HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 1975-10-27 TOM OF ITHACA
SPECIAL BOARD MEETING
October 27 , 1975
At a special meeting of the Town ' Board of the , 7�own of Ithaca ,
Tompkins Courity ® New York , held at the Town of Ithaca Offices
at 126 East Seneca Streeti Ithaca , New Yorko . on the 27th day of
October , 1915 at 500 o ' clock pima , there were
PRESENT . Walter J . Schwan ; Supervisor:
Andrew .. W . McElwee , Councilman
Noell � Desch , Councilman
Victor Del Rosso , Councilman
Robert N . Powers , Councilman ;
ALSO PRESENT . Lawrence Po Fabbroni , . Town - Engineer
James V . �Bixyoucos v. . Town Attorney
Barbara Holcomb , Planning- Board Chairwoman
Beverly Livesay , County . Representative
Catherine A . Valentino ; - Town Representative
On Ithaca Youth Bureau and the Ad `Hoc
Committee on Youth and Recreation .
Walter Jm , Wigging ;kepresdhting .Ridley
G
David . Cassel , 152 : Rihe Tree Road
Willis Hilker , 275 Burris Road
Paul and Bruce Ridley µ
Representatives of the Media
If
I RIDLEY _ '
GRAPHIC ARTS BUILDING PUBLIC HEARING
Proof of posting and publication of notice of public
hearing having been presented by the Town Clerk , Supervisor Schwan
opened the public hearing to consider site plan approval of a
graphic arts building on property owned by . Ridley ( Parcel No .-
6 - 62 ® 2 - 1 . 125 ) at East Hill Plaza ,on Judd Falls Road .
Mr . Ridley ( illustrating on map ) explained that the
Parcel in question is 2 . 038 acres and that he intends to .con®
struct a " buld- ng 60 x 60 with -an unloading dock at the back
corner . It is laid out for future expansion - ® as much as 8fl -120 . .
feet additional . They have laid out seven parking places 9 x 2.5 '
as an initial capacity and have left a customer convenience space .
The building is pre-engineered metal similar to their building
on North. Triphammer Road and the landscaping will also be similar ®
Mr . Ridley pointed out other details on the map , including the
proposed traffic pattern . He noted that the plan conforms to
the Zoning Ordinance requirements , the set-back , and the area of
the building . It is zoned commercial and no change in zoning is
being requested . Mrs . Holcomb noted it is part of the original
zoning for that corner, it is Business " C
Mr . Ridley said they would begin with three employees
and that the purpose of' the graphic arts building is book binding ,
printing , and other related technical processes . There will be
no retail business .
There was long and detailed discussion of such matters
as possible add tional :set-back ( 5 ft . ) , sight distances , elimi-
nation o one entrance , one-way or two-way traffic pattern , water
and sewer connections , drainage , buffer planting strip between
commercial and ,residential properties , blacktopping of parking
areal possible change of use or ownership of property , use of
Utility easement for a walkway for the - Elderly Housing project ,
parking and access , possible traffic hazards on adjacent highway .
11
i
TOWN BOARD MINUTES 2 October 27 , 1975
Town Attorney Buyoucos said he had no intimation that
so many conditions would surround approval . of the Ridley site
plan , and suggested he be given time to prepare appropriate lang -
uage for a formal resolution . Mr . Wiggins *. bbjected to any delay
and suggested that he and Mr . Buyoucos could agree upon appropri -
ate language for the . resolution and the surrounding conditions
and that they could do it at this meeting ° Thereafter , based on
language worked out by the two attorneys and agreements reached
during the discussion , the Town Hoard acted as follows *
Motion by Councilman McElwee ; secionded by '. Councilman Powers ,
RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby grants
final approval to the site plan entitled " Site ' Plan , Ridley &
Ridley , Ellis Hollow Road , Ithaca , New Yorkj? " dated August 27 ,
1975 , William Summerhays , P . E . , and approved by the Planning Board.
on October 21 , 1975 , submitted by Paul and - truce Ridley ( herein
" Owner " ) , subject to the following conditions .
( 1 ) Owner shall landsca§e the Owner ' s parcel along the
east wall of the building as shown on. said plan in accordance
with such requirements as the Town Building Inspector may reason-
ably require . The Owner shall submit to the Town Building In-
spector for his approval plans and specifications for such land -
scaping . If the Town Building Inspector approves such plans , as
submitted or as they may be modified to meet his requirements ,
no further approval by the Town Board for such landscaping shall
be required . Such landscaping shall be designed to act as a
buffer strip between any building on the premises and adjacent
streets and properties .
( 2 ) The approval of the parking .and access road plan
as shown on the site plan is conditioned on the use of the
premises for a . graphic arts building for the purpose of book
binding , printing and other such highly technical processes .
In the event of a change of or increase in the use and occupancy
of said premises , the Town Board reserves the right to review
the parking plan and the access road as shown on the site plan
and require such modifications as the Town Board may reasonably
require in view of the conditions created by such .. change in the
use and occupancy of said premises .
( 3 ) In order to promote the safety of the public , the
Town Board reserves the right to - limit the access road connect
ing the premises to Ellis Hollow Road .
( 4 ) Any change required by the Town Board pursuant to
the provisions of Sections 2 and 3 above shall be submitted to
the Planning Board for recommendation and shall be considered
by the Planning Board and the Town Board in accordance with the
procedures relating to site plan approval and upon written notice
to the Owner . In making any determination in the above matter ,
,the Town Board shall with respect to .the provisions in ' Section 2
above act if a change in use and density of occupants and users
of the premises reasonably requires a change in provisions for
parking and change in the maintenance and width of the access
road . With respect to the
. provisions of Section 3 above , the
Town Board shall act if it determines that any such change or
modification is -reasonably required because of traffic condi -
tions and the creation of possible traffic hazards on the adjac -
ent highway .
( 5 ) No access road for ingress and egress to and from
the Owner ' s premises and the adjacent road . 60 ft . in width run -
ning along the east line of said premises , which has been desig -
nated as an - official road on the Town '. s official map , shall be
permitted .
t
TOWN BOARD MINUTES 3 - October 27 , 1975
( 6 ) The Owner agrees to grant to the Town , upon its
request , an easement over the existing 20 ft . utility easement
granted by the Owner to the Town , along the south line of the
parcel , for use as , a public pedestrian walkway and any construc -
tion which may be . inoident thereto , provided that the Owner assumes
no liability for itssinstalla' tion , construction or maintenance and
is held harmless from any liability for personal injury to the
users thereof .
Unanimously carried .
P & C FOOD MARKET , SIGN PUBLIC HEARING
Proof of posting and publication of notice of public
hearing to consider the application of P & C Food Markets , Inc .
for the erection of a sign on the P & C Food Market at Judd Falls
Road which does not comply with . Section 7 ( a ) of Local Law # 1
11972 to replace the present sign and to consider - the legality
of the present sign .
Mr . David Norcross , representing P &C food Markets , Inc . ,
illustrated with sketch drawing the sign proposed . The sign is
64 sq? ft . over the allowable limit stipulated in the •Town of
Ithaca sign ordinance . Mr . - Norcross stated that P &C was request-
ing the larger sign because they are 490 feet from the road , and
a smaller sign would not give them sufficient visibility . He
noted that the size sign he was requesting would be legal in the
City of Ithaca .
Supervisor Schwan asked if anyone wished to be heard on
this matter .
Mrs . Livesay said she had heard quite a bit of comment
from people who were not able to be at this meeting about the
time of day that public hearings are held . With regard to the
P& C sign., she said people had remarked to her that it was not
necessary to spend money on another sign ; that there is nobody
who does not know the P & C store is there , that people have said
there is no reason for P & C to spend money on a sign when the
money spent on the sign adds to their grocery bills . Mr . Buyoucos
noted this was not a valid legal reason for denying a sign appli -
cation . Mrs . Livesay said she was only reporting some of the
things she had heard . Mr . Buyoucos said , however , she had pre -
sented, them without qualification .
Mr . David Cassel , 152 Pine Tree Road , said he understood
the request for a variance results from P & C ° s claim that a smaller ',
sign would not have sufficient visibility from 490 ft . Mr . Cassel
said what was really being argued is that P & C be allowed to ex-
tend the bars the whole length of the sign . He .said they could
shorten the bars since the bars do not identify P &C in any way
and that would come close to bringing the sign within the sign
I ordinance and no objection could be raised . Mr . Cassel said he
thought the argument that the sign must be 200 sq . ft . to be
Visible is nonsense , and that the Board should not allow this
kind of a variance .
Mr . Norcross argued , with respect to the bars , that it
was a matter of having a sign on the building which is in propor-
tion to the building frontage which is intended for signing . To
cut the length of the bars would make the sign look worse than
something more in proportion . Mr . Cassel said the ordinance has .
set the right proportion at 1 sq . ft . per lineal foot , and the
way to handle it is not by making a variance , that the ordinance
is rational or it is not and should not be diluted by an arbitrary
variance . Mr . , Buyoucos agreed that this was a good point .
1
TOWN BOARD MINUTES - 4 - October 21 , 1975
Mrs . Valentino said she had attended a recent meeting
of the Eastern Heights Civic Association and the . few people
present were opposed to a variance for this sign . If P & C says
there is a hardship in terms of visibility , that is something
the Board should consider . Mrse Valentino agreed with Mr . Cassel
that the bars do not add identification or visibility .. She
thought it ought to be a simple matter - to make the sign comply
with the ordinance .
Mrs . Livesay asked what the status of the present sign
is . It was agreed the present sign is . illegal . However , Mr .
Buyoucos stated that Mr . Norcross had already agreed at the last
meeting that the present sign will be removed in any case . There
is no waiver by this Board of any action they could take to pro-
ceed on the illegality of the present sign . . Mr . Buyoucos also
noted that Mr . Norcross ' s argument that what is good for the City
of Ithaca is good for the Town of Ithaca is not •valid since the
Town and City are not the same ; the environmental requirements
are different .
Mrs . Livesay said the request for making the sign larger
than allowed by the ordinance was based on greater visibility .
The " P & C °' is the same size as the present sign and that does not
make it more visible . It does not seem to make sense , she said ,
to grant a variance for a sign to replace a sign that is already
illegal . Mr . Buyoucos no that a variance would make it legal.
Mr . Hilker asked Mr . Norcross how many of these signs
P & C had . Mr . Norcross said they have 69 stores and 75 % have
been converted to the new sign and logo . Mr . Hilker asked if
many of their signs had been turned down in other localities .
Mr . Norcross said he could not recall whether any of their signs
are smaller than this one . He could not say with assurance that .
there are not other places where they have had to put up smaller
signs due to existing zoning laws . He said , however , in every
instance the situation was not the same as this one where there
is a distance factor . He said the distance factor is important ;
that they have a large frontage building and that a sign like
they are proposing is more in proportion , based on the size of
the building , than something smaller . Mr . Hilker said he thought
the sign , basically , is meant to be seen from the parking area
rather than the road . Mr . Norcross said this was not necessarily
so , that they liked to think the sign would attract people from
the road as well . He said food buying is an impulse business .
No other . persons wishing to be heard , Supervisor Schwan
closed the hearing and the Board acted as follows *
Motion by Councilman Desch ; seconded by Councilman Powers ,
RESOLVED , that. this Town Board hereby denies the application of
P & C Food Markets , Inc ., for the erection of a sign on the P &C
Food Market at Judd Falls' Road , for the following reasons *
( 1 ) It does not comply with Section 7 ( a ) of Local Law # 1 -
1972 ( Town of Ithaca Sign Ordinance ) .
( 2 ) That no hardship on P &C Food Markets , Inc . has been
demonstrated .
( 3 ) That in the absence of hardship , no other considera -
tions have been shown which are deemed sufficient to justify the
application sought for .
( 4 ) That the sign ordinance itself appears to be care -
fully thought out and that the prescribed area for signs has suf -
ficient reason and purpose to justify it .
TOM BOARD MINUTES - 5 - October 27 , 1975
( 5 ) . That considerations such as proportion to the build -
ing and what type of signs might be permitted in other areas can-
not be considered under the existing ordinance .
Unanimously carried .
Councilman Desch suggested Mr . Norcross could. coine be -
for the Board again if the bars of the sign are shortened to
bring it within the square footage allowed by the sign ordinance .
Mr . Norcross said P& C were pressed for time since they planned
an opening on November 4 , 1975 and asked if the sign were made to
comply could he get a permit from the Building Inspector without
again having to come before the Board . This question raised some
brief discussion about procedure , the Board indicating a desire
to help Mr . Norcross meet the opening deadline . Mrs . Valentino
said it is all very well to take into consideration P & C ° s desire
to open on November 4 , but that P & C had had plenty of time to
come in with a sign which would meet the sign ordinance require -
ments in the first place . Supervisor Schwan , however , noted they
were seeking a variance . After brief discussion , - the -Board acted
as followss
Motion by Supervisor Schwan ; seconded by Councilman Desch , .
RESOLVED , if P& C Food Markets , Inc . submits a plan for a sign
basically the same as the one presented at this hearing , but
which in square- feet and in all other respects conforms with
Local Law del - 1972 ( the ToTam of Ithaca Sign Ordinance ) , the
Building Inspector is hereby authorized by this Board to issue
a permit for the erection of same .
Unanimously carried .
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 6020 p . m .
A
Edward L . Bergen
Town Clerk