Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1985-01-15 t TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD JANUARY 15 , 1985 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , January 15 , 1985 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , Bernard Stanton , Barbara Schultz , James Baker , Edward Mazza , David Klein , Carolyn Grigorov , Peter M . Lovi ( Town Planner ) , Lewis D . Cartee ( Building Inspector ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) . ALSO PRESENT : Town Supervisor Noel Desch , Stewart D . Knowlton , Charles W . Bell , Sara Beth Canaday , Peter Jackson , Peter Rider , Bernard Hutchins , Richard C . Varn , Ralph R . Varn , Marge Giannella , Mario Giannella , Larry Rosenberg , Pam Rosenberg , Jerold Weisburd , Claudia Weisburd , Deborah Gesensway ( Ithaca Journal ) . Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 34 p . m . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - December 4 , 1984 MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of December 4 , 1984 , be and hereby are approved as written . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Stanton , Schultz , Baker , Mazza , Klein , Grigorov . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . STAFF REPORT - Peter M . Lovi Mr . Lovi stated that he would like to start with a question for the Board prompted by a call from an attorney having to do with the subdivision regulations . Mr . Lovi stated that the attorney has a client who has been parking on an adjacent property owner ' s piece of land because that person apparently needs a sliver of land to park his or her car . Mr . Lovi stated that , after some pulling and hauling , the person has been persuaded to buy a little , small triangle of land about six feet on one side by not over fifteen feet on the other . Mr . Lovi stated that the question is - - is this a subdivision ? Mr . Mazza asked if there were any building anticipated on this sliver of land . Mr . Lovi stated that there was not , adding that it is just a change in lot line so that the person could continue parking there . Chairman May asked if anyone felt that the Board needed to treat this as a subdivision . Mr . Mazza stated that he would treat it as a boundary exchange . Planning Board 2 January 15 , 1985 . Chairman May stated , as a Consensus Statement of the Planning Board , that this slight change in lot line configuration is acceptable without Subdivision Review by the Planning Board and , further , in matters such as this , the Planning Board would rely on staff for appropriate action . Mr . Lovi reported that he had just received the most recent edition of a very large booklet edited and published by The New York Land Institute entitled New York State Trends in Planning , Zoning , and Land Development , which had been compiled in cooperation with the Government Law Center of Albany Law School , SUNY Buffalo Law School , and the Pace University School of Law . Mr . Lovi stated that the booklet , some 200 pages in length , sets forth the Proceedings of the 1980 and 1983 Conferences and makes for some very interesting reading . Mr . Lovi stated that this document is available in the Planning Library upstairs anytime a Board member might wish to peruse it . Mr . Lovi read briefly from the Table of Contents highlighting some of the articles contained : Case Law Updates ; Rezonings , Variances & Special Permits ; Unpopular and Controversial Project Reviews ; New Developments . Mr . Lovi reported that an inspection by Miss Susan Beeners and him , as requested , had been made of the Dove Drive area in connection with the Varn Subdivision . Mr . Lovi reported that there are about seven pine trees up there , each of about $ 30 . 00 in value , which will be lost , but there is a considerable number of more substantial pine trees which Mr . Varn will be moving . Mr . Lovi stated that staff ' s suggestion is that , rather than replacing the pine trees , a couple of sugar maples and oak should be picked up by Mr . Varn to replace the lost pine trees . Chairman May indicated that that approach would be okay . Mr . Lovi stated that there will be an additional item on the Agenda this evening . Mr . Lovi stated that Mr . Weisburd , Commonland Community , is proposing some changes to the building configuration and so he [ Lovi ] thought he might come in tonight and speak to the Board . Mr . Lovi stated that Mr . Weisburd is proposing that certain buildings be somewhat larger and also a splitting of the roof lines such that it looks more like detached housing and fits more appropriately the contours of the land . Mr . Lovi commented that , as he understood it , after his efforts to build moderately priced housing he has received requests for housing costing a little more . Mr . Lovi reported that the Pine Tree Associates proposed restrictive covenants is an Agenda item . REPORT OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR - Lewis D . Cartee Mr . Cartee noted that each of the Board members had received a copy of his Report of Building Permits Issued for the month of December 1984 , and stated that 6 permits were issued for a total of $ 57 , 890 . 00 in improvements , as compared with December of 1983 when 5 permits were issued for a total of $ 103 , 500 . 00 in improvements . • Mr . Cartee stated that , with the permission of the Board , he would like to proceed and speak to his 1984 Annual Report . Mr . Cartee stated • Planning Board 3 January 15 , 1985 that 172 building permits were issued , a number far over other years , for a total of $ 3 , 960 , 980 . 00 in improvements , which generated $ 3 , 307 . 50 in fees . Mr . Cartee stated that , as the Board may know , there is an agreement between the Town of Ithaca and the Town of Ulysses to provide the Town of Ulysses with the services of a Code Enforcement Officer and he is that person . Mr . Cartee stated that his Annual Report does not reflect that from May to December he issued 62 permits for improvements in the Town of Ulysses . Mr . Stanton asked Mr . Cartee if there were anything happening with regard to Mr . Lucente ' s project on Sapsucker Woods Road as to change of ownership . Mr . Cartee responded that there has been no change in ownership that he is aware of , adding that the project is in the construction stage with respect to two units , and further , Mr . Lucente is still the owner of everything . Chairman May commented that Mr . Lucente has planted a lot of trees up there . Mr . Cartee noted again that two building are under construction now . ADDITIONAL ITEM : SIGN REVIEW BOARD : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO PROPOSED SIGNAGE FOR TOMPKINS COUNTY TRUST COMPANY DRIVE - IN BANK FACILITY - EAST HILL PLAZA , Chairman May stated that Mr . Charles Bell of the Tompkins County Trust Company and Mr . Stewart Knowlton representing East Hill Plaza were here to present a new proposal for signage for the proposed Tompkins County Trust Company drive - in bank facility . Mr . Cartee noted that there is no application for sign permit yet . Mr . Knowlton appended four large drawings to the bulletin board , including ( 1 ) drawing of a proposed 20 - foot high freestanding , two - sided sign with the message portion being approximately 5 ' x 4 ' and reading " Tompkins County Trust Company Bankers Since 1836 " and including a Time and Temperature sections ( 2 ) drawing of a 416 " x 10 " sign reading " Pass Thru Lane " ; ( 3 ) drawing of five two - foot high freestanding signs by 3 ' 6 " reading " Bank Parking Drive Up Banking " , " Exit Only " , " Exit Only Bank Parking Drive In Banking " , " Drive In Banking Only " , " Drive In Banking Exit " ; and ( 4 ) drawing of the same five small directional signs as in ( 3 ) showing the artwork and details . Mr . Knowlton stated that the pylon sign , which he termed the " Time and Temperature " sign is the point of discussion . Utilizing the drawing on the bulletin board , Mr . Knowlton described the sign , commenting that the Marine Midland Time and Temperature sign has gone by the wayside . Mr . Knowlton recalled that there was a a great deal of discussion at the last meeting as to where and how identification of the bank would be obtained . Again indicating on the drawings , Mr . Knowlton stated that the pylon sign is the total identification of the site , with the exception of the Bank Logo on the little signs , adding that there are to be no wall signs whatsoever . Mr . Knowlton commented that the crux of the whole matter was to identify the bank with no wall signs at all . Mr . Knowlton described what he termed a whole bunch of signs at the Marine Midland Bank across the street . Mr . Knowlton stated that the thing they were concerned with and that the Board seemed to be concerned with is the controlling of the traffic and so Planning Board 4 January 15 , 1985 the directional signs became a very important part of the project to get people in where you want them and out where you want them rather than it being their choice . Mr . Knowlton commented that it seems that signs on banks are unlit signs but they are not satisfactory at night or in the winter and a lit sign requires a dimension that will take a fluorescent type set up , so , there is a built - in size requirement . Mr . Knowlton indicated on the drawings the various other signs such as " Bank Parking Drive Up Banking " , " Exit Only " , " Exit Only Bank Parking Drive In Banking " , " Drive In Banking Only " , " Drive In Banking Exit " , commenting that it seems like a lot of words but he did not think so . Mr . Knowlton stated that what they have tried to do is control traffic in and out with the least danger and any kind of fear that a person would have in getting in and out of the property , commenting that it seems this kind of directional signage the bank would be just as happy not to spend money for but they want the public to be safe . Mr . Knowlton commented further that particularly on snowy nights like this , you can plow and five minutes later the identification of driveways is very difficult . Mr . Knowlton stated that this is a rather unique situation , especially with the drive - up windows and , thus , it seems to everyone involved that this is the appropriate amount of signage . With regard to the freestanding sign , Mr . Knowlton commented that a 4 ' x 5 ' sign on a property that big seems to him not to be too much to ask . Mr . Stanton asked how many square feet is involved with regard to the freestanding sign . Mr . Cartee stated that the sign is 22 square feet in area and it is 20 feet up from ground level to the top of the . sign . Mr . Cartee stated that directional signs are exempt signs . Mr . Knowlton commented that this proposed Time and Temperature sign seems to him to be a definite asset to the area . Chairman May asked where the sign is proposed to be placed on the site plan . Mr . Knowlton stated that it is proposed next to the " bus station " , so to speak . Chairman May wondered about the direction to which the sign would face . Mr . Knowlton stated that the sign would face toward Ellis Hollow Road . Mr . Mazza wondered , as to construction , what the sign would look like , for example , wood or metal . Mr . Knowlton stated that the sign would be all metal - - something like a polished or brushed stainless steel . Mr . Cartee pointed out that there are no construction specifications in place at this time . Chairman May commented on the dimensions of the directional signs , noting that they were proposed to be about 316 " x 2 ' high . Mr . Mazza wondered how high they would be off the ground . Mr . Knowlton indicated that they would stand about 3 to 32 feet high . Chairman May wondered if the signs were to be single or two - sided . Mr . Bell stated that they all are proposed to be two- sided . Mr . Bell stated that the bank believes that there cannot be too many directional signs , adding that he knew the Board did not want to clutter things , however , they felt it to be important . Mr . Bell stated that they will have a walk - up area where one can park and walk - up to the window , also a drive - in area , and also a pass - through lane sign . • Mr . Mazza wondered where the pass - through lane sign might go , with Mr . Bell responding that it will hang under the canopy . Planning Board 5 January 15 , 1985 Chairman May asked if there were any further questions with respect to the primary sign . There were none . Chairman May stated that the Planning Board cannot approve the freestanding sign under any circumstances , adding that the only direction open to the Board is to offer a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals . Mr . Mazza stated that he thought the addition of the Time and Temperature sign changed his view toward this matter , commenting that it offers information to people and makes him feel differently about it . Mr . Stanton stated that he thought it was fine . Mr . Cartee stated that he would like the Board to know that the Town Sign Law does not mention sizes or shapes with regard to directional signs . MOTION by Mr . Edward Mazza , seconded by Mr . Bernard Stanton . RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , in its capacity as Sign Review Board , recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals a grant of approval for the proposed freestanding Time and Temperature sign proposed by the Tompkins County Trust Company in conjunction with its proposed East Hill Plaza drive - in banking facility , said sign proposal having been presented to the Planning Board this date , January 15 , 1985 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . - Aye May ,y , StantonSchultz , Baker , Mazza , Klein , Grigorov . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Both Mr . Bell and Mr . Knowlton thanked the Board for their time and consideration . SIGN REVIEW BOARD : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR A SIGN AT IDE ' S BOWLING LANES , SCOTT HAMILTON , APPELLANT , Mr . Cartee stated that he would speak to the matter of the sign for Ide ' s since Mr . Ideman was ill and Mr . Hamilton could not come . Mr . Cartee stated that the requested sign takes the place of a food operation sign which is closed . Mr . Cartee stated that the sign is in place and was erected unknown to his office . Mr . Cartee distributed four colored photographs showing both the sign under discussion which reads : " IDE ' S Home of the $ 25 , 000 Easter Time Tournament Dick Ritger ' s Academy for Bowlers " and the entire facility itself . Mr . Cartee stated that , with this additional sign , there is a total of five signs on the structure as the photographs indicate . Chairman May asked what the linear frontage of Ide ' s Bowling Alley is . Mr . Cartee stated that it is about 1501 , not counting the Bicycle Shop , Mr . Cartee noted that the sign under discussion is a permanent sign . Mr . Cartee distributed to the Board members a copy of the sign Planning Board 6 January 15 , 1985 permit [ # 16 ] as approved by the Planning Board and the Town Board in May of 1976. . Mr . Cartee described the signs covered by that permit which have been removed since that permit was issued , noting again that Mr . Ideman is now requesting approval of the 30 - square - foot sign on the north end of the structure replacing the former food operation sign [ Cowbell ] . Chairman May stated that he thought there was a sign on the side . Mr . Cartee stated that there was not . Mr . Cartee stated that Mr . Ideman has painted the structure and done considerable work . Mr . Stanton stated that he thought this signage was much better than one great big sign . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Bernard Stanton * RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , in its capacity as Sign Review Board , recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals a grant of approval for the addition of a 30 - square - foot sign , reading " IDE ' S Home of the $ 25 , 000 Easter Time Tournament Dick Ritger ' s Academy for Bowlers " , on the north end of the facade of Ides , 10 - 12 Judd Falls Road . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Stanton , Schultz , Baker , Mazza , Klein , Grigorov . Nay - None . • The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Mr . Cartee requested permission to speak to one other matter of interest . Having received such permission , Mr . Cartee stated that he had talked to a Marine Midland representative last week with respect to their time and temperature sign and was informed that due to cost they do not intend to repair it . Mr . Cartee stated that , as he understood it , their intention is to leave it there . Mr . Cartee noted that the sign permit with respect to this sign is for a time and temperature sign . Mr . Cartee asked the Board members for their philosophy on time and temperature signs , commenting that his question to the Bank was when are you going to repair it ? Chairman May stated that he thought the Bank should be required to blank it off in a neat and attractive fashion . Mr . Cartee stated that he agreed . Mr . Mazza stated that he was not willing to just let it go at that , commenting that if they blank it out you just have a big " thing " there . Mrs . Grigorov commented that she thought the sign in its present condition was unsightly . Mrs . Schultz suggested that the Board through Mr . Cartee ask the Bank what they intend to do about this state of disrepair since the Sign Law requires signs to be maintained . Mr . Cartee stated that he would go back to the Bank people and handle it in such a manner , adding that it may come before the Planning Board , the Zoning Board of Appeals , or the Town Board , REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD - Carolyn Grigorov . Planning Board 7 January 15 , 1985 • Since the Agenda was running behind schedule , Chairman May asked if Mrs . Grigorov would mind presenting her Report later . Mrs . Grigorov stated that she would be happy to do so at the end of the meeting . PUBLIC HEARING . CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A 22 - LOT SUBDIVISION IN THE VICINITY OF DOVE DRIVE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 61 - 1 - 8 . 121 RALPH YARN , DEVELOPER . Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 30 p . m . and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on January 7 , 1985 and January 10 , 1985 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of the property in question , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the applicant on January 10 , 1985 . Mr . Varn appeared before the Board and noted that each of the Board members had received a reduced copy of the Final Subdivision Plat for Hungerford Heights , appended a large copy of that Final Subdivision Plat to the bulletin board , and stated that what he basically wanted to discuss was drainage and maybe trees , adding that everything else has been pretty well covered . Mr . Varn stated [ indicating on the plat plan ] that he just highlighted the drainage so everyone could see , commenting that the biggest drainage thing would be a culvert " here " . Mr . Varn noted that instead of letting the water go all the way , he • will bring it to a central ditch and to a ditch near Cornell property . Again indicating on the plat plan , Mr . Varn pointed out that there was an existing ditch " here " and stated that he will take that theme and do the whole length of the property basically getting the whole hill off from the back yards on other people ' s property . Indicating on the plat plan , Mr . Varn commented that it will be cut off " here " so it comes " here " such that it will be brought out to the Snyder Hill area . Mr . Varn stated that everything else is self - explanatory , adding that " this ditch " [ indicating ] is for existing owners of " these lots " [ indicating ] , and adding further that , as far as everyone else is concerned , " this ditch " [ indicating ] will take care of everything . Mr . Varn noted that two culverts will be put in - - an 18 " and a 24 " . Mr . Lovi stated that he had walked the land this afternoon and , with respect to the Cornell property , asked Mr . Varn to explain where he will , or will not , make more of a ditch , adding that it was his understanding that it will drain on to Cornell property and not to Snyder Hill Road , Mr . Varn responded that that was not the case , described the drainage utilizing the plat plan and stated that it ends up in Snyder Hill Road . Mr . Varn commented that he was not going to do a master ditch , adding that he did not own the property anyway . Chairman May asked if the staff were completely satisfied with the plans as presented . Mr . Lovi responded , yes , adding that the drainage , water and all plans have been looked over by Mr . Flumerfelt . Mr . Lovi • stated that he had looked at the plans , had walked the land with Susan Beeners and , further , was satisfied that the Subdivision Regulations had been met . With regard to the point he had mentioned earlier about Planning Board 8 January 15 , 1985 vegetation , Mr . Lovi stated that he would mention the pine trees now , adding that he had discussed the matter with Miss Beeners , Mr . Lovi stated that there are seven pine trees that will probably be lost in moving through there and what they would prefer to see is , at some point when Miss Beeners has some idea of how she wishes to go on with the park area , that Mr . Varn acquire two shade trees , such as sugar maple and oak , in the 2 " or 3 " caliper range . Chairman May asked if there were anyone present who wished to speak to the matter of the Varn Subdivision , Ms . Sara Beth Canaday , of the Cornell University Real Estate Department , spoke from the floor and stated that she had a statement from the Real Estate Department to read . Ms . Canaday read : " January 15 , 1985 Montgomery May , Chairman RE : Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for a 22 - lot subdivision in the vicinity of Dove Drive , tax parcel number 61 - 1 - 8 . 12 , Ralph Varn , developer . . . . Cornell University wishes to continue its standing as a good neighbor and inform the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca and Ralph Varn , developer of the proposed subdivision , that the subdivision is adjacent to lands owned by Cornell University which are used for agriculture , . including the pasturing of a variety of farm animals . This land has been used for grazing and other agricultural purposes for many years . It is planned that this use will continue . There may be noises and odors associated with the animals , fertilizers , or other activities which might be offensive to homeowners of the proposed subdivision . We felt that this potential annoyance should be considered in your planning and in Mr . Varn ' marketing of the lots if the subdivision is approved . Thank you . Sincerely , ( sgd . ) Sara Canaday " Mr . Stanton asked Ms . Canaday what lands she was referring to , wondering if they were lots numbered 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , and 12 , or if she were referring to all the borders or just one of them . Ms . Canaday responded that she was referrring to both borders . Mr . Lovi stated that the other point about landscaping he would mention is that he noticed that on lots # 4 and # 5 there is quite a growth of evergreens and he would suggest in the reallocation of evergreens that Mr . Varn just keep in touch with Miss Beeners . Mr . Lovi stated that he would suggest firming up the border with Cornell University so as not to interfere with the view of the homeowners to the west . Mr . Varn commented that he did not believe he had ever seen any animals grazing up there . . Mr . Mario Giannella , 6 Dove Drive , spoke from the floor and stated on one side is the Baker Institute , and then Mr . Varn ' s area , and then Planning Board 9 January 15 , 1985 Cornell land with some grazing animals . Mr . Varn commented that that was not close to the border . Mr . Peter Rider , 2 Pheasant Lane , spoke from the floor and asked Mr . Varn where the water was going from " that " point . Mr . Varn responded that it was going under a culvert and suggested that Mr . Rider come closer to the bulletin board and he would show him where using the drawing . Mr . Varn explained the drainage to Mr . Rider . Mr . Rider stated that he was satisfied , adding that there has been a specific attempt to take care of that . Mrs . Pam Rosenberg , 38 Dove Drive , spoke from the floor and wondered , if the water chooses not to follow " those red arrows " [ indicating ] , what happens then ; whom do we call ? Mrs . Rosenberg stated that , now , the ditches barely hold the water and described at length the area of her concern . Mrs . Rosenberg stated that she was concerned with exposed ditching . Mr . Varn stated that , seriously , Mrs . Rosenberg owns the house and has owned it for several years and part of her responsibility is keeping the ditch clean . Mrs . Rosenberg stated that she has no ditch in the backyard . Mr . Varn replied that that is why he is cutting the hill off " here " [ indicating ] . Mr . Klein noted that at the corner of lot # 1 , Mr . Varn was asking the water to make a right turn . Mr . Varn stated that that was correct , adding that that has been designed by the engineer and adding further that he was trying to get everything to turn into the road ditch and . not wander . Mr . Varn commented that if it should rain for three days and nights everyone will be wet . Mr . Mazza asked who designed this drainage system . Mr . Varn stated that Larry Fabbroni was the engineer . Mr . Mazza stated that it was important for the neighbors to know , and it might make them feel better , that it was designed by a professional engineer . Mr . Bernard Hutchins , 1 Pheasant Lane , spoke from the floor , noted that the " master ditch " goes across private property , and asked who maintains that . Mr . Varn responded that in a neighborhood situation like that everyone has a part in maintenance when it is all done , adding that it is a responsibility of homeowners to maintain the ditch . Mr . Hutchins stated that what he was worried about was if one person decides not to do that , then there is water on the north side of Pheasant Lane . Mr . Varn stated that he did not know how to answer that question . Chairman May stated that keeping the ditch clear is a responsibility of a homeowner just like anywhere else , adding that , hopefully , everyone has good neighbors . Chairman May commented that if ditches are properly designed they should drain . Supervisor Desch commented that the Town requires homeowners to clean out their ditches . Mr . Mario Giannella stated that , with respect to the main ditch going at an angle to the downhill line , it seemed to him just as easy for water going down and to Dove Drive . Mr . Giannella spoke of a dead - end to Cornell land . Mr . Varn stated that the engineer has spent a lot of time to go out there and to make this work , noting again that there is an existing ditch . Mr . Varn stated that he did not think Planning Board 10 January 15 , 1985 there will be an overflow. Mr . Giannella countered that Mr . Varn was saying that the water path is easier to go into a dead -end field than into a ditch . Mr . Lovi stated that the field is not a dead - end . Mr . Lovi stated that , if anything , the drainage plan developed by the engineers will carry water into that field and intercepting water in the area of the Rosenberg lot and diverting it away from their property and neighbors . Mr . Lovi stated that he did not know if there were anything else that can be said except that the contours continue across Cornell property . Mr . Lovi stated that he has walked this land and this drainage plan is going to work on a day to day basis . Mrs . Rosenberg stated that she would like to mention the Hilker plan in 1976 when the Town Engineer suggested perforated pipe to take water away from this area underground into the Snyder Hill Road ditches . Mrs . Rosenberg stated that now water is being added . Mr . Lovi stated that no water is being added , commenting that it is unfortunate that the property which went into receivership at the time when the original development failed because a lot of the grading work that should have been done was not done and those lots were not drained as well as they should have been . Mr . Lovi commented that he had sympathy with that problem to the extent that Mr . Varn will not be exacerbating that problem , adding that perhaps the Rosenbergs should put in a ditch . Mr . Larry Rosenberg stated that he could live with swampiness as long as more does not come . Mr . Rosenberg stated that he is hoping there will not be a problem and that is why he is raising the question now . Mr . Varn suggested to Mr . Rosenberg that , perhaps , he . could put in a ditch turning into his ditch . Mr . Varn commented that a tremendous mass of water was being assumed . Mr . Rosenberg asked , with reference to the " center " ditch , if it were an open ditch . Mr . Varn stated that it was . Mr . Rosenberg asked if the park were going to be fenced . Mr . Varn responded that he had no intention now to fence that area . Mr . Rosenberg wondered if it might , for safety reasons , make sense to have covered pipe . Mr . Varn described the approach being used as a of water way . " Mr . Lovi described just how a " grassed water way " looks , noting that it tapers about 1 Z ' over a 4 ' - 6 ' run and is a very smooth , wide U - shaped depression . Mr . Rosenberg wondered if this type of ditch goes between the properties and the road ditches are deeper . Mr . Lovi stated that that was correct . Mr . Hutchins asked if the culvert on the lower part of Dove Drive was to be 24 " . Mr . Varn stated that that was correct . Chairman May asked if there were any further questions . No one spoke . Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 41 p . m . and asked the Board members if they had any further questions . No one spoke . Chairman May asked Mr . Lovi if he and Miss Beeners were satisfied in all aspects . Mr . Lovi stated that they were - - in all aspects . MOTION by Mr . David Klein , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May . RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final Subdivision Approval for a 22 - lot subdivision in the vicinity of Dove Drive , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 61 - 1 - 8 . 12 , Varn Brothers Construction Company , developers , in accordance with Final Subdivision Plat entitled " Hungerford Heights " , dated January 4 , 1985 , Planning Board 11 January 15 , 1985 • revised January 13 , 1985 , and presented at Public Hearing this date , January 15 , 1985 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Stanton , Schultz , Baker , Mazza , Klein , Grigorov . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Mr . Varn thanked the Board for its time and consideration . REVIEW OF PINE TREE ASSOCIATES ' PROPOSED RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS Noting that each of the Board members had received with his / her Agenda a copy of a letter from Professor Royal D . Colle , Pine Tree Associates , dated December 29 , 1984 [ to Mr . Lovi ] together with a 6 - page document prepared by the Town Attorney entitled " Restrictions on Use of Land " , Mr . Lovi asked if the Board members had any particular comments on the proposed restrictions section by section . Mr . Lovi stated that , as a part of this discussion , he will be referring to a Memorandum from Town Attorney Buyoucos to Professor Colle , dated December 10 , 1984 , a copy of which had been sent to the Planning Board members by the Town Clerk . [ Professor Colle ' s letter reads " I have enclosed the ' Restrictions on Use of Land ' that was prepared by the • Town attorney . Dr . Baldwin , Dr . Mecenas and I have made some observations on the document , and in general agree to the thrust in the document . TIf the suggestions we have made seem appropriate , would it [ be ] possible for the document to be put in wording acceptable to the Town , and then would you advise us of the next step in making this meet the Town ' s requirements concerning the restrictive covenant ? TI will be out of the country through January 20 , but my associates expect to be available if any other questions arise . " ] Mr . Lovi stated that he would like to go through Mr . Buyoucos ' comments because he raised some good points . Mr . Lovi noted that Mr . Buyoucos had highlighted accessory uses , however , he [ Lovi ] had thought there was nothing unusual in the permitted accessory uses and this " subdivision " should not be treated differently from others in R15 , with the exception of there being no further subdivision . Mr . Lovi stated that his point to the Board was that he did not see a need for an additional level of restrictions on these properties . Turning to the specifics of the proposed " Restrictions on Use of Land " , Mr . Lovi commented , with regard to Section 1 . , Description of Land Subject to Restricted Uses , that he did not feel there was any need to go over that Section . Moving on to Section 2 . A . , Subdivision Approval , Mr . Lovi referred the Board to line 5 of that section which refers to one - family dwellings only . Mr . Lovi stated that , to him , this means that all of the lots in the subdivision , i . e . , lots 1 through 26 , have to be single family . Mr . Klein pointed out that this is their land [ Pine Tree Associates ] that they are subdividing and so they can make it more restrictive if they want . Mr . Lovi replied that , yes , it is their land , but this is the Town Planning Board . Mrs . Planning Board 12 January 15 , 1985 • Schultz offered that it is possible that Pine Tree Associates might want to keep it restrictive . Supervisor Desch suggested that , if the Board feels comfortable in leaving out " as one family dwellings " , then it is up to them to change it . Continuing on with that same paragraph [ 2 . A . ] , Mr . Lovi read the next sentence - - " Pine Tree Associates have represented that the quality of construction of residential dwellings shall be at least equal , and the design of the construction will be substantially comparable , to that of the existing residential units on said adjacent lots on Pine Tree Road and Slaterville Road . " Mr . Lovi stated that in his marginal comments as he read the document he had written " Who cares ? " , in terms of the Subdivision Regulations , Mrs . Grigorov thought that they might want to have a lot more in than the Board cares about . Mr . Lovi stated that he agreed with Mrs . Grigorov but , once they have subdivision approval , they can impose any restrictive covenants they want . Mr . Lovi expressed concern over a fait accompli accommodating all this subdivision which includes the 12 - 13 parcels already sold off . Moving on to Section 2 . B . , Mr . Lovi noted that the " RESTRICTED USE " lots are those created by splitting off certain lots . Mr . Lovi stated that he had no problems with Section 2 . B . , adding that , in his opinion , that is the meat of this particular document to which the Town will become a party . • Discussion continued with Section 3 . , Restrictive Covenants , of which there were four parts numbered A . B , C , and D . Chairman May wondered if those involved really mean that a kid cannot raise vegetables and sell them on his front lawn . Mr . Stanton stated that he had a lot of trouble with the whole concept and asked , " why are we doing all this ? " Chairman May commented that the Board has to do something but , if restrictive covenants are going to be made later , he wondered why the Board should be a a party to it . Mr . Lovi asked if there were particular uses which the Board did not think should be allowed , adding that his own particular opinion is that there are none and the lots should be treated as any other land given that they have no access . Chairman May stated that he had a lot of problems with being more restrictive especially since they are larger lots . A lengthy discussion ensued , during which Mrs . Grigorov expressed concern with the possibility of unnecessary impact on the existing houses , Mr . Lovi suggested that the restricted lots should be flagged , and Chairman May suggested that a paragraph just setting restrictions on the so - called restricted lots as in the record . Mr . Lovi wondered if it were the consensus of the Board that these are too restrictive with regard to paragraphs 2 . A . and 3 . and also ( 1 ) under 3 . D . , with it appearing that 2 . B . is in order , and 3 . C . which is the meat of the whole matter . Chairman May asked , with regard to 3 . C . , " No further subdivision of these lots shall be permitted . " , to what does " these " refer to . Mr . Lovi stated that Section I . B . covers that . question . Chairman May thought that was okay . Planning Board 13 January 15 , 1985 • Chairman May stated that he would recommend that the Board direct Mr . Lovi to send a note to the Town Supervisor indicating that the consensus of the Planning Board is that this document is much too specific and much too detailed and outside the realm of what the Board cares about , and further , that the document be restricted to the zoning ordinance regulations for R15 lots . Mr . Stanton stated that he sensed that the Board thought page 1 and section 2 . B . were the parts that were most germane and suitable . The Board members indicated their agreement . REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD - Carolyn Grigorov , Mrs . Grigorov noted that , as usual , Mrs . Fuller had sent the Board members copies of the County Planning Board Minutes for the November and December 1984 meetings . Mrs . Grigorov stated that those two meetings were mostly educational with the January 9th , 1985 meeting following in that vein . Mrs . Grigorov reported that a panel presentation by Earl Arnold as Panel Coordinator , Joseph Laquatra of Cornll University , and Becky Bush of the Department of Social Services , entitled " Energy Conservation Measures in Rental Units " was the main part of that meeting . Mrs . Grigorov noted that the only municipalities which have established standards are Lansing and the City of Ithaca , commenting that if a, property is owner - occupied the market takes care 0 of the matter , but in the case of rental property it is good to have some legal code in place . Mrs . Grigorov reported that the situation with respect to welfare housing was discussed . Commenting on the December 12th , 1984 meeting , Mrs . Grigorov reported that a panel presentation was also the highlight with the presentation dealing with " The State of Utilities in Tompkins County - - Water and Sewer , the panel members being John Andersson [ Director of Environmental Health , Tompkins County Health Department ] and Larry Fabbroni [ Town of Ithaca Engineer ] . Mrs . Grigorov commented that she was surprised to learn from Mr . Andersson that the Bolton Point Water Treatment plan has a treatment capacity of 9 million gallons per day and only 1 . 9 million gallons per day is currently utilized . Mrs . Grigorov noted that the other primary water supply is the City water supply which comes from the Six Mile Creek system which has a capacity of 5 to 7 million gallons per day with about a 4 . 7 million gallons per day utilization . Mrs . Grigorov noted that Cornell University has its own water supply system from Fall Creek , Supervisor Desch commented on Mr . Andersson ' s figures , noting that the numbers are not quite right , although the 9 million gallon per day figure has its place in any discussion of the SCLIWC system . Supervisor Desch stated that the Bolton Point Water Plant presently has a 6 , 000 , 000 gallon per day capacity . . Chairman May thanked Mrs . Grigorov for her report . Planning Board 14 January 15 , 1985 • INFORMAL DISCUSSION WITH JEROLD WEISBURD , ARCHITECT AND DEVELOPER OF COMMONLAND COMMUNITY , 1459 SLATERVILLE ROAD . Mr . Jerold Weisburd and Mrs . Claudia Weisburd appeared before the Board and thanked the members for permitting them to speak in an informal manner at this time . Mr . Weisburd and his assistant [ name not known ] placed before the Board two very large and very detailed wooden models of what it was they wished to speak about . Mr . Weisburd also appended two large drawings to the bulletin board . Mr . Weisburd stated that he would like to start with the drawings on the wall , commenting that this is a preliminary presentation which is not on the market at this time . Mr . Weisburd described the changes which he would like to make in the configuration and looks of a certain number of the homes planned for Commonland , indicating enclosed porches , a pair of French doors , and a deck and trellis . Mr . Weisburd spoke of one of the differences in design is that they have given up the enclosed patio for some open porch and deck in the back , adding that the general massing of the buildings is very much like they had before but this allows for the stepping up and down of the slope . Mr . Weisburd commented that not as much earth work is needed . Mr . Weisburd stated that the materials would be identical to what they have been using , commenting , however , that it was not necessary that they be identical but that they be tied together in a pleasing fashion such as the same roof pitch , same siding , etc . Mr . Weisburd described the general categories into which the discussion might fall ( 1 ) elevation and architecture which is shown on the two drawings and in the models , and ( 2 ) a couple of planning changes which they are making . Mr . Weisburd now showed the original site pian as approved , pointing out that they have now built " Spring Hill " , " Mare ' s Nest " , " The Pines " , and " East Meadows " . Mr . Weisburd stated that they are considering shifting phases slightly with respect to " Round Rock " and " The Meadows " which , they believe , is more orderly . Mr . Weisburd recounted one thing that happened in " Round Rock " is that initially " this " road [ indicating ] came straight down , however , after dealing for a very long time with the State and their requirements for approach to Slaterville Road , they had to loop around , the result being that this area [ Round Rock ] is very congested and , so , they left it to see how it came out . Mr . Weisburd stated that they have built the road and he is not pleased with it , commenting that the area known as " Round Rock " is very crowded , and adding that , therefore , he would like to cut back that area from 9 units to 6 units , 6 being the maximum number they can put together in one group , and take the 3 from " Round Rock " and put them in " The Meadows " . Mr . Weisburd pointed out that one unit would be left out of " The Pines " and they would make up that one too . Now , utilizing both the drawings and the large models , Mr . Weisburd showed the fourth building in " The Pines " - - a four -plex . Pointing to an area on the wooden model , Mr . Weisburd commented that he felt it was nice to have this sort of protected space , likening it to a sort of common green . Planning Board 15 January 15 , 1985 . Mrs . Schultz asked how far away the fourth building would be from the other ones . Mr . Weisburd stated that it would be at the least the thirty feet as required . Mr . Klein wondered about Mr . Wei. sburd ' s hopes for solar application . Mr . Weisburd responded that there was no question that he would lose that on " these " buildings [ indicating " The Meadows " on the large wooden model ] , but they have discovered things and the Canadians have discovered things too in that regard . Mr . Weisburd stated that the homes will still be super - insulated and commented that one thing is - - yes - - you lose some solar , but when you super - insulate it is no problem and it makes up for some heat loss . Mr . Weisburd noted that " The Commons " stays open all the way down to the end . Mr . Weisburd stated that another question about which he would speak is that when he brought the new ideas in and showed Mr . Fabbroni he questioned density and whether that would be changed in any way . Mr . Weisburd stated that he would like to address that and proceeded to append another very long drawing to the bulletin board depicting the various clustered components of Commonland , commenting that assessing density in a cluster subdivision is kind of tricky . Mr . Weisburd stated that the density overall is 2 . 8 and he is not suggesting any change in that . Mr . Weisburd commented that you cannot apply density per cluster line , adding that a " cluster line " is only an engineering line . Indicating on the long drawing , Mr . Weisburd stated that he had taken the original layout and blocked in the buildings and then circled each group of buildings , adding that his point was what , in effect , the density is and is going to be and adding further that the density is balancing out as is shown on the large drawing . Turning back to the matter of the units themselves , Mr . Weisburd stated that they are still going to be using a full two - hour fire wall between units , pointing out the use of masonry walls instead of gypsum . Mr . Lovi asked if the units would be larger . Mr . Weisburd stated that they would not be larger , however , the smallest original unit is eliminated , adding that those smallest units had been referred to as 1 as opposed to 1A . Mr . Weisburd stated that they will also represent a higher price . Mr . Lovi wondered what Model 1 was . Mr . Weisburd described the terminology and the use of the letters " A " , " B " , and " C " , adding that 1 , 2 , and 3 worked quite well at first , but now there is more demand for bigger area and , therefore , the terms have evolved into A1 , B1 , and Cl . Mr . Weisburd noted that the plans for these particular units were submitted to Mr . Cartee and several were sold last year and , so , in essence , there are six models . Mr . Weisburd reiterated that , now , there is no Model " A " , now there is Model " A1 " , adding that there have been a couple of exceptions which he did not think to be a problem with respect to specific requests for larger houses and which will be submitted to Mr . Cartee . Mr . Mazza , pointing to one of the units on the large model , asked what the square footage of that particular home would be . Mr . Weisburd described that unit as having a gross size of 22 ' x 36 ' , with a square footage of about 1 , 600 . Chairman May commented that Mr . Weisburd ' s proposal looked very good and asked Mr . Lovi what , at this point , the Board needs to do , other than be aware of the proposal . Mr . Lovi responded that there was Planning Board 16 January 15 , 1985 nothing for the Board to do at this time , other than be aware , adding that , in effect , the principal thing at this time is , insofar as concerns the " Round Rock " phase , it could probably be agreed that this is an important change . Mr . Stanton stated his agreement . Mr . Lovi stated that the question that staff had , and which Mr . Weisburd raised , is when you take four units and put them in " this " model [ indicating on the large wooden model ] is the density really higher . Mr . Lovi commented that Mr . Weisburd had made a good case for considering the total envelope with respect to density . Mr . Lovi stated that he did not know since this is the first time this has come up , and added that the thought among staff at the time was to take four units and lose them over the rest of the site and not load up " this " section [ indicating ] . Mr . Lovi commented that there was something to be said for the idea of having something which approaches an urban townhouse court [ indicating ] , adding the further comments that the project does not have this at this time and that he thought it would be interesting - - if there is a market . Mr . Weisburd commented that if there is no market , he does not build , adding that if anyone sees some fundamental reason against it , he or she should speak now . Supervisor Desch asked what the height is proposed to be . Mr . Weisburd responded that the height will be below 30 feet . Mrs . Grigorov noted that it appeared there would be no earth sheltering . Mr . Weisburd responded that that was an interesting question , and added that they have learned a lot of lessons , among which was that they found that the two - hour fire wall is very expensive and to go down is • very expensive and with 16 " insulation the earth is almost superfluous . Mr . Weisburd commented that it really costs a fortune to dig and to move earth around . Mr . Weisburd described in some detail the foundations , double floors , concrete piers , and commented that the contours of the land are not disturbed . Indicating on the large wooden model , Mr . Klein inquired if Mr . Weisburd had studied turning the gables , that is , running them the other way . Mr . Weisburd stated that they had studied that approach , however , they would have to build a gabled two - hour fire wall . Chairman May stated that the project looks very nice , commenting that he thought the Board members were quite comfortable with it as long as the total number of units do not change . Mr . Lovi wondered if , as long as the total number of units do not change , it would be okay for staff to proceed administratively . Both Supervisor Desch and Mr . Klein pointed out that the site plan is changed by this proposal - - to which general agreement was indicated . Chairman May stated to Mr . Weisburd that the Board may ask him to come back for site plan approval . Mr . Weisburd commented that he needed to get this out into the market for spring and if encumbered by several meetings , if there were any questions , he would be stuck with going with the same plan that is in place . There followed a lengthy discussion of what would be changed and what would not be changed , during which Mr . Weisburd noted that they have filed a new offering plan with the State that reflects the changes . . Chairman May suggested that if and when the matter should come before the Board a Short Environmental Assessment Form ought to be ` Planning Board 17 January 15 , 1985 • completed . Mr . Klein thought the matter should come before the Board as a minor site plan change . Mr . Stanton stated that he thought everything ought to be public and known . Mr . Weisburd stated that he understood , adding that he will most probably be before the Board at its next meeting - - February 5th . EXECUTIVE SESSION Chairman May announced that Supervisor Desch wished to speak to the Planning Board members and at this time the Board would retire into Executive Session . Matters pertaining to personnel were discussed ; no action was taken . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the January 15 , 1985 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10 : 20 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board . •