 7. Will the project result in an adverse effect on air quality? ❑ x 8. Will the project have an effect on visual character of the community or scenic views ❑ x or vistas known to be important to the community: 9. Will the project adversely impact any site or structure of historic,pre-historic, or ❑ x paleontological importance or any site designated a local landmark or in a landmark district? 10. Will the project have an effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ❑ X 11. Will the project result in traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing ❑ X transportation systems? 12. Will the project cause objectionable odors,noise, glare,vibration, or electrical ❑ X disturbance as a result of the project's operation during construction:or after completion? 13. Will the project have any impact on public health or safety? ❑ x 14. Will the project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in ❑ X permanent populations of more than 5 percent over a one-year period OR have a negative effect on the character of the community or neighborhood? 15. Is there public controversy concerning the project? ❑ X If any question has been answered YES,a completed Full Environmental Assessment Form(FEAF) is necessary. PREPARER'S SIGNA RE: ` ---- _ D TE: PREPARER'S TITLE: REPRESENTING: City of thac hoar Of " - L j:\bza forms\seaf part ii.doe S 'I j I NOV 2 �20 4 Closet _ 2nd floor front bedroom 2nd floor middle bedroom 13'10"x 12'10" 17'3"x 10'3" Closet Hall closet Hallway Closet Hallway { Tub 2nd floor back bedroom 1116"x 101,51, - - - JW. Stairway to 3rd floor Stairway Landing Toilet Fire Flre 3rd floor front bedroom FT,. gave 1o'x13' 3rd floor middle bedroom 12'9"x 9i2" 3rd floor back bedroom 918"x 13'5" 1 z 0 f. � � r a. ,e Half bath 3rd floor landing Stairway A _ A I r ( t I _ � PIPE PIPE r I KIMBALL et al GRAVEL 'INSTRUMENT NO. 539866-065 j II 1 PARKING I I I ZETA CHAPTER OF I ' �� I� R LPARMG I f►LPHA GA>�[A RHO. INC. I� 0 j t 1 L.208/P.539 5" SQ. STO -------- r i PIPE FOUND NE .II(ONUIL�NT -J ! 0.5' NORTH _-__- OF LINE, 4.7' r-PIPE WEST OF CORNER I rPIN I .. S 83.57_23" E ` �. .. � _..._ PIPE AREA (50 �y' 83 57 23 2" SQ. METAL POST ') ` " E _y AT CORNER rl 0.115 ACRES, 5'a - _ 0� (50') —- — --�___ PIN 'L'O�DATPON � I I j W GRAVEL I CHAIN AIFENCELINK it 1��-. PARKING WOODEN STOCKADE o�1 ne- Ii GRAVEL FENCE. I A 11 o I PARKING J AREA t 0.115 ACRES ^� w o I o I 4.1- Foam PORCH : co I r u h •'. 9.8' GARNET K.L. CHAN I \ it 2 I INSTRUMENT NO. 472336-004 I I I 130 JS STORY 2.5' '� I t E N0. 114 rs o N0 2 STORY HO * LOT 507 1 . 116 & 11 f GARAGE d GE 1 KIMBALL at al !8.2' 1 13 S -Ito.- , INSTRUMENT N0. 539866-005 � PORCH 8.0''''' 2,7• 'WOOD ' FENCE ' LOT 504 �� a POST i y I CONC. FXT� IF O PORCH NG WA TAX MAP NO. �� I PO N LINE 8.-4-8 � Co dV. I o O —S ET L ' LOT 505 (50' I FUNC. 50. ) a TAX MAP N0. _9.T O 1 WALK �r: 13'�'=` (5O') 8.-4-5 CURB ' • .. 91'15 W 50.12' LOT 506 P P I,E EAt.S ALONG $ T v,► 'Q ?r 84'11'lb jp ` ` PIPE ' OF FAGfN,AND Z °' °• . STII PIPE V ► .. r y _ ► CONC A,iI,K _-�-- _ 'fie CURB �' I�T H°rS 'COURT CURB .T q'}r 'v-. '.+COXC. 1f.41,ICv . C o G� ! • . URB a SURVEY MAP FNJ LANDS OF N JANET KEARNS, JOHN R: LAWRENCE & MARY RIDGWAY TINKER CITY OF ITHACA N COUNTY OF TOMPKINS STATE. OF NEW YORK TAX MAP NOS. 8.-4-5 & 8.-4-6 PORTION OF REFERENCE DEED: INSTRUMENT NO. 522291-003 (PARCEL I & H) * REFERENCE MAP: 0' -20' 40' 60' "A-PORTION OF THE WYCKOFF ESTATE ..." MADE BY CARL CRANDALL, C.E.,DATED APRIL, 1912 �� FIND IN Me BOOK B-4, P.7. LEGEND: GRAPHIC SCALE REAGAN LAND SURVEYING NOTE: Any-revisions.to, this map must comply 'with section 7209, Subdivision 2 of • EXISTING IRON MONUMENT AS SHOWN P.O. Bo: 1124 the New York State-Education Law. All certifications hereon are valid for this mal Dryden, New York 13053 and copies thereof only if said map or copies bear the embossed seal of the SQUARE MONUMENT AS NOTED Phone/Fax (607) 844-8837 licensed land surveyor whose signature appears,hereon. This map is-not valid O . SET 3/4" REBAR AND SURVEY CAP when used in conjunction with a "Survey Affidavit" or''Certificate of.No=Change". jf UTILITY POLE snawpged 4/2012 Bryan A P. scale: 1"=20' Job No.:'12-039 ,.�ua�ruav�o.. Qa �" . 112-0, REPUTED OWNER I hereby certify to: CFCU COMMUNITY CREDIT UNION, ITS PRINCIPALS,.SUCCESSORS AND OR �° y '�9 ASSIGNS; STEWART TITLE INSURANCE-COMPANY;. BARNEY,,GROSSMAN, .DUBOW, a�° � AQ� �V. (....) RECORD DISTANCE MARCKEARNUS; OHN R' LLP; TOP LAYRtENCE;CADANS, THELSEN MARY MAY 3eMILLE IDGWAY TINKER;- JANET I. �'' -{g.', 0/H OVERHEAD UTILITIES that I am a licensed land surveyor, New York State License No. '049892'and'that this map correctly delineates an actual survey on the ground made ,by me or under• may direct 111 , FENCE supervision, that it was prepared in accordance with the current code of.practice.-for land "' ;'title surveys adopted by the New York State Association of Professional Land Surveyors; and �� / o that I found no ible encroachments eith r way across property lines except-as shown e q hereon Signe bated.: APRIL 3, 2012 -. OF .I�4{�� no°: "Copyright 2012: All Rights Rese , Re an La Surveying" R c,4 o�" City of Ithaca Board of Zoning Appeals Worksheet Appeal Number BZA-2968 Address 424 Dryden Road „ Use District CR-2 Date 1/6/2015 Applicant Daniel Hirtler Owner William and Angie Chen Application Type: Area Variance CNinnharolumn 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14/15 16 Accessory Off-Street Off-Street Lot Area Lot Width Number of Hci ht in %of Lot Rear yard: %of depth Minimum Column Title Use g Front Yard Other Front Use Parking Loading (Sq.Feet) (Feet) Stories Feet Coverage yard Side Yard or number of feet, Building Existing whichever is Iess Hei ht Multiple Condition 6 10933.6' 64.45' 3 28' 14.3% 21' 4.3' 19.8' 67%or 95' and Use Dwelling One and District Two None o 20%or 20', 20'/2 Required Regulations 6 4000 45 3 35 35/0 5 10 10 for Existing Family Zone whichever is less Stories Note Non- Not Conforming Permitted OK OK OK OK OK OK Def. OK OK Conditions Proposed Multiple Condition Dwelling 6 **6770 64.45' 3 28' 23.2% 21' 4.3' 19.8' 29% or 31' and/or Use District One and Regulation Two 6 None 4000 45 3 35 35/o o 10 10 5 20% or 20', 20'/2 for Proposed Family Required whichever is less Stories Zone Note Non- Conforming *Not N/A OK N/A OK OK OK OK OK OK Def. OK OK Conditions Permitted for Proposal NOTES: * Grandfathered use as multiple dwelling. **Lot area of the proposed sub-division IPA EA 6 BUILDING PERMIT# " _ APPEAL NO. HEARING DATE RECEIPT # l; ' APPLICATION FOR: I . Type of Appeal . Appeal is made herewith for: { ) An Appeal of an action, decision or interpretation of the Zoning Enforcement Officer { ) A Special Permit under the Zoning Ordinance { % ) An Area Variance from the Zoning Ordinance { } A Use Variance from-the Zoning Ordinance 2 . Appellant: 13aniel R..Hirtler (Name of appellant) 327 South Geneva Street Ithaca NY 14850 (Address of Appellant) (City) (State) (Zip Code) 607-275-1000 t10 fay;lu'n'cer (Telephone # of appellant) (Fax # of appellant optional) 3 . Location of Property 424 Dryden Road CR-2 I (Number & Street) (Use District on Zoning Dlap) 1 i Property Owner William and A:nvie Chen (Name of Owner) 10'Highgate Circle Ithaca NY 14950 (Address of Owner) (City) (State) (Zip Code) 4 . Provision (s) of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate the article, section, subsection and paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance being appealed, by number. Do not quote the ordinance. ) 325-8 Column 11,Front`_tardy CR-2 i i i i I i I I BOARD OF 2_ 3ON LNG APPEALS Page 2 Appeal No . S . Previous Appeal : A previous appeal ( )has- { a )has not been made with respect to this proposal and was (were) made in Appeal No. dated 19 -- Appeal No. dated _ 19 _ Appeal No. dated 19 NOV201 Appeal No. dated 19 t 6 . Reason for Appeal.: Attach sheets that describe the interpretation that is claimed, or the use for �.vhich a special permit is sought, or the details of the variance or exception applied for and the grounds for which it is claimed that the variance should be granted, as the case may be. You should describe fully the use contemplated, and the physical characteristics of the property as they relate to zoning issues, giving figures for numbers of tenants, employees, users, and off-street parking spaces, as required. A dimensioned plot plan clearly illustrating the location and outlines of all buildings on the property, and lot lines is required, as well as elevation drawings for new construction may be required. , Unless these drawings and/or plans are on 8-1/2" x 11"sheets, suitable for reproduction, you will need to provide 8 sets of the drawings. Please refer to the information sheets and the Zoning Ordinance which describe the factual information required for each type of appeal for evidence to be presented as well as the Zoning Ordinance and attach your facts as exhibits to this application. i i I I I I BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 3 - (_IV 18 �i��'�� Appeal No. oZj'(5 I certify that the information- subin tted''w th--Lhe appeal is true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that I have read, and am familiar with those sections of the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance that apply to this appeal, (including Section 325-40, which describes the powers and duties of the Board of Zoning Appeals) . I also acknowledge that the Board of Zoning Appeals may visit the property and specifically permit such visits . Signa ure of ppellant* Sworn to this day of ELLY AYN KENO Nt�V�yu�G, 0 NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. ied In Tompkins n C Qualified in Tompk(ns County ,O ar Public MY Commission Expires March 24, 26ff, Appellant must be the owner of the property, unless an Owner's Authorization form designating an authorized representative is filed with the appeal. PLEASE STJBMIT ORIGINAL APPLICATION TO: City of Ithaca Building Department Phone: (607) 274-6508 108 E. Green St. Fax: (607) 274-6521 Ithaca, NY 14850 '.c'ei`r:F 'u* YF-lrY'.e 'cYsr;tk3r't*}kkde�rx' �r;rtio�fa.C"!; use Application of SEAR determination: Type 1 Type 2 Unlisted Environmental Assessment form used: Short Environmental Assessment Form Long Environmental Form Lead Agency Determination of Significance Building Permit Application # (if any) Date Received Date 1st Hearing Dates Subsequent Hearings Zoning District I I i Revised 6/99 i j i i CITY SHO T E 4RONNIT,lYT-A p 1=SSES�.IMENT Fi ORIA @p--- Project Information: To be coaiipletCd ley applicant ox projec-C;sponsor. F ant/Sponsor: 2. ProjectNaine G Iirder 42A iyden woad„u6 0iv;sion t Location.: Lr- zyen R ad 4. Is Proposed Action: o New o Expansion 'd Modification/Alteration 5. Describe project briefly: Subdivide existing parcel to create a seceacl buildable lot with its_'rent on C91c�'..5✓Fait e. 6. Precise Location.(Road Intersections,Prominent Landmaxlcs, etc. or provide map) his lot is bo-unded.ley —A-Y en r?oad,Oneida Place and,Oak Ave uc. 7. Amount of Land Affected: Initially .251 FAcxes�or Sq.Pt. ultimately.155+.tl96 Acre or Sq.Ft. 8. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? _ b Yes o No If No,describe briefly: 9. What is present land use in vicinity of project: d Residential o Industrial, o Agricultural d Parkland/Open Space o Commercial o Other Describe: -Parcel is sut-•ounded by resideiitial Lases, The gorge is nearby. 10.Does action involve a permit/approval, or funding,now or ultimately,from: governmental agency(Federal,State or Local): o Yes 6 No If Yes, List Agency Name and Pen it/Approval Type: 11. Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? o Yes U No If Yes,List Agency Name and Permit/Approval Type: 12. As a result of proposed action will existing permit/approval require modification? o•Yes a No I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my Imowledge. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: � DATE: 11/4/2014 PREPARER'S TITLE: Architect REPRESENTING: ttVilliaain and Angie then i I i:1prolectshfomattonlpd websiteiformsici y seaf form.doc E SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESS MENT Jlt OMM Part II ��� To Be Completed By taff In order to answer-the questions in this Short Environmental Assessment Form(SERF),the preparet-iS toes - currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. Yes No I. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter ❑ X more than one acre of land? 2. Will there be a change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site or to any ❑ % site designated a unique natural area or critical environniental area by a local or state agency? 3. Will the project alter or have any effect on an existing waterway? ❑ 4. Will the project have an impact on groundwater quality? ❑ X 5. WilI the project affect drainage flow on adjacent sites? ❑ X 6. Will the project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? ❑ X 7. Will the project result in an adverse effect on air quality? ❑ X 8. Will the project have an effect on visual character of the community or scenic views ❑ X or vistas Known to be important to the community: 9. Will the project adversely impact any site or structure of historic, pre-historic, or ❑ X paleontological importance or any site designated a local landmark or in a landmark district? 10. Will the project have an effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? ❑ X 11. Will the project result in traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing ❑ transportation systems? 12. Will the project cause objectionable odors, noise, glare,vibration, or electrical ❑ X disturbance as a result of the project's operation during construction or after completion? 13. Will the project have any impact on public health or safety? ❑ X 14. Will the project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in ❑ X permanent populations of more than 5 percent over a one-year period OR have a negative effect on the character of the community or neighborhood? I5. Is there public controversy concerning the project? ❑ % If any question has been answered 'YES,a completed Tull Environmental Assessment Form(FEAF) is necessary. _ PREPARER'S SIGNATU . DATE: PREPARER'S TITLE: - " -- -- REPRESENTING: (, y of Ithaca B0 ara of FE11J14. 1r'y.t'1 i I j:\bza forms\seaf part ii.doc A '; Pf=i= DESGV,i ION OF ti HE FACYS OONGEPU\IING THE APPEAU-C,L CifVS: Applicants should explain here WHAT they propose to do; HOW it differs from the present use, development-or-signa e on the property; and WHY the proposal requires a variance, interpretation or special permit_ It should be insufficient dletail for the average person to understand basically what is proposed and how it may affect them.Additional information,including a plan or sketch of the proposal, and the REASONS for it, may be attached on additional pages. DESCRIPTION �, k �I I d w p Y I, ,rin �;.. rl.�F } �1 G, , I.. ` w fat FN , - C I'�!'L I,._ L" vTl I�I�.: 't_� lljr t '•.^�I f'J ,25:16I J, .�J' I it r a(:I.°'I ��u A.J'.'� �4;Ily, u'u �� Th: � I.�Y rIP _ �d'.y; ,� t p'ho'-'s4e is i� �_l�"-t. ✓Irlr7 l,.il�'I i o�V ''Vlaldd-L V, WF"Gjo.OF" I13 4 iEl_,( i_f��i✓ / �,�.�l II�J O jl7r_til-ji i,& .i G. rs 3 n a'1_w. �7�1 '.:'�i. �_, f`-o_+,t�r J/ �._� +�_;e,,'o, If_ ._ <� 11 TsV. y d `C" is to be 1 C', e N;. The (,-xisfiag l b7lldiag.has iL3 7a)pp'SC�11CI�ziately 80.5 ff(M 5o 11@oii Yoaw_'(�1- reas-`ur d'4 6-oe J'cA01-'e +sl 1 A::G 0- he v� R �a�_ Y:I!ir,v jii7.(M Itcac'l r� � Ir.EI�,II duF ,:PJ u1.I! :.�) M('Fj; ;J,,_F_ t0*Vr7(9 -1. @�yP i_ t t F,�`L E'ID on", fi l .__.y u 1611"d-'ag cif l'�o Before, tho'parcel coal be SWO(iI`w IeleCV, dhQ 0Wi1G- p_eCJS 0,0 HC9,VFi 0.!JGP �UVI "EC "Ecr_.,'s�Of ZGPip11g h1 bJ(-,a"_S )l -y1'�!.� �.311- POC ,� y y'63 L_.^.1 �T.:�Iily i'',4� .TC4.sail. w�_.y�� 1 iA'a, v1_ t ,I.y,.,�' f�.� _ '�I j o1 Vd2 .. Further information on the appeal may be obtained from the undersigned, or from the City Building Department, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY (607)-274-6508,where the appeal may be seen, and where information on the appeal process or the Ordinances can also be obtained from 8:00 A.M.-4:00 P.M,, Monday-Friday. Signature Address Date Revised 11/98 ��®��\i11 g t vc6G 21 z 'w'° � �`' .° �il7N�dW OUNOm o i ze Fo P 4 3 no ®a Jq1' I I WN* NA z 1N3W3hbd 30 3.03 { paQ {�` + cs a "go r'7 40 e•�q zaS3� zo in. I 3N17 133813 f 3oN%dlo �. db773,j� ss a 91VIMaVd 73/idcl9 - a L \ o 0 9 _ - Of !u LLJ cl U r� tp N W v, N W Q1 ' o c N - 0 O LIJ et IX Las o z �0 u o ��� 8 C w �a u� ® �� �" 3oN3-4 YNII NIHNO iy ' � w �* Q ei�o �6 oe6Qe � y s :ate O Q y C= 11- f O � O30 r@� ¢� O s Ulsl ®boo o W w o _ ci U •_� >s 10 U IrT �� t9 00 Cl CITY OF ITHACA NOV 2 ��� �� BOARD Off` ZONING APPEALS APPEAL BUILDING PERMIT #_-al 948 APPEAL NO. HEARING DATE RECEIPT # �'� APPLICATION FOR: 1. . Type of Appeal. Appeal is made herewith for: ( ) An Appeal of an action, decision or interpretation of the Zoning Enforcement Officer ( } A Special Permit under the Zoning Ordinance { } An Area Variance from the Zoning Ordinance ( ) A Use Variance from the Zoning Ordinance . 2 . Appellant: Benderson Development Company, LLC (Name of appellant) 570 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo, New York 14202 T (.Address of Appellant) (City) (State) (Zip Code) 716-878-9626 716-886-1026 (Telephone # of appellant) (Fax # of appellant - optional) 3 . Location of Property _ 742 - 744 South Meadow Street _ (Number & Street) (Use District on Zoning Map) Property Owner _ Buffalo-Greenbriar Associates, LLC ` (Name of Owner) _ 570 Delaware Avenue Buffalo New York 14202 _ (Address of OWiiei) (4i y) %State) (zip C.-de) 4 . Provision(s) of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. (Indicate the article, section, subsection and paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance being appealed, by number. Do not quote the ordinance. ) Section 325-8 (Column 7 and 11) BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS Page 2 Appeal No. n� ,` 5 . Previous Appeal: A previous appeal ( )has +: X )has not been made with respect to this proposal and was (were) made .ita Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal - 2014 Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal No. dated 19 Appeal No. dated 19 6. Reason for Appeal: Attach sheets that describe the interpretation that is claimed, or the use for which a special permit is sought, or the details of the variance or exception applied for and the grounds for which it is, claimed that the variance should be granted, as the case may be. You should describe fully the use contemplated, and the physical characteristics of the property as they relate to zoning issues, giving figures for numbers of tenants, employees, users, and off--street parking spaces, as required. A dimensioned plot plan clearly illustrating the location and outlines of all buildings on the property, and lot lines is required, as well as elevation drawings for new construction may be required. unless these drawings and/or plans are on 8-1/2" x 11" sheets, suitable for reproduction, you will need to provide 8 sets of the drawings. Please refer to the information sheets and the Zoning Ordinance which describe the factual information required for each type of appeal for evidence to be presented as well as the Zoning Ordinance and attach your facts as exhibits to this application. �I i I i BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS lU� � � �' � I " , Page 3 Appeal No. r,- I certify that the information submitted with the appeal is true to the best of my knowledge and belief, and that 'I have read, and am familiar with those sections of the City of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance that apply to this appeal, (including Section 325-40, which describes the powers and duties of the Board of Zoning Appeals) . I also acknowledge that the Board of Zoning Appeals may visit the property and specifically permit such visits . KRISTINA RAMSEY NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK No. O1 RA6182066 , Qualified in Erle County Signatu of Appellant* My commission Expires February 19, 2016 Sworn to this T day of ��u1 1}��IN 20�` NOV 24 2014 Notary Public J * Appellant must be the owner of the property, unless an Owner's .authorization form designating an authorized representative is filed with the appeal. PLEASE SUBMIT ORIGINAL APPLICATION TO: City of Ithaca Building Department Phone: (607) 274-6508 108 E. Green St. Fax: (607) 274-6521 Ithaca, NY 14850 use OI21 y'r Yr dr r Ye S� tk 9r�Y Yc�r�r ie fe fr 9r sk�s�Y 3r x h h Application of SEQR determination: Type 1 Type 2 Unlisted Environmental Assessment form used: Short Environmental Assessment Form Fong Environmental Form Lead Agency Determination of Significance Building Permit Application # (if any) t Date Received Date 1st Hearing Dates Subsequent Hearings Zoning District i i Revised 6199 i I [ 2 570 DELAWARE AVENUE -_ BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14202 716.886.021 1.P: :716.886.1026.F N 0 V 2014 ' November 20,2014 VIA OVERNIGHT DELIVERY Chairperson Steven Beer and Members of the Board of Zoning Appeals City of Ithaca Building Department 108 East Green Street. 6; Ithaca,New York 14850 Attn: Gino Leonardi, Housing&Land Use Supervisor Re: Application for Area Variance Relief(Building Permit#31948) South Meadow Marketplace 742-744 South Meadow Street,Ithaca,New York(BDP#3529) Dear Chairperson Beer and Members of the Board: Enclosed please find the required application materials in connection with our request to renovate the fagade of the remaining portion of the former K-Mart Building, as well as to expand the approved retail space located in the former garden center by 1,456 square feet. The following two variances are required: • City Code § 325-8, Column 7: "A minimum of 35% of a lot's street frontage must be occupied by a building or buildings;"and • City Code § 325-8, Column 11 (required front yard): "minimum 15'; maximum 34 feet from curb." As the Zoning Board of Appeals is aware,this property contains the former K-Mart which a portion is now occupied by Hobby Lobby and Staples and is located in the City of Ithaca's SW-2 zoning district. The existing K-Mart Building and Staples are legally non-conforming in that the City Code requires that the front yard setback of the building be a maximum of 34 feet from the curb and that 35% if the lot's street frontage must be occupied by a building or buildings. The K-Mart building, as it exists, is 533.56 feet from the curb line of South Meadow Street. In addition, as shown on the site plan materials included with the application,this property sits behind three other parcels and buildings,which are located on the street,and the only portion of the property which abut the street are the two site driveways. The K-Mart building has a remaining vacancy and over the past few years Benderson has been in the process of redeveloping this property so that it is more consistent with the City's zoning regulations and design guidelines. This has included Hobby Lobby in a portion of the former Kmart as well as the addition of PetSmart to the northern end of the building, the construction of two outparcel buildings in front of the property,along South Meadow Street and Fairgrounds Memorial Parkway. The result has been the development of a cohesive shopping center, where once there was only a K-Mart and Staples. In addition,the Zoning Board has previously granted a variance for Hobby Lobby to have a vestibule at 518.61 feet from the road. i I I RETAIL: :OFFICE::INDUSTRIAL::HOTEL: :RESIDENTIAL I www.benderson.com 570 DELAWARE AVENUE BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14202 716.886.021 1.P : : 716.886.1026.F As part of the redevelopment of the property,TJ Maxx has agreed to take the remaining 21,770 s.f. of the former K-Mart building. As part of the TJ Maxx development,the facade will undergo a renovation and will"bump out"the building facade 3.7'. The new facade will result in the building being between 539.5 and 529.0 feet from the curb of South Meadow Street,and therefore a variance is required.In addition, Benderson is also proposing to increase the previously approved 14,744 s.f.addition to the south side of Hobby Lobby in the former Kmart garden center. The setback of this addition will be 396.6 feet from the curb of South Meadow Street and will also require a variance. Based on the fact that this is an existing shopping center,in which only the driveways are adjacent to the street,it is impossible to comply with the zoning requirements discussed above.As a result,Benderson is requesting area variance relief to permit both the facade change and the front expansion of the additional building in connection with the redevelopment of the property. The General City Law 4 81-b Balancing Test As the Zoning Board is aware, NYS General City Law§ 81-b provides that a Zoning Board must balance the benefits of the applicant with the detriment to the health, safety and welfare of the community. It is clear that granting the variances will not cause any detriment to the health, safety, and welfare of the community,while such would result in a significant benefit to the applicant. The benefit to Benderson is to fill the remaining vacancy and provide additional tenant space over an area which previously served as the garden center for K-Mart. Pursuant to NYS General City Law§ 81-b, in undertaking this balancing test the Zoning Board should consider five factors. We believe that the application conforms to the standards set forth in the Town Law, and should be granted. With respect to the five factors provided for in NYS General City Law§81-b,we note the following: 1. An Undesirable Change in Area Character Would Not Occur. As noted above, Benderson is in the process of redeveloping the above-referenced property. The property is currently improved with a commercial building and sits within a commercial area. The requested variance relief will not result in any undesirable change in area character. An aerial photograph of the area is attached as Exhibit A. As demonstrated by the aerial photograph,the K-Mart building is an existing building, and the variance relief does not result in a change in the setback of the building from the curb. Moreover, is does not result in any change of occupancy of the street frontage by a building. In fact, the addition of the vestibule actually brings the building closer to the curb and makes it less deficient. Moreover, as demonstrated by Exhibit A, the area has been developed consistent with the proposed variance relief. Wal-Mart, Lowe's, the Tops Plaza and Wegmans all significantly exceed the 34' maximum set-back requirement, some in far excess of the relief requested by this application. Similarly, the same shopping centers also do not comply with the requirement that 35% of the lot's street frontage must be occupied by a building. As noted previously, the Zoning Board granted similar relief for the Hobby Lobby located in the building. A copy of the approval is attached as Exhibit B. Clearly, the requested relief does not result in a change to the area, while allowing additional redevelopment and investment in the site. RETAIL: :OFFICE: :INDUSTRIAL: :HOTEL::RESIDENTIAL I www.benderson.com 570 DELAWARE AVENUE - BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14202 NOV 716.886.0211.P : : 716.886.1026.F �` d� 2. The Petitioner May Not Achieve the Sought-after Benefit Without the Sought-after Variance Relief. There is absolutely no way to construct either the redeveloped facade or the building addition without the variance relief.Initially,the only frontage for the property on South Meadow Street are two site driveways;therefore it is impossible to locate any building within 34 feet of the curb or occupy the frontage with a building. Moreover,this is an addition to an existing building,so it is also impossible to locate the additions so that those additions comply with the setback requirement. 3. The Requested Variance Is Not Substantial. The requested variance relief is not substantial because it does not result in a change of the existing setback or frontage occupancy. The requested relief does not result in any greater non-conformance than currently exists. In addition, the requested relief is consistent with other development in the area, as well as the relief already granted for the property,and simply allows for the redevelopment of the property. The Court stated in Matter of Easy Home Program v. Trotta. 276 A.D.2d 553 (2d Dept. 2000), that the fact that a variance may seem substantial on paper does not justify the denial of an application if there is no demonstrated harm to the community. In the present case, the variance presents no harm to the community as the majority of the project complies with the zoning requirements and the elevation is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. NY Courts have upheld variances far in excess of what is being requested in this matter. For example,in Matter of Sasso v. Osgood. 86 N.Y.2d 374 (1995),the variance concerned a 60%reduction in lot area and a 50% reduction in lot width. Based on all facts presented, the Court of Appeals overturned the Fourth Department and directed that those variances be approved. See also, Lodge Hotel. Inc. v. Town of Erwin Zoning Bd. of Appeals.43 A.D.3d 1447 (4th Dept.2007)(Fact that variance was substantial was insufficient to deny petitioners'application). Even if a variance may seem noteworthy on paper does not mean that any"harm"would be generated on the surrounding community, and it is "harm" that is balanced against the interest of the applicant according to the Town Law§ 267b(3) test.When one looks at the current matter,the variance relief is not substantial. 4. The Variance Will Not Have an Adverse Effect or Impact on the Physical or Environmental Conditions in the Neighborhood. There will not be any adverse physical or environmental effect or impact on neighborhood conditions. The property is not environmentally sensitive and the proposed setback is consistent with the existing building on the property and the other developments in the area. RETAIL: :OFFICE:: INDUSTRIAL::HOTEL::RESIDENTIAL I www.benderson.com 570 DELAWARE AVENUE - BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14202 r 716.886.021 1.P : : 716.886.1026.F 5. A Self-Created Hardship Does Not Require Denial. Initially, it is Benderson's opinion that the hardship is not self-created. Since Benderson has taken ownership of the property, the K-Mart has gone vacant and Benderson has been actively marketing the building to tenants.TJ Maxx is proposing to take the last remaining space and requires a facade renovation as a lease requirement. In the event the Zoning Board determines that the hardship is self-created,NYS General City Law§81 - b explicitly states that a self-created hardship is not by itself a sufficient basis to deny an area variance application. The Court was directly confronted with this issue in Matter of Easy Home Program v. Trotta. 276 A.D.2d 553 (2d Dept, 2000) when it held that even though the hardship was self-created and even though the variance was substantial,where there was no evidence demonstrating the variance would have an undesirable effect on the character of the community, a variance application must be approved. See, also. Jackson v. Kirkpatrick. 125 A.D.2d 471 (2d Dept, 1986); De Sena v.Zoning Board of Appeals.45 N.Y.2d 105 (1978); Goshen Shopping Center v.Zoning Board of Appeals 112 A.D.2d 140 (2d Dept, 1985). In the present case, there is no evidence that the variances would have any negative effect on the neighborhood. Conclusion ] \� 1 We look forward to working with the City on this project. Should you have any questions,please do not hesitate to contact me by phone at(716) 878-9626 or by e-mail at lamesBoglioli@Benderson.com. Sincerely, BE ERSON DEVELOPMENT COMPANY,LLC 11(- Director, ames A.Boglioli, Esq. Right to Build-Northeast US RETAIL: :OFFICE ::INDUSTRIAL:: HOTEL: :RESIDENTIAL I www.benderson.com f A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FACTS CONCERNING THE APPEAL FOLLOWS: Applicants should explain here WHAT they propose to do;HOW it differs from the present use,development or signage on the property;and WHY the proposal requires a variance,interpretation or special permit. It should be in sufficient detail for the average _ person to understand basically what is proposed and how it may affect them.Additional information,including a plan or sketch of the proposal,and the REASONS for it, may be attached on additional pages, DESCRIPTION The applicant is in the process of redeveloping the Former Kmart located at 742-744 South Meadow Street, Ithaca. The following variances are being requested: • City Code § 325-8, Column 7: "A minimum of 35% of a lot's street frontage must be occupied by a building or buildings;" and • City Code § 325-8, Column 11 (required front yard): "minimum 15; maximum 34 feet from curb." As part of the redevelopment, TJ Maxx has agreed to take 21,770 square feet of the former Kmart. as part of the TJ Maxx development, the facade will undergo a renovation and will "bump out"the building facade by 3.7 feet. The new facade will result in the building being between 539.5 and 529 feet from the curb of South Meadow Street, and therefore a variance is required. In addition, Benderson is also proposing to increase the previously approved 14,744 square foot addition to the south side of Hobby Lobby in the former Kmart Garden center. The setback addition will be 396.6 feet from South Meadow Street and will require a variance. Based on the fact that this is an existing shopping center, in which only driveways are adjacent to the street, it is impossible to comply with the zoning requirements. The request is consistent with the prior variance relief granted for this property and the other shopping centers developed in the area. Further information on the appeal may be obtained from the undersigned,or from the City Building Department, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, NY(607)-274-6508,where the appeal may be seen, and where information on the appeal process or the Ordinances can also be obtained from 8:00 A.M.-4:00 P.{411,,Monday-Friday. 570 Delaware Avenue, Buffalo,NY 14202 �S' n ure Address Pate- Revised 11198 CITY OF ITHACA SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM(SEAF) proje et Information (to be coiupleted by applicant or project sponsor) NOY 2 4 2014 I A Benderson Development Company, LLC TJ Maxx Facade bump out 3. Project Location: 742-744 South Meadow Street 4. Tq Proposed Action: X1 New M Expm-ision 8 Modification/Alteration T-J— Proposing to create a facade bump out for TJ Maxx and an adjustment to the expansion space next to Hobby Lobby. Dl*=4 T 111'n111;11'-11f 1qnrT-n151A,-Q 4'.f(-- m.1-11'r-117id snap): i1 Ase-0— ---" -- -r 0 Part of South Meadow Square near the corner of South Meadow and Elmira Drive 7. Amount of Land Affected: Initially:_ Acres or Sq.Ft. Ultimately: Acres or Sq, Ft. S. Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? 0 Yes 6 No If no, describe briefly: Variance required 9. What is present land use in vicinity of project: 0 Residential 0 Industrial 171 Agricultural C3 Parkland/Open Space M Commercial 171 Other Describe: 10. Does action involve a pernlit/approval or funding,now or ultiniately,from governmental agency(federal/state/local): CJ Yes 171 No If Yes,lis t a,gency name and penniti I appToval type: variance from the City of Ithaca for front yard setback. 11.Does any -pP-f,.f c)-Ft11e,.qcfit)ii have a.currently valid permit or approval? 0 Yes KI No If Yes,list agency name and permit/approval type: 12. As a result of proposed action,will existing permit/approval require modification? N Yes ®No City of Ithaca, Site Plan Approval I certify the inforwationproWded is true to the best of my Imowledge. PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: L DATE: to-01a- PREPARER'S TITLI Dire qq , Right to Bul?T- Northeast V REPRESENTING: Benderson Development Company, LLC s November 14,2013 Benderson Development Company,LLC 570 Delaware Avenue Buffalo, NY 14202 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals lt7eeting of November 5, 2013 Appeal tt292 ......742-744 Soui:h Meadow Street Present: Board IMembers Steven Beer,Gabriel llolbrow,Jan deRoos,Moriah Tebor,and Phyllis Radke,Director of Zoning Administration Dear Ben.derson Development: l'he Board of:honing considered your appeal on behave of wAmers Buffalo-Greenbriar Associates,LLC,for area-variance from 325-8, Column 7,lot width,and 325-8 colluum 11,front}yard,requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. You propose to erect a .1,125 SF vestibule at the:front face of an existing building that will be.known..as Hobby Lobby. You also purpose to erect a 14,744 SF building that will be attached to the south end of Hobby Lobby-. Both the vestibule on the east face of Hobby Lobby and the addition to the south cause the properties to be deficient in lot -width and front yard setback. The requirements for street-width and front yard setback,in the ;��-2 zoning district where 742 and 744 South Meadow Street are located,requires that a minimum of 35%of 'the lot's street frontage must be occupied by a building that is a rninfi um of 15 feet and a maximum of 34 feet from the street crab. However,the face of the vestibule at Hobby. Lobby is approximately 475 feet from the street curb at Meadow Street, The south-end addition will be approximately 400 feet from the same street curb. The actual street frontage for both these buildings is comprised of two access roads that are 29 feet and 65 feet Nxide for a total street width of 94 feet. No portion of either building will be in setback.between 15 to 34 feet from street curb.. `lhe b3aildings at 742 and 744 South Meadow are in a W-2 zoning district where the buildings' use as retail stores is permitted. However,.Section 325-3 9.requires that variances be granted before a Certificate of Occupancy for either store is granted. Discuss followed and a Public Hearing was held. There were no persons' in favor of the project and no persons opposed. NOV 2 4 201 Benderson Development Company,I.LC November"1.4, 2013 570 Delaware Avenue Page 2 Buffalo,NY 14202 RE: Board of Zoning Appeals Meeting of November 5, 2013 Appeal#292 3 --742-744 South Meadow Street (6 1.1111 �-A . { A motion by Board member Gabriel Holbrow to grant the appeal with the following findings of fact: 1.. There will be no undesirable change.in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties created by the grariting of the variance. 2. The benefit sought by the applicant can not be achieved by some other method. 3. The requested variance is not substantial. 4. There will be no adverse effect or impact on the phN sical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. 5. The alleged diffictlty was not self-created. 6. City of Ithaca Planning Board recognizes that the setback requirements for the zone predate the existing development and recommend approval of this appeal. The appeal for 742-744 South Meadow Street was granted with a vote of four(4)in favor and none opposed. Sincerely, Phyllis Radke Director of Zoz Ing Administration I i i I sxOLLYnbEEq Bd'!tl3d cB afN "4 NYSEG EASEMENT WILL-RIDGE ASSOCIATES,LLC 2 SEE 547233 lNSTRUMfNT N0.445062-002 \ riRINMIM6 kIGHTS \ 50'EITHER SIDE 0( �F WILL-RIDGE ASSOCIATES,LLC 7AX MAP N0. 118-f-12.4 POEE LIME) _ INSTRUMENT o. 118-1-1.22 - -TAX MAP N0. t t8-7=f.2- c `-c-c--c --c --c .f-- c I c-c ` ' J4• W SENECA S.TRE Te'rly11 GRAPHIC SCALE - - - - - - - - -' - -p =`- - - 61'23'11'•1� N 01'34r111'• W �` �e'� w.GREEN smEE S�FF cASE1,EM �41.89 x s- -SEE °9'=6E - _FLOOD CONTROL CHANNEL I _ a.as' ` I E o 3 (IN FEET) -- \ - i I n WILL-RIDGE ASSOCIATES,LLC I inch.=50 It. - 9 _ RIDGE B I ccsE oc INSTR MWENT AP NO. 1180622001 TITUS FLATS EN o£ D +s Lc E N 01-57'08•' W .Ns p/ � SITE o e ra a 11 LOCATION s y scxEDUEE a ITEx xUs sc.fou�Cue�t Ex NnP3ac za s Ex xos - IEEI 3 n\\�� \ xlcl?oof lacy ro P�oPO O7 N = tcxfD 11_ ---- ;.Q`,� I dire a a xfoIc's --`poHd�FPpaEBe9_o11'111E o TEHLI o uLfaEe_\' O _ Its ciex iI sE��,,-�,�ErncMT " -- - >eu - Em S 023321 EJ $h; - Ef 5Te/239 B -G R-\xraN/ana _ © � �,Fm;amo! LOCATION SKETCH _ :�, I \o ,�frRx, aftOBERT5.MILLER \ „rk BSNDui. I1 CROSS HATCHED AREA INSTRUMENT NO.49531]001 lyl ° f "' ( iI LF / 1' I REPRESENTS Cu eDnt zoning of site is SW 2 TAX MAP NO. 122-1-4 I llE ♦ a3/ ( \ r- 7 \ 320 ELMIRA ROAD 321.2' :my+ \ { ' _-��m }-)'.-1• '• .-5 A DEED OVERLAP WITH Setback requirements, ae mu N .0 sew/ a, j' BUFFALO-ITHACA Front m m 15',m m 34'from curb _- "N 02'08'14•• W / I= //'S �',r- Ic 1-, /�6 \'� 5`Kw` �'T,a``' Z• 1 ASSOC. AND WILL-RIDGE ASSOC. Rear l5X or 20'eh,h e i s less \ac 7 / n co 7 105.10• / L.✓ U / / \ 1° 1 6 Matt mMm b�mm ne nt sYsmriee ar fio' 1 ` ' 1 abvf`jF \\\\� \(- �` y 1 Mak mum bu lding. °ve of lot 60R 78R _ E k'° \ (wJt 1 9 c rage (meaesures ) \- E I �_ '•kR / / �I. \I 't f BUFFALO-ITHACA ASSOCIATES subject re not national a tale designated floods ov r paste m r\F _ ag /� 1 - ip f'-I '3 1 •�8b5, *- �/ `\ \ `u ac fB,• W I I TAXSMAP NO63102-1-2.1 714 S.MEADOW ST. UTILITY DATA :fE il'/i/l a \N ff / /49.9/ o �- I.`I II�,�� a� �. �V _ R I \\ -..i I, m I E.iern um nee eon,s and'nverttl)snawn o RECORD DESCRIPTION-SCHEDULE A a 74.Jv I ^ten \ / �142.0' ., 1:1 9 face II I I F/ / / a m X; I al \ P i I the I hove been platted z from Teld locations of n AL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND situate in the City of Ithaca,County of ­11- the II <g \ � ,�:m S .T7 ) I pans Tompkins,Stale of New York,bounded and described os follows: II I-f // / observable evidence and farm ore the Information te from oL 1 ( references shown hereon d not rt'fetl to BEGINNING at tin the northweslerl hi hwa line of the Elmira Road,said poin B 1i11 1): tt' _ / / / g4 I ;.s e 5��= I I the a racy of their location or completeness. The a pO1n y 9 y CUTTING HOLDING CORP.(R.C.)\\ III1 VACANT STORE \� IF se c[ Q ontractor shall be responsible for determining the marks the intersection of the northwesterly highway line of the Elmira Road wTh the BK.615 PC.2t r III II l $eAy 'm / _/////// /j /�j I .s ' I xoct Iocoiions and depths of all utilities and structures asterly Tine of lands reputedly of Waring,as described in Liber 592 0(Deeds at TAX MAP N0. 122-1-2&3 11 11'?. _ , / tt lr asz\ n the path of or closet IIeI to,o under the Page 3]3; 315-318 fLMIRA ROAD �l Ili It - (88,200 sq. (t.) 11 ' I I V° y parallel ( _ / / a �.. \,g m I proposed construction. The nt-tor.shall be RUNNING THENCE North DO.58'41'West fora distanca of 73.78 feet to point; II I - __- \STAPLES ,PET SMART , result of i for any delays or damage'N.­ oc..ring 'T a Ea x£nTa1.Nr 1\ 1 G _ e (^./ STORE/ I Gl� I m \``11-cA j I I result t into ,1 located utilities. No extensions of RUNNING THENCE South 87'20'3B'West passing through° n pipe found at ) 1 1 :..- \STORES / 1 1 °ntroct time fend n ne d damage.ti.n. shall be to° Ira a Tound for o total distance s[c _ e. / /m `1 Ix 1 allowetl a suit o(rr sed design Iocotions or time 460.09 feet,and continuing for 18.68 feet n n ptp scxfD.LE e.ITEx xp.Io a I B w .•'<-� (21,220 SO, ff.)\\\ 19.450 sq. (t.) 1 1/\ 1 I allowed to do same wh,.h rPe.IL from existing utilities of 478.97 feel ,N s \ _ /.�/ 1 I\}(;•�� I being found in different Iocotions than shown on these RUNNING THENCE North D2'08'14'West for a distance of 105.10 feet to a PK oat 00 .I I V \ : / �,^ "'a e .: 0 e' F gs.I< '^ drowtn It is the contractors esponsibility to notify found in asphalt; _ 't II ;tlW�Y PuIF _ ���_ 1 ov I I LEGEND iolai<nnd mark the'refacilities.ple time for foam to RUNNING THENCE North 87'55'49'West for a distance of 116.00 feet to an Iron r/O lly,l\ r I_ pipe found; �)W° I I y 44 /u 4_ N oOR �yni I PROJECT PARCEL InAl-Y mark v v uxbsci+[nixaDcns o fi RUNNING hIENCE South 02'33'21'East for a distance of 150.51 feet to on iron SEE DEED so0x a91 ADJOINING PROPERTY LINE pipe found; ncxfemiz 1 - Stx•auEf D RUNNING THENCE South 87.12'10'West for°distance of 59.30 feet to a point on "'tor R -- s !777 STORM SEWER UNE WTH FLOW ARROW the east line of lands of Will-Ridge Associates as recorded fn instrument \ \° '" ( -T;-� -- =Tt�gf--'qNJ�O£r L jr• �s�s �Y' -��» -Y 1 ID I � I\ , a ) '�- ,..: -/ _� 1 I SANITARY SEWER LINE n,.445G62-002; I 1 nJS '/La'•'� _-wJ� v __-_ r..{t.Q y n l WATER LfNE N11H WATER VALVE RUNNING THENCE North Ot'57'08•West elan the easterly line of lands of - 1' ` •---i(w' m .w . .tl• + - ' I:'I k c3 e. b > a" al 1 GAS LINE-GAS VALVE ----- -----c--- _ ""• gun n 9 Y \ f �rEw w w t $ R' 1 I Will-Ridge for a distance of 928.33 feet to a point; \ -w- -r w 6 •@I �° '�k 1" '� \ i RUNNING THENCE North 61'23'11'West for distance of 8.86 feet to a point; �I 1T'.\ e s i e e e d b w ¢- K N = „_I {) b Q•s'� �- o ��° a ""m 11 I I I UNDERGROUND UTIUtt WRES --"-"'Lm I { 3 •Ot �' °"^ -' a` _ vi I ' E I 22'LIGHT POLE wllh top at concrete base RUNNING THENCE North of 34'11'West fora distance of 41.89 feet to a point; m /o�'_ ^m, _ �I 0»„oE I a 1 - 71. I e I elewllon and l,cvtlon of light heedsOn �z L 1 y 1 N 1. , P i li O I I URUTY POLE RUNNING THENCE North 87'35'33'East for a distance of 650.67 feet to a point; e 11 j f ° ° 3� 6 1 y 1 E 1 r - , 1 '/'�G's `s r� CD t I GUY WIRE RUNNING THENCE North 87-35'33'East for a distance of 270.15 feet to a point on the West line of South Meadow Street; v °col I°e \ e p vD i } 1 I SANITARY MANHOLE O O RUNNING THENCE southerly long the westerlyIna of South Meadow Street following BANITARY CLEAN-OUT Q O rve fo the rght having a sad us of 75.00 eet and an arc length of 10.49 feet and FF ,T \ gG p oll\��- - • C• \ \� G �e B It I 1 j� CATCH BASIN auahard of South 67'41'17'West a distance.of 70]0 feet to a point / >1 a\ .I^. I _ r°q. y Yj x { LL TRANSFORMER RUNNING THENCE South 86'30'34•West for q distance of 3.40 feet to a point j I .� �' �w'�_ e 6 � +k � tEit � 3 F 1 ( 4'y RUNNING THENCE South 02'78'S7'East far a distance of 100 feet to t. 8 k - 1t �1 1ELECTRIC MANHOLEbeing located in the westerly Ire of South Meadow Street;; a polo < k IFTELEPHONE MANHOLE 09 l:RUNNING THENCE South 87.35'33'West for a distance of 215.93 feet to a point; npN - 7 J s HYDRANT RUNNING THENCE South 01'AV 36'East(or a distance of 220.07 feet to a paint; M1 \ E i _ '1•r/� - li k e•i 6 \ 4 P N 1 BOLLARD U "o RUNNING THENCE North 87'35'33•East for,distance of 238.G8 feet to a point in ES LNG \J_� 6 TAL 'VV a uu?_ ;�e $ ��; ¢ k«� I�\ I I Conllerous tree With a'ometer the west I'n<of South Meadow Street; S wA.R m l` m 1 2 A RKS92 PG 373 r li AK�Ro1F�t _ _ e I 1 s -�n s p I. ° - t o ° 1 D,ra.,..bee wltn a'ameler -0 _ Th y, RUNNING THENCE southerly along the westerly line of South Meadow Street South 02' 3 Etu1Rn T 1 x ,U 18'59'East-65.99 feet to a point; ' B ar/{} /'( 22 e' /--¢ Q r'-bat _ i 1 1 Z I 1RAFFIC SIGNAL MANHOLE / E LIZ RUNNING THENCE South 87'35'33'West along a distance of 235.72 feet to a N 00*58.44 \I r: I 9 l I I� '� _ _52�4 -4 `o '� - - s Q� �© g m I - Fri 3 G, point, 73.78• s �--- ' y Y I y I iRAfflC LIGHT SUPPORT POLE. .. -.. W i of S'F> eI. __ RUNNING THENCE South Ot'45'36'East a distance of 228.23 feet to a point,being�(r the north corner of First National Bank&Trust Co; '(. k ��n �;y I V (/� [/( �/j 1(/� RUNNING THENCE South Dt'45'36'East along the westerly line of th.First National 0 °f ` 4 � 0 '4 •36-r E- - �� G` s 4 aim �a z ( \ I�``A 6 pf c ��'aA-a "�� Z I It \RI[� W I NO W + 20° 1 � k Bank&Trust Company a d'stan a of 352.20 feet to o point located in the d 5\. I _ - - - -'352.20 e E: r�^ 3 •� tl IJ 1 'I v sza+•r ... L�yr northwesterly highway line of the Elmira Road; l Aj :rSfEi •'aavv l__I D Q ` \ '�•°�I 6' , S 01.4J•36"E .• Y 220.07 lee I�:I r 1 fT7 I I� RUNNING THENCE South 41'S1'it•West along the northwesterly highway line of the SJ,A '\ Y ,k vosr _�9- -' - > c I I r r Elmira Road for a distance of 43.47 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING. !N 7, ,5 Y J5Z f g & mil" s r e?w0I�'n w? CONTAINING 15.2]]..,as of land. �z o it IT Pb n I ro �' i iI N'1 I q DEED Boo V SCHEDULE e o soon i s PaGE Bz _ w �O EDUEE B,ITeH u¢T I �° LRni" ai � 4.Rights of adI.!,ing O and/ar pubiic in and to v 60-foot proposed street ru ring a Wrty I scxf I fx n¢a E1 Ala Ui RST NAfONLLaI6pPK h6iRU5r OF GI ^ DULE I P E.f a IlNAG DEYELOPM£Nr,lE50CNTES LLC between General Electrlewpe,e,,n Trust property and Tre arc,Corporation property and southerly along u6£RA4K89 F DEEDS,PAGE 616 / o Ufa 'Lj UUENr xo:b6z696-a¢t T*7' Em> '1 ` mil rT, e.terly line of Trsm arco property and westerly line of Cornell University properly to Elmira State Sw Iva.11)-t-s Io Wi I W IN M°P 1""1 p oq C.MIR1 FGD 74D 5.NFAOOI,sm- n 4 r[) Highway, I W- �i O 5.Rights-of-way granted to City of Ithaca and recorded to Libor 179 of Deeds at Page 535 on April 10, / I I� I _ ;I I ^1 C, 19 6E / z rA� 6,Easement granted to New York State Electric&Gas Corporation and recorded in Liter 325 of Deeds at Page 10 on September 16.1949. B/e Rut ESIAi£ASsa-- m ].Easement granted to New York State Electric&Gas Corp oration and recorded in Liber 366 of Deeds INSIHUMENT N°.66269E-006 fPAR ELT) 1 ,a6 I I Y K at Page 62 an March 11.1954. _ r�s. No.N7-1-5 71 B.Easement made by WII-Ridge Associates,LLC to Vert-New York Inc.dated December 16,2003 and 8 uFADOp'n"EET PEBnn i II =m 1 corded In the Tompkins County Clerk's Offlce on January 5,2005 in Instrument No.466603-002. -Is W " U 9.Rights conveyed to Jacob Novidor by deed recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk's Off-in Liber 353 REFERENCES: sExcbucE a i,En oJe Am•!1 II I erg I U of Deeds at Page 300. 1.DEED TO B/B REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES FlLED -_ 10.Easement granted to New York State Electric&Go,Corporation and recorded in Liber 491 of Deeds 1.DEED0TO AS INSTRUMENT 4 5 SSOCIA6006. { I at Page 891 March 30,1971. 2.ALTA/AGSM LAND PRE SURVEY PREPARED BY n M� `: Y 11.Easement(Underground Electric and Gas)granted to New York Stale Electric&Gas Corporation and T.G.MILLER P.C.LAST DATED JULY 9,2007. a xo.ss.PnvcEL xplz. R= N I �.•I m corded in Li 491 of Deeds at Paga 893 on January 22,1971. 3.TITLE REPORT BY COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE \'�?, it 823.$O' p) 12.Easement granted to New York State Electric&Gas Corporation and recorded in Liter 491 of deeds INSURANCE COMPANY,FILE N6.3529 AND DATED AUGUST 4, \o !\ .x /_ at Paga 897 on March 30,1971. 2010. _` .+cHaaO_S ?14,45' ,. Q.Easement granted t,New York Slate Electric&Gas Corporation and recorded in Liber 509of deeds E >'21" at Page 283 an Jvly 25.1973. roanfR xGNvnv Lixc " �. 2�O3 922.__ 14.Easement'n Liber 574 cp.1140 and Liber 578 cp 239. TIRE INFORMATION » - --v c 15.Right-o(way granted to N.Y.S.E.&G.and N.Y.Telephone Co.and Ceracche Telev Sion Corporation and BIB REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES S 9550 a�y� ="- - -- ` •�•• corded in Liter 567 of Deeds at Page 383. fNSTRUMENT N0.562696-OOb,PARCEL 1 T'uOs�'s 50.2' 0 16.Easements with Covenants,Conditions and Restrictions mad,b WII-Rid Associates,LLC; TAX MAP N0.f77-t-1.2 sTv 9ssa'0£4p) S O1'3t 03"E Y 9e S 04'S4'33"W Buffalo-Creenbriar Associates,LLC;LDWE'S Home Center,Inc.and Wal-Mart Stores East,LP dated April AREA=15.277 ACRES fsra Icbaly.s0.2Y or<o) (SUrSalalY Iss.74 ZZIP) a,loax 2,2004 and recorded April 9,2004 under instrument n 451B4B-002.(not plott,ble). nap xas9.zABm n sz� 17.Consent and Joinder to Easements with Covenants,Conditions and Restrictions made by AP x sAVPaovRlAnax Buffalo-Ithaca Associates I,LLC,Buffalo-Meadow Associates,LLC,RF-Meadow Associates,LLC and Ithaca NOTE r.snca xlcxvnr uNE Sr.rf'RLrrji"r Development Associates,LLC dated May 19,2004 and recorded In the Tompkins C,.nty Clerk's offae an ALL BEARINGS&DISTANCES V 09SOUTY MEADOW ,.,.,d. PARTIAL TOPOGRAPHIC BOUNDARY SURVEY June 18.2004 under Instrument No.455939-001.(not p[.LtZble) SHOWN HEREON ARE PER ' 18.Permanent easement far traffic control device contained in Warranty Deed made by Bu ffolo-Meadow S 02'1b•59'• E µ.' "uu�sm.n+nc^c �+ W'�^"°r'�Nwm� / Associates.LLC and RF Meadow Associates,LLC to the City of Ithaca dated May 26.2004 and recorded DEED(REF./1)& 65 99' SOUTH II�ADOW MARKETPLACE In the Tompkins county clerk's offae an J.ne L zoo4.odes lnab.m,nt Na.45966-005. MEASURED a� " "'""'°""'"°`""'r"" 744 SOUTH MEADOW STREET CITY OF ITHACA,TOMPKINS COUNTY, NEW YORK FLOOD RELIEF CHANNEL bbRR � I STORAGE _ 2,876 SF i PROPOSED RETAIL PROPOSED i 'HOBBY LOBBY' RETAIL $6,444 G.S.F. 'T.J.MAXX' T 0 F.F.E.385.87} _ T m T 21,770 G.S.F. m m sv F.F.E.385.87} PET SMART m��oR'a 19,450 SF i PROPOSED RETAIL^ T O x STAPLES _ 16,200 G.S.F. 21,220 SF _ NEW CANOPY F.F.E.38$.67' SUPPORTCOLUMNS r1[vnnoN ovuix A Y 14 •:N 41` ' .111.1;-•= SPRINKLER O ° ROOM i F 17 ifi to ifi iB 1] ` 20 ] 7 S S B B S B 9 20 19 20 e�,twrv° 16 1fi 1fi 16 i6 i6 i6 16 i6 16 i6 �2 I PACE 6) I I I I S 15 2 �. Ll Ln a ® +o t . 4 57 PA 45 PACE , b CE , _ Q --.- - FIREHOUSE SUBS W rso 11 15 15 — 2,—.17 _ .. SUPERCUTSCA 1,417 SF E T - _ AM RI20SF °O I — ZOOM TAN Z 1,380 SF NOVSALLY BEAUN I Q V• [S J0 — 1,380 SF MMMI// LLL i B ATar b 4 b 4 i b 4 b 4 1 S-A , ,000 SF � e YOOURTLAND ' "�• ' 1,1356 SF b in a AVAILABLE ' 2,4 sF PAN RA BRE I —_ R 33 I d d tOD SF b b FIVE STR 1] 17 UR.ENICAAFtE 3,600 SF QI _ b b C40D SE i6 2,40D SF - - --- 87 - °--°- —��EXIS EXISTING SOUTH MEADOW SQUARE/ z MARKET PLACE SOUTH ME ELMIRA RD SIGNAL ITHACA,NY SI Pk� 3529 PROPOSED SITE PLAN 11-12-2014 NOVEMBER 12,2014 5 BENDERSON SITE PLAN 5>°O6uw B6A .6° rvw'EP�,xW:+ "K 1fi"142,01 0S—NBY.DMN CHECKED BV:MAO SCALE:1:50 z . / — / I os /%. p � 1 ; - 524.fi 1' .. l.. { Carmina I 1 4 n ON THIS;: _.. m - - I� __ ... 5 ;' PRo?DseD �j r, B. _ I 1 , PLANWood a a, LOADING DOCK i ', - i' / } t ... c m r p. Morris' 2' TO BE INSTALLED ,- ` 40.0' 0!-=_ 4Buffalo,New York t4203 7. o v m c F m 2 N m PROPOSED RETAIL e '^ .• .,. :`. -; 'FIVE BELOW' PLAN I i ` ® KEY A N K 8,208 G.S.F. =gr, ( ��3 I SCALE:TUTS m F.F.E.385 87 iao - ^ - 7 ' r opt � 2Ba2' �N �-�, . toa — r CO PROPOSED T'B'OVERHEAD.DOORTO a p -- - - w c m o \ „ BE INSTALLED:COORDINAT E EXACT pm q w LOCATION WITH ARCHITECTURAL PLANS ......._ m PROPOSED IL \ o 0o O A PROPOSED TRASH 'T.J.MAXX' N .... o @ COMP.ACTORTO BE INSTALLED ✓ - .,.,., 21,770 G.S.F. UPON IOY.40 CONCRETE PAD PROPOSED OVERHANG - e .. ........._ � ¢ F.F.E.385.87- WITH SUPPORT COLUMNS+ FORTJ.MAXXIENTRANCE E i w 0 w t 3. 2 ._. n c 26.31' 3 8T i0'03" W 21769r zo` NOTELEGEND i/lJ 0 / (5)PROPOSED HONEY LOCUST hiATCHINTO t2j y ! 4 E Q j _ Qj INSTALL"STOP"SIGN-M:J.T.C.D,SIGN NO.RI.1B N I TREES:O BE INSTALLED ALONG _ :+ 1. - - - --'-"• - 7 3 EXISDNG CIDEWALK THE BACK OFTHE BUILDING .. 3 '-�.,✓ APPROX.LOCATIONOFSAWCUTLINE, Z c 2 MATCH EXISTING EDGE OF PAVEMENT E - (9)TREESTO BE TRANSPLANTED [-r QRUNOUT CURB IN 2'OR MATCH EXISTING CURB C7 dp OP.REPLACEDINKIND. ` ti P TIN D 1,1255Q.FT.VESOBULE FOR 10.0 24.0' 7'61 / LAND.�CAPEAREA-SEELAND=CAPE PLAN,IF HOBBY SQ. r.VENTRANCE NO PLANTINGS,GS,INSrALLTOpSOiL&SEE H .: 3 ( : /' QINSTALL''NO PARKING"SIGN M.LI.T.D.D.SIGNNO.PI,C _ ` INFILL'WITH4"1VIDEYEL.11.11I. J I , PROPOSED RETAIL o 4 OS IPES@2'O.C.&45"TO PARKING LINE 'HOBBY +_ - I F , - -�\ 6"WIDEN/RITE CROSSVJALKLINESAT 5`5?ACING,LOBBY' - •...•, -'•'� Y \, \ : LIINFILL W/t'WIDEWHITEL!NESATI'SPACING 56,444 G.S.F. �� R F.F.E.385.87� 2 OCATEDEXISRNG E_IGH INCPC E .: 276 BB .; \ ....... .. 014 So O !` \ B 1 NV242 BI -.... J..._ .__ _... ... J: TYP.OFI� -'; � Ei IL LEGEND d : O£ - ...... OACONCRETECURB i ._. � 2O SIDEWALK CURB RAMP 3O INTEGRAL CURB/SIDEWALK -- +`.\ z 4A HEAVYDUTYASPHALT RELOCATED HYDRANT'OCATiON, 3O-`_ _ SEE DRAVJING'C ILIJY PLAN' gy N 4B EXTEPHOR CONCRETE SLAB ON GRADE FORCONNECTION EDGEOF PIPE BOLLARDLo _ :�_ `Q ............ Gwd a 00 HANDICAPPEDPARKING SIGN f .\ 750 - _ 1Q3�F O7 HANDICAPPED PAVEMENT MARKINGS�SIGNAGE [PAVEMEN� O Y _ ,1i-30+ ©DtJMPS7ER ENCLOSURE ry BIKE RACK .. ... O 3 2 w a 3 to -'MATCH INTO MATCHTNTO I N rn o W W z EX PAVEMENT 2 I 1 ry EXISTINGSIDEWALJ( z w w = SITE LEGEND w <..-., PROPOSED RETAIL P' - 3 TYt'.OF2. PROPERTY LINE Z ILL v-+ _ 48 64' 16,200 G.S.F. �, 5 'BACK TO(JACK ''I. ' i - SA' vJ U j F.F.E.385.87' o sr, PROPOSED CURB _— Q O s p _ NOTE FFE IS BELOWTHE 100 '. ,-- °q. PP.OPOSED ASPHALT PAVEMENTn- / 3 VEAP.FLOODPLA.\ELEVATION 3 B ' 6 Q r 4A O — O L Y 6ACKT0 BACK �y� 2 / PROPOSED SIDEWALK/CONCRETE PAD � 3 1OD 240 7.30 2 NUMBER.OF PARKING SPACES 27 EDGE OF R/0 27522 O PAVEMENT 5 ATGRADEOVERHFAD \ Date: March 2013 i LOADING DOOR Drawn by: KPB 6Go S - Rya I 20 PROPOSED SIGN S Scale: As Noted - PROP GHT LEW!SINGLE FIXTURE ' m -'--- MATCHIMO (M.H SGHALL?OIT RCEEDD 251FRON GFl� EDGRADE) DRAWING NAME: l 4B y ...-:. .,. EDGE-0F _ E __ PROPOSED IIGHTPOLE 4V/DOUBLEFIXTURE Site Plan _.. EX PAVEMENT PAVEMENT f J- /� (M.H.SHAU-NOTE(CEFD 2THRON.MG,HN19HM—DE) .......... i'" ""1 PROPOSED WALLMOUNTED FIXTURE - -........ 1 i F� LOGGED: ;529 NOTE:BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC INFORMATION DRAWING NO. DA1E._9124114 PROVIDED BYOTHERS,CAP,MINA WOOD MORRIS.P.C.BY K18 ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBLITY FOR ITS ACCURACY. /^- /� 4 ppNpp SITE PLAN DO 30 0 30 60Ft. �jf/ SCALE:1"=30' Project no.: 13.010 F-- I .... ........ �j ........... ............. 7: / / /X; CORE DRiLLIN-0 EXISTINV� SAN KiHJN 377.6- Carmina - /:: % /%�/ , +2 24 LF Bi�p i2 Wood 0,47 7 SBVER 1, 1 -Eli Morris' 487-11--E Su to SAN MIT N �t 14.3165 RIM 384.50 PROPOSED RETAIL S INV.1'N 377.80 t NE INV.OUT 377.70 'FIVE BELOW' 8,208 G.S.F. SELECT TILL J'P. 2 .......... ...... F.FE.385.87± ji it ........... j Z w- PROPOSED RETAIL a 'T.J.MAXX' ........... 21,770 G,S.F. 1 .4 F.F.E.385.87± § E. @9 0 —3 e- 2 w 0 0 z 50 8 A J, 9 .................... . NOrE ...... ....... S. PROPOSED RETAIL. 'HOBBYLOBBY' ............. TALL SELECT FILL IN PAVED AREAS, I. FOR ALL SANITARYSEWERS,INS 56,444 G.S.F. EXrEND 5'MIN.BEYOND PAVEMENTLIMTS. F.F.E.385,87± 2. PROVIDE FrFnNGSAND BLOCKINGAS NECESSARYATALL SENDS IN WATERLINES. 3. WHERE ULILITIESARE INSTALLED IN EXISTING PAVEMENT,LANDSCAPED AREA,ETC.,ANY ITEMS REMOVED/DAM AGED SHALL BE REPLACED IN KIND. J................ 4. PER CITY OFITHACAWATER DEPT,REQUIREMFNITS,ALL PROPOSED NOV 2 4 2014 WATER LINES SHALL BE FLUSHED,PRESSURE TESTED,a DISINFECTED cl: 6: BEFORE USE.EACH OFTHESE PROCEDURES MUSTBE SUPERVISED BY 374 LF 3"0 SDR-35 w THE CITY 01:ITHACA WATER DEPARTMENT PERSONNEL (PRIVATE SEWER)@0.4% WATER SERVICE NOTES INSTALL VENT TRAP&C 0 VENT GAS.ELICM C aTEUEPHONE 266LF32!OSDR35PVC INV-3603,t, UPTHROUGH BUILDINGV�ALL COORDINATE (PRIVATE SEWER) AWWA C 900 DUCT ILE IRON{CLASS 52)COMBINED SERVICE(4.5'COVER MIN.) % 23UF&-SDR35 IT( WITH U HATE CONNECTION POINT C'0A% AU TPUTY COMPANIES,TYP- ' -FCT FILL,TYP.. SM!L11V=380S3 1 SANITARY Z�S6"X6"X2!'TP LATERAL@ I OV, -GATEVALVE 4 6 Lr) E T 6 Z�,Z'GATEVALVE Co G SELECFFILLTYP. .............%�--.. -.: T�, &PROVIDE BEND AND BLOCKING AS REQUIRED SAN MH 3 M384.5f ��,6`AWWA C 900 DUCTILE]RON(MASS 52)FISESERVICE.145COVER MIN.) (D RI jr -W INV.IN 39057-,,i:z, SAN MH 2 7 N NV.01.13BO.4+7 PROPOSED RETAIL R�M38.77 Z�,2"TYPE-"K"COPPER DOMESTIC SERVICE(45'COVER MIN) I. 0 16,200G.S.F, NW[NV.N379.40 �SAPPROXIMATE LOCATION OF RELOCATED HYDRANT INV.OUT379.30 LO co.......... Vi F.F.E.385.87* PROPOSED UTILITY LEGEND Z(D U) NOMF.F.E.IS BELOWTHE I OD (3) YEAR FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION B J PROPOSED STORM SEWER ST— < LL -If Cu INSTALL DOUBLE CHECK VALVE 0 z PROPOSED SA'NITARY SEWER —6"SA— U) to DEVICES ON SERVICES WITHIN BUDG 0 PER CITY�F ITHACA REQUIREMENTS TO BE INSTALLED BY CJTYCF co 2 4 ITHACA WATER DEFA71VIENT,*21,75' PROPOSEDWATERLINE ........... LU 02 LU 0 4 8 PROPOSED CATCH BASIN ■m CIS 0 C) PROPOSED YARD DRAIN •YD Ej IL n 6"W C) m G G �G 6 • I PROPOSED MANHOLE a MH 3 b .. ....... Date: March 2013 PROPOSED HYDRANT ASSEMBLY Drawn by: KP13 ..... ...... A&Noted PROPOSED GATE VALVE e(W Scale ........ DRAWING NAME: ity Plan . ...........- NOTE:FR PRPOSED VALVE OXES, ........... .............. CLEANOUOTSETC.,INSTALL A 3 B000 PSI EXIWSTINGGASS 11 ;z , CONCRETE DOLLAR AROUND THE ITEM AT GRADE. — RELOCATED OUTSIDE S • THE COLLAR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF V'WDEIR, Util BUILDING FOOTPRINTAS SHOWN I ON ALL SIDES,I HAN THE BOX,CLEANOUT,ETC. THE COLLAR SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 6"THICK. ............... ti F."n F ....... K Y LODGED �5�k...... NOTE:BOUNDARYANDTOPOGRAPHICINFORMA-PON DRAWING NO. AT BE 9/241U THERS,CARMWA WOOD MORRIS,P.C. N UTILITY PLAN BY—KIB PROVIDEDBYO— ASSUMES NO RESPORSIBUTY FOR ITSACCURACY. VVVllllll SCALE:1 11=301 30'30 0 30 60FL C-6 Project no.: 13-010