Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1987-05-19 - FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD C1erk22 MAY 19 , 1987 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , May 19 , 1987 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , . New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , James Baker , Carolyn Grigorov , Virginia Langhans , Edward Mazza , David Klein , Robert Kenerson , William Lesser , Susan C . Beeners ( Town Planner ) , Robe= rt R . Flumerfelt ( Town Engineer ) , Andrew S . Frost ( Town Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer ) , John C . Barney , Esq . ( Town Attorney ) , ALSO PRESENT : Valerie Littlefield , John Littlefield , John Perialas , Carol Taylor , - Raymond Taylor , Claudia Weisburd , Shelley M . Blackler , Marie Cario , Barbara J . Bredbenner , Edgar Bredbenner , Douglas Armstrong , Herbert Deinert , David C . Auble , Scott Brim , John Cake , Dora Barnett , Peter Hillman , Paul Kelsey , Elliott Lauderdale , Margie Rumsey , Daniel Booth , Sarah Whipple , Joyce Hickes , E . L . Rose Gostanian Monkemeyer , Herbert N . Monkemeyer , Evan N . Monkemeyer , Andrea Coby , Kathy McLaren , Lenny Fromkes , Attorney Robert Clune , Carol Hill . • Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 30 p . m . and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on May 11 , 1987 , and May 14 , 1987 , respectively , together with the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion , as appropriate , upon the Regional Manager of Finger Lakes State Parks , Recreation , and Historic Preservation , upon both the Clerk and the Building Commissioner of the City of Ithaca , upon the Tompkins County Superintendent: of Public Works , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the applicants and / or Agent , as appropriate , on May 14 , 1987 . PUBLIC HEARINcJ : CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF A PROPOSED CHILDREN ' S OUTDOOR PLAY AREA , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF COURTSIDE RACQUET AND FITNESS CLUB , 16 JUDD FALLS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO , 6 - 43 - 1 - 51 BUSINESS DISTRICT " C " . CAROL TAYLOR , APPLICANT . i Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 34 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Ms . Taylor was present . Ms . Taylor appeared before the Board and stated that she was requesting approval to construct a 20 - foot by 24 - foot play area outside the front entrance of the Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club . Planning Board - 2 - May 19 , 1987 • Ms . Taylor noted that a fence will be erected to enclose a grassed area . Chairman May , noting that this was a Public Hearing , asked if anyone from the public wished to speak to this issue . No one spoke . Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 7 : 45 p . m . and asked for questions or comments from the Board . Mrs . Grigorov asked about the number of children , with Ms . Taylor responding that there will be no more than ten or eleven at any time , and there will be an adult supervisor on the premises at all times . Mr . Mazza expressed his concern for the safety of the children . Ms . Taylor stated that there is an existing boundary of railroad ties around the area now , and mentioned that she and Ms . Beeners had discussed having another layer of railroad ties which would then make it high enough to stop a bumper on a car . Ms . Beeners commented that there would be 16 inches of ties along the entrance area plus the picket fence . Ms . Beeners stated that she had spoken with Mr . Flumerfelt and he had suggested that some concrete wheel stops that could be spiked in the ground would probably be the best protection . Mrs . Langhans asked Ms . Taylor if there ever was a time when all the parking spaces were used , with Ms . Taylor responding that the parking spaces are filled in the winter months , but not ususally in the summer months . Mrs . Langhans wondered if there would be any • hardship if the parking spaces were eliminated in the summertime . Ms . Taylor stated that there are specific times for this use - - morning hours and evening hours - - 9 : 00 a . m . to Noon , and 5 : 00 p . m . to 8 : 00 P . M . Mrs . Langhans inquired about the space between the fence and the grill of the car , with Ms . Taylor indicating that there is approximately a foot , and reiterating that the only time the parking area is used around the Club is in the winter months when the other lot is not plowed . Ms . Taylor offered that something could be worked out so that parking near the play area could be eliminated during the time the children are present . Mr . Mazza asked how the parking could be restricted during the time the children were at play , with Ms . Taylor replying that they would erect a sign , and adding that there would be a total of six spaces affected . Mr . Flumerfelt suggested that , if parking were really needed , a more substantial steel guard rail , two feet away from the fence , could be erected , and this would solve the problem of having to erect a sign . Chairman May asked Ms . Beeners if there were any plantings planned for the north side of the Courtside building . Ms . Taylor offered that her original proposal had been for the other side of the entrance , but that was rejected because , if they were ever going to expand , that would be where the expansion would be . Ms . Beeners recalled that the site plan for the area had been approved in 1982 , and stated that: the main area where there was not a fulfillment of the Planning Board - 3 - May 19 , 1987 • site plan plantings was along the road which was pretty much an asphalt area . Ms . Beeners also recalled that there had been a Letter of Credit at one time in regard to the plantings . Ms . Beeners stated that she had discussed this with former Town Engineer Fabbroni and it was his opinion that what had transpired at that time had been satisfactory . Ms . Beeners stated that there are some barriers in the front area , but it is a little more enchanced in the back , insofar as plantings are concerned . Chairman May wondered if the Letter of Credit had been released , with Ms . Beeners responding that it was Mr . Fabbroni ' s understanding that it had been , and adding that she had not located any record of it , however . Chairman May stated that the Board needed clarification as to why these plantings have not been done and the status of the planting schedule . Chairman May stated that he felt the Board should have this information before approving the play area proposal . Ms . Beeners offered that she would research the matter with respect to exactly what has happened , and stated that she did not feel that the play area proposal should be held up for this reason . Chairman May asked if there were any further comments or questions . There being none , Chairman May asked if anyone were prepared to make a motion . MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mr . James Baker : • WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval for a proposed children ' s play area , proposed to be located adjacent to the front: entrance of Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club , 16 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 51 Business District " C " . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board has been legislatively designated to act as Lead Agency for environmental review , and for which the Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance , subject to certain conditions . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of this action , make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance subject to the secure installation of a steel guardrail in the parking space on the northerly and westerly sides of the play area two feet from the perimeter fence surrounding the play area , and further subject to the inspection of: the play area installation by the Town Building Inspector . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Mazza , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Planning Board - 4 - May 19 , 1987 • Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : WHEREAS * 1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval for a proposed children ' s play area , proposed to be located adjacent to the front. entrance of Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club , 16 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 5 , Business District " C " . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental review , has made a negative determination of environmental significance , subject to certain conditions . 3 . The Planning Board , at a Public Hearing on May 19 , 1987 , has reviewed the following : " Revised Site Plan Showing Proposed Play Area " , dated May 12 , 1987 . " Plans for Play Area at Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club " . • SEQR Short EAF , THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Site Plan Approval for the proposal as presented , subject to the secure installation of a steel guardrail in the parking space on the northerly and westerly sides of the play area two feet from the perimeter fence surrounding the play area , and further subject to the inspection of the play area installation by the Town Building Inspector . This Approval is contingent on the agreement that the full landscaping plan , substantially as shown in the 1982 site plan for Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club , be completed to the satisfaction of the Town Planner by October 31 , 1987 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Mazza , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the matter of the Courtside play area duly closed at 8 : 09 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD • OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL APPROVAL OF A SCHOOL USE , PURSUANT 'TO ARTICLE IV , SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 4 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A NURSERY Planning Board - 5 - May 19 , 1987 SCHOOL BUILDING ON A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 60 - 1 - 161 LOCATED IN A RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 , AT 142 HONNESS LANE , FOR THE PROPOSED RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING MONTESSORI NURSERY SCHOOL ( LITTLE FEET ) CURRENTLY IN OPERATION AT 139 HONNESS LANE , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 . JOHN AND DORIS PERIALAS , PROPERTY OWNERS ; JOHN AND VALERIE LITTLEFIELD , APPLICANTS . ( ADJOURNED FROM MAY 5 , 1987 . ) Chairman May declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 8 : 10 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Perialas was present , as were his daughter and son - in - law , Valerie and John Littlefield . Mr . Perialas appeared before the Board and stated that he was requesting approval to construct a building designed to be a school at 142 Honness Lane , Mr . Perialas stated that the proposed school will be larger than the one presently existing at 139 Honness Lane , Chairman May , noting that this was a Public Hearing , asked if anyone from the public wished to speak to this matter . Mr . Scott. Brim , 146 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and asked what the building would look like and what will be done with the existing student apartments on the site . Mr . Brim asked about parking and car access area . Mr . Perialas stated that the plans are to paint • the existing apartments . Dr . Lesser asked where the parking area was for the apartments , with Mr . Perialas responding that it was between the road and the building , and adding that the future parking will be in the back of the apartments . Mr . Perialas stated that the present " Little Feet " nursery school will revert back to a two - family dwelling . Mrs . Langhans wondered how many children were presently enrolled at the school , with Mrs . Littlefield responding , 27 to 33 . Mrs . Marie Carlo , 143 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and asked about the number of children proposed for the new building . Mrs . Littlefield stated that under the square footage requirements according to the New York State Department of Social Services , they would be able to enroll 120 children with 12 or 13 staff members . Mrs . Littlefield stated that the school hours would be 7 : 30 a . m . to 5 : 30 p . m . , Monday through Friday . Mrs . Littlefield noted that the times for delivering and picking up the children would be staggered , as they are presently at the existing school . Mr . Mazza wondered what would happen with 120 children involved , and asked how that would be handled . Mrs . Littlefield stated that it would handled as it is now - - by staggering the pick- up and delivery times . Mr . Mazza asked about the proposed number of parking spaces , • with Mrs . Littlefield responding that there will be 16 spaces in the front with provision for additional parking in the back . Planning Board - 6 - May 19 , 1987 • Chairman May voiced his concern that there may be a problem with the driveway , although it is proposed to be approximately 200 feet long and 14 feet wide , in that there could be a problem with cars getting stacked up on Honness Lane , Mrs . Barbara Bredbenner , 141 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and stated that she was the owner of the property east of the proposed school . Mrs . Bredbenner stated that that property is an undeveloped lot which she has owned since 1958 . Mrs . Bredbenner stated that she was concerned with density and also traffic in the area . Chairman May wondered if there would be a problem constructing a larger driveway . Ms . Beeners offered that a 14 - foot driveway with 3 - foot shoulders was recommended . Mr . Flumerfelt suggested that a 16 - foot driveway with 2 - foot shoulders would give ample room for two-way traffic . Mr . Klein suggested constructing a loop road . Chairman May noted that a 20 - foot roadway width is required by the Fire Department . After a brief discussion , Chairman May indicated that a looped driveway would be the best solution . Mr . Edgar Bredbenner , 141 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and asked about the size of the proposed building . Chairman May stated that it is proposed to be 55 feet by 70 feet , with a 40 - foot by 15 - foot jog out of that . Mr . Bredbenner voiced his concern about density and traffic on the road at the present time . • Mr . Mazza, wondered why such a large facility was being proposed , with Mr . Perialas responding that there is a great demand for day care in the area . Mr . Douglas Armstrong , 121 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and expressed his concern about density and more traffic in the area . Mr . Armstrong staged that the proposal is for a public institution in a residential neighborhood . Mrs . Littlefield stated that it was a private facility . Chairman .May asked if anyone else wished to speak to this matter . Mr . Herbert Deinert , 130 Honness Lane , spoke from the floor and stated his concern about the increased flow of traffic and density in the area . Mr . Brim stated that Honness Lane is the main shortcut to get to Snyder Hill Road . There appearing to be no further comments from the public present , Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 45 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion . Ms . Beene :rs inquired as to the plans for expansion over the next few years , wondering how soon they expected the school ' s enrollment • would reach 50 on up to 120 children . Mr . Perialas stated that reaching 50 enrollees would be fairly soon ; an enrollment of 120 children would probably take a year or two . , Planning Board - 7 - May 19 , 1987 • Mr . Klein inquired about there being two buildings , which are not accessory to each other , located on this same lot . Chairman May described the legal non - conforming apartment building presently located on the subject lot and stated that constructing another non - conforming use would require a variance . Town Attorney Barney stated that a school is not a non- conforming use ; schools are a permitted use subject to the approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals . Ms . Beeners stated that at the time the applicants presented the proposal , she had suggested that they not show a subdivision of the lot on the plan , but , at least , show the capability for that approach permitting 30 , 000 square feet for the apartment building . Ms . Beeners stated that she had also advised the applicants that , while it may not look like the greatest place for a road , as it has been proposed it could be continued , at some point , north into Cornell lands . Ms . Beeners also suggested that if the Littlefields could demonstrate being able to also retain and allocate 60 feet for the access to the school , that would be another way of working within the rules . Ms . Beeners pointed out that , as far as distance between two principal buildings on one lot is concerned , that is not a problem - - the Little Feet proposal meets all requirements in that respect . There appearing to be no further comments , Chairman May called for motion . • MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the matter of the proposed Little Feet Montessori school be and hereby is adjourned to Tuesday , June 2 , 1987 , at 7 : 35 p . m . , with the request that the applicants present a plan showing a loop road , existing parking , and access to the existing apartment building . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Mazza , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTIO14 was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the Little Feet matter duly adjourned at 8 : 54 p . m . PUBLIC HEARIr1G0 CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL APPROVAL OF A SCHOOL USE , PURSUANT TO ARTICLE V , SECTION 18 , PARAGRAPH 41 OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE PROPOSED OPERATION OF THE MONTESSORI ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL OF ITHACA , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ON EAST KING ROAD , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 , ON A 2 ± ACRE PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 ( 46 . 96 ACRES ) . HERBERT N . MONKEMEYER , PROPERTY • OWNER ; ANDREA B . COBY , SCHOOL ADMINISTRATOR AND AGENT /APPLICANT . Chairman :May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted Planning Board - 8 - May 19 , 1987 • matter duly opened at 8 : 55 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Ms . Coby , School Administrator , was present . Ms . Coby appeared before the Board and gave a brief history of the School , stating that the School was started in 1979 with nine children in attendance and , presently , the enrollment is 102 . Ms . Coby stated that for the last three years the School has been located in the former Cayuga Heights Elementary School , Ms . Coby distributed copies of a map to the Board members , and introduced Mr „ John Cake , a member of the School ' s Board of Directors and one of the Architects for the proposed school . Ms . Coby and Mr . Cake appended four large maps to the bulletin board . Mr . Cake stated that the proposed building is a little less than 10 , 000 square feet , situated off East King Road with access to the building intended to be off a future road which loops from East King back down to Route 96B [ Danby Road ] . Mr . Cake stated that there will be a long drive back into the property . Mr . Cake stated that , basically , there will be four large classrooms and a multi - purpose room . Mr . Cake stated that there will be six buses in the morning and four buses in the afternoon for approximately 100 students . Mr . Cake also stated that almost all of the students will be transported to the School by bus , adding that the pre - school children , ages 2j to 5 , attend the half - day program , and further adding that these pre - school children are brought in by the parents . • Chairman May , noting that this was a Public Hearing , asked if there were anyone who wished to speak to the matter of the East King Road Montessori School , Ms . Dora Barnett , 107 East King Road , spoke from the floor and asked where the building is going to be located on East King Road , Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer stated that the building is going to be located approximately two blocks up from Danby Road . There appearing to be no further comments from the public , Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 9 : 15 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion . Dr . Lesser stated that his two children attend the Montessori Elementary and Secondary School of Ithaca , and asked if the Board memebers felt that he should abstain from any discussion on this matter . It was the consensus of the Board that Dr . Lesser need not abstain from participating in this matter . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer stated that this particular farmsite was once the site of the King Road Schoolhouse and , so , he felt that this was a particularly appropriate site for a school . Mr . Mazza. inquired about the area on the map which indicated • " Town Park " . Ms . Coby responded that that area is shown as a proposed park , adding that when the topic of a park came up during discussions with Ms . Beeners she had suggested including a proposed Town park on Planning Board - 9 - May 19 , 1987 • the site plan . Ms . Coby stated that the proposed park site is a little over one acre in size - - 220 feet by 250 feet [ 1 . 26 acres ] , and added that they have agreed with the Town to put in a pond across the street - - south of the School - - on King Road . Mr . Klein asked about access to the School , noting that the applicant is relying totally on the " future road " : Mr . Cake stated that the road will be developed as a road and they will maintain it . Mr . Cake noted that the road probably will not be paved for a while yet . Chairman May wondered if the school buses would travel on the road , with Mr . Cake responding that they would check on that . Mr . Mazza asked if the future road is an officially platted Town road or would Mr . Monkemeyer continue to own the land . Mr . Evan Monkemeyer stated that the right of way for the road is 80 - 100 feet wide , sweeping from King Road to Danby Road , and , there will also be an extra 20 - 30 foot greenbelt strip which they want to maintain as access for drainage , utilities , and plantings . Mr . Mazza expressed his concern that , without an easement for access , there may be a problem with traffic ingress and egress for possible future owners . Town Attorney Barney asked what kind of access was going to be granted to the owners of the School . Mr . Herbert Monkerneyer responded that this will be worked out with the School , adding that they will do everything they can to help the School . Town Attorney Barney stated that a site plan is needed showing an irrevocable dedication of access in some form . • Mrs . Grigorov asked about access to the proposed park area . Mr . Evan Monkemeyer stated that a bicycle path or walking strip has been provided from East King Road to gain access to the park . Ms . Beeners wondered if access to the park will be provided from the circular access road and noted that more information may be needed with respect to the different types of access provided to the park . There appearing to be no further comments or questions from the Board members , Chairman May asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion . MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of a 2 ± acre lot from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 ( 46 . 96 acres ) , located on East King Road , and the consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to a request for Special Approval of a School Use , pursuant to Article V , Section 18 , Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the proposed operation of the Montessori Elementary and Secondary School of Ithaca on • said 2 ± acre lot . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board has been Planning Board - 10 - May 19 , 1987 • legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed subdivision , and the Zoning Board of Appeals to act as Lead Agency for the proposed Special Approval . 3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance , with certain conditions . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed subdivision , make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance for the proposed subdivision , with the following conditions : a . The provision of a final subdivision map prepared by a licensed surveyor or engineer , suitable for filing by the Tompkins County Clerk , for approval by the Town Engineer , showing the precise location of access and manner of construction of driveway over the " future right of way " . b . The configuration of the park site is approved in concept , with further information necessary on potential development of the 46 . 96 acre parcel necessary prior to any final park site approval . An easement shall be provided to the park site from East King Road either over the access road or directly from East King Road as part of the current • subdivision proposal . c . The building shall conform with the Zoning Ordinance requirements including as to height . 2 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that a negative determination of environmental significance be made for the proposed Special Approval with the following conditions : a . The final site plan shall be subject to approval by the Town Engineering , Planning , and Zoning Department . b . Expansion of parking facilities from the 12 currently proposed to 20 shall be made , and the final design of any other circulation improvements subject to approval by the Town Engineering , Planning , and Zoning Department , and with the condition that additional parking may be required by the Town at any time . c . Parking , delivery and loading rules , and scheduling shall be implemented and enforced by the applicant . d . The Special Approval shall be personal to the applicants , shall not be transferrable , and shall not run with the land . • e . The `.Town shall reserve the right to impose additional conditions at any time . Planning Board - 11 - May 19 , 1987 • f . The Special Approval shall be subject to all conditions and regulations required by the New York State Education Department , the Tompkins County Health Department , and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code . There being no further discussion , the Chair called a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Mazza , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov , seconded by Mr . James Baker : WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of a 2 ± acre lot from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 ( 46 . 96 acres ) , located on East King Road , and the consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to a request for Special Approval of a School Use , pursuant to Article V , Section 18 , Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the proposed operation of the Montessori Elementary and Secondary School of Ithaca on said 2 ± acre lot . • 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed subdivision , has made a negative determination of environmental significance for the proposed subdivision and has recommended to the Zoning Board of Appeals a negative determination of environmental significance for the proposed Special Approval , with certain conditions . 3 . The Planning Board , at a Public Hearing on May 19 , 1987 , has reviewed -the following material : " Proposed Subdivision for Montessori Elementary School " on " Composite Plan Showing Certain Features on Lands of Herbert N . Monkemeyer , Evan Monkemeyer , and Lenora Ann Monkemeyer " . " Site Plan - Montessori School " . SEQR Long EAF , Special Approval Request , THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval , having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the • Town Board , 2 . That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive Preliminary Planning Board - 12 - May 19 , 1987 • Subdivision Approval and grant and hereby does grant Final Subdivision Approval to the subdivision as proposed , with the following conditions : a . The provision of a final subdivision map prepared by a licensed surveyor or engineer , suitable for filing by the Tompkins County Clerk , for approval by the Town Engineer , showing the precise location of access and manner of construction of driveway over the " future right of way " . b . The configuration of the park site is approved in concept , with. further information necessary on potential development of the 46 . 96 acre parcel necessary prior to any final park site approval . An easement shall be provided to the park site from East King Road either over the access road or directly from East King Road as part of the current subdivision proposal . c . The building shall conform with the Zoning Ordinance requirements including as to height . 3 . That the Planning Board , determining that there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location , that the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood in which the use is to be located will not be adversely affected , and that the proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town , recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that Special Approval as proposed be granted , with the following conditions : a . The final site plan shall be subject to approval by the Town Engineering , Planning , and Zoning Department . b . Expansion of parking facilities from the 12 currently proposed to 20 shall be made , and the final design of any other- circulation improvements subject to approval by the Town Engineering , Planning , and Zoning Department , and with the condition that additional parking may be required by the Town at any time . c . Parking , delivery and loading rules , and scheduling shall be implemented and enforced by the applicant . d . The Special Approval shall be personal to the applicants , shall not be transferrable , and shall not run with the land . e . The Town shall reserve the right to impose additional conditions at any time . f . The Special Approval shall be subject to all conditions and regulations required by the New York State Education • Department , the Tompkins County Health Department , and the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code . Planning Board - 13 - May 19 , 1987 • There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Mazza , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the matter of the proposed Montessori Elementary and. Secondary School of Ithaca duly closed at 9 : 43 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF A 7 . 75 ACRE PARCEL , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 39 - 1 - 25 , KNOWN AS 371 STONE QUARRY ROAD , CONTIGUOUS TO THE WEST OF LANDS OF CAYUGA VISTA , INTO TWO PARCELS OF 5 . 87 ± ACRES AND 1 . 88 ± ACRES , AND FURTHER , CONSIDER MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE OF ARTICLE III , SECTION 91 PARAGRAPH 3 , OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , TO PERMIT THE RELOCATION OF AN EXISTING THREE - UNIT DWELLING FROM TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 39 - 1 - 5 ( 1018 DANBY ROAD ) TO A PORTION OF SAID PARCEL NO . 6 - 39 - 1 - 25 , SUCH RELOCATED BUILDING TO BE PROVIDED WITH A 60 - FOOT FUTURE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY FROM FUTURE VISTA LANE AT CAYUGA VISTA , AND CONSIDER MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO SAID BOARD OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST TO ADD A FOURTH DWELLING UNIT TO SAID EXISTING THREE - FAMILY DWELLING . MAURICE E . SNYDER , OWNER OF PARCEL NO . 6 - 39 - 1 - 25 ; DELL GROVER , OWNER OF PARCEL NO . 6 - 39 - 1 - 5 ; EDWARD A . MAZZA , ESQ . , AGENT . • Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 9 : 45 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Mazza stated that , at this point in the proceedings of the Board , he was stepping away from his place as a member of the Planning Board , and asked to approach the Board as Attorney / Agent in the above - noted matter . Attorney Mazza stated that he would like to point out , for clarification , that Mr . Maurice Snyder is the owner of the property that is proposed for subdivision into two parcels , and there is a contract made with Robert Reed which has been assigned to Dell Grover , William Grover ,, and himself . Attorney Mazza appended a map to the bulletin board. and stated that for the Cayuga Vista clustered subdivision the Town required the reservation of a 60 - foot strip for a future roadway and for utilities . Attorney Mazza stated that that future roadway ends up going in " here " and the property line between Mr . Snyder ' s property and Mrs . Rumsey ' s property would be in the middle of this reserved road , therefore , thirty feet would come onto the presently Snyder parcel . Attorney Mazza stated that , at this time , the request is for a two - lot subdivision , and , for the relocation of the house presently existing at 1018 Danby Road , which Attorney Mazza referred to as " the • ugly blue house " . Attorney Mazza offered that one of the reasons for the request to relocate that house is that it is part of the family properties once owned by Mr . Dell Grover ' s deceased wife ' s family and Planning Board - 14 - May 19 , 1987 • which they would like to salvage if they can , and , in order to do that , they want to move that old farmhouse over to the other parcel . Attorney Mazza indicated that it is an " L - shaped " property which they will be squaring off , which will also be much more economical and serve to make it viable . Attorney Mazza noted that they will also be requesting approval from the Board of Appeals to add a fourth unit to the house . Attorney Mazza stated that he was unable , at this juncture , to indicate where on this proposed parcel the house will be located , the reason being that they have not yet decided what they are going to do in the back . Mrs . Langhans asked about access to the property , with Attorney Mazza responding that the access would only be across the 60 - foot reserved strip? [ indicating on the map ] , and adding that they would restrict themselves in order to be able to locate the farmhouse on the proposed parcel such that , if nothing else ever happened , it would just service the house as a driveway . Attorney Mazza stated that they did not see any development there in the near future , but realistically it probably would be developed at some point . Attorney Mazza offered that , hopefully , it would be their group that might develop it in keeping with Cayuga Vista , although not as condominiums , but as some other kind of subdivision . Attorney Mazza reiterated that the proposal before the Board is a two - lot subdivision and consideration of recommendations to the Zoning Board with respect to less than 60 feet of frontage on a public • highway and adding a fourth unit to the non - conforming three - family farmhouse . Attorney Mazza stated that , in the event there should ever be an opportunity to develop that parcel , and they do secure approval for the fourth unit , they will be allocating an appropriate amount of space to insure good planning . Attorney Mazza pointed out that this area is zoned. R - 9 , meaning 9 , 000 square feet of lot area for a single - family or a two - family residence , and indicated that for a four -unit apartment 18 , 000 square feet would be allocated . Attorney Mazza noted that the subject parcel does not have 60 feet of frontage on a Town road , however , they do have a right of way of over 60 feet which will be from a Town road , Vista Lane , which is currently being constructed . Mrs . Grigorov asked where the house was being moved to , with Attorney Mazza replying that they were not sure yet and adding that , in any event , the house would not be occupied for at least a year . Chairman :May , noting that this was a Public Hearing , asked if there were anyone from the public who wished to speak to this matter . Mr . Daniel Booth , 375 Stone Quarry Road , spoke from the floor and , commenting that he was concerned about all the loose ends in this matter , stated that it was uncertain where the house will be placed , and asked why it was being moved from up near the road , and further asked if it needed to be moved back into this new parcel where it will • be closer to him . Mr . Booth stated that the house is already non - conforming and there have been a number of loud parties that have taken place on the premises . Planning Board - 15 - May 19 , 1987 • Attorney Mazza stated that before they have approval for placement they are going to have to come in for a site plan approval . Attorney Mazza stated that they have not done that because it is a complex timing problem juxtaposed with the development of Cayuga Vista and the construction of roads . Attorney Mazza reiterated that before they locate that house anywhere , they will have to appear before the Planning Board for site plan approval . Attorney Mazza pointed out that they were seeking , at this point , simply a two - lot subdivision and approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals to locate the house somewhere on that parcel in the event that the site plan is approved by the Planning Board . Attorney Mazza offered that one reason the " blue house " is so " ugly " is that they have not been able to determine for the last several years whether they were going to be able to move it or if it would have to be torn down . Mr . Booth stated that he was less concerned about the house ' s appearance , commenting that you can take a big house , fix it up , and make it look nice , than as to what it represents in terms of all the variances that are going into this new place , and adding that procedure -wise things seem to be going backwards . Mrs . Langhans asked when they would know how much it would cost to move the :house , with Attorney Mazza responding , probably next month , by June . Mrs . Grigorov asked if the subdivision were being requested in order to have a place to put the house . Attorney Mazza stated that • they want to subdivide the Snyder parcel because they have a contract to purchase that five - acre portion of it . Mrs . Langhans wondered if there were a need for this if they find it too expensive to move the house . Attorney Mazza noted that the subdivision is still necessary because they wish to purchase that , adding that they are separate applications , and further adding that , even if there were not a blue house , they would still be requesting this subdivision . Ms . Beeners stated that it is the two - lot subdivision which is before the Board this evening , adding that the Board can consider whether or not they wish to make a recommendation on the applications before the Zoning Board , however , that is not required , although it is a good idea to supply the Board of Appeals with information . Mr . Peter Hillman , 370 Stone Quarry Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he would like to see pretty strict adherence to the present zoning requirements , adding that it seemed to him that moving a non - conforming structure into another parcel is to ask for a variance on height because he thought the house exceeded 30 feet by quite a bit . Mr . Hillman stated that this is more than a two- family dwelling which is also within the restrictions of R - 9 zoning . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer , 1058 Danby Road , spoke from the floor and stated that he is a neighbor of this house and felt that it has been very well run housing . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that his only objection • was the blue color . Mr . Elliott Lauderdale , 381 Stone Quarry Road , spoke from the Planning Board - 16 - May 19 , 1987 floor and voiced his concern with a zoning variance in R- 9 . Mr . • Lauderdale asked how nine unrelated persons could live in a quadraplex which is in violation of R- 9 . Chairman May stated that this was a grandfathered application . Attorney Mazza pointed out that the reason there was a specification in the documents he had submitted as to the number of unrelated persons was to place a limit on occupancy and not to say that that is what is going to happen . Attorney Mazza stated that they would anticipate renting to a family , a couple with a child , or to an individual . Attorney Mazza pointed out that a restrictive limit would be set on the number of individuals in each unit . Attorney Mazza stated that , as a matter of fact , if they took the 18 , 000 square feet allocated and made two building lots out of that , they could have a family and two unrelated persons in residence in each of such buildings . Mr . Lauderdale , commenting that his property runs back alongside the whole of the subdivision and the noise factor is a regular occurrence , stated that he felt asking for nine persons is exceeding the zoning ordinance which in R - 9 requires a maximum unrelated persons of three . Mr „ Lauderdale stated that he did not understand how the maximum of three in a duplex can somehow add up to a quadraplex of nine . Mr . Lauderdale wondered how approval is made to move a house that is already at variance and is clearly College student housing , to any single place in a confusing area of five acres . Mr . Lauderdale referred to the proposal documents he had received and his copy of the Environmental Assessment Form and stated that the EAF states that • there was no vegetation in the area and also that there was no significant wildlife living in the area . Ms . Beeners stated that there are no significant wildlife species or habitats that are recognized either by the County or by the Town of Ithaca on that parcel that would be adversely affected by the proposed subdivision or by the proposed moving of the house . Mr . Lauderdale asked what constituted a significant species , with Ms . Beeners responding , one which would be identified either in the list of rare plants in New York State or by the County in the Environmental Image Report which is used as part of the Town ' s Technical Appendix . Mr . Lauderdale wondered if deer and species like that are considered since it is a very crowded deer area , adding that , in fact , there is a regular deer path running across the subject parcel . Both Town Attorney Barney and Ms . Beeners stated that deer are not considered as they are not an endangered species . Ms . Beeners reiterated that neither proposal presented tonight involves any significant site alterations that would affect anything unusual here . Mr . Lauderdale stated that he has a drainage concern with the land in question . Mr . Hillman stated that there are some endangered species - - plants - - across the road - - where there are a couple of pockets of these plants where it is in wetland , adding that this wetland dries up for about two or three months out of the year , and further adding that these species of plants only occur in small pockets . Ms . Beeners • assured Mr . Hillman that that certainly will be looked into . There appearing to be no further questions or comments from the Planning Board - 17 - May 19 , 1987 • public , Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 10 : 10 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion . Mrs . Langhans stated that her only concern is that access to a road is on a future roadway that has yet to be built , adding that the five acres is going to Cayuga Vista and their only access is through the proposed :road . Attorney Mazza stated that it is not going to be part of Cayuga Vista , adding that there are not going to be any building permits issued until the road is in place . Town Attorney Barney stated that , normally , when land is subdivided , one of the things considered is traffic and there should be an access to a Town highway . Mr . Klein , noting that the future 60 feet of road is split - - 30 feet and 30 feet , stated that it is of no value to the Snyder property without an agreement for an easement across the Rumsey property . Attorney Mazza stated that , if in fact they cannot reach an agreement with Mrs . Rumsey - - which he doubted - - they would then ask for a modification of where that road comes back in such that it would just be moved up 30 feet . Dr . Lesser voiced his concern regarding grades and asked if the length were going to be too great for a single access . Ms . Beeners pointed out the lengths of 600 feet to 700 feet with respect to Cayuga Vista buildings 5 , 7 , and 8 . Ms . Beeners noted that the access would • start from its intersection with Vista Drive , Chairman May asked if there were any further questions on the subdivision proper . Mrs . Langhans stated that before anything could be done on the five acres the road would have to be completed . Attorney Mazza , commenting that it is a site plan approval that the Board is discussing , stated that what he has been mentioning is , in the event that the Zoning Board of Appeals grants approvals authorizing the relocation of an existing house , and the addition of one apartment unit , to a parcel of land not fronting on a public highway , and what he has been suggesting is , that that be conditioned upon coming back to the Planning Board for a site plan approval . Attorney Mazza stated that , first of. all , if they know they can go ahead , then they can make certain plans and do some research on the property itself' to ascertain what is going to be the best approach . Attorney Mazza asked that the Board bear in mind that they have invested a great deal of time , effort , and money in that property and they certainly want this to happen in the right way and in an appropriate manner . Town Attorney Barney wondered if Attorney Mazza would voluntarily submit to a second site plan review , if the Zoning Board of Appeals • grants the variance on the blue house , and if , after the Zoning Board did grant that , the Planning Board at that juncture in its wisdom felt that they could not approve the site plan - - what then ? Attorney Planning Board - 18 - May 19 , 1987 • Mazza offered that he was suggesting concurrence between the applicants and the Town that a condition be placed on it conditioned on approval by the Board of Appeals . Attorney Mazza stated that things were happening this way because of the timing , adding that they want to build the road as soon as possible to cut down on the dust factor . Attorney Mazza pointed out that the blue house is in the middle of Vista Drive and , in order to complete the road , the blue! house has got to be moved . Mr . Klein wondered if there were any way that the blue house could be moved to one of the other locations in Cayuga Vista and , essentially , remodel it to be compatible , with Attorney Mazza responding , no , because of the way it is constructed , it would be difficult to have it included as part of the condominiums . Mrs . Grigorov asked if there were a real financial hardship to retain the blue house . Attorney Mazza , commenting that the house does have value to Mr . Grover , stated they were not sure at this point what that value is , mused that it sort of depends on the cost of moving it . There appearing to be no further questions or comments from the Board , Chairman May asked if anyone wished to make a motion on the proposed subdivision action only . MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mr . Robert Kenerson : • WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of a 7 . 75 acre parcel , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 39 - 1 - 25 , known as 371 Stone Quarry Road , contiguous to the west of lands of Cayuga Vista , into two parcels of 5 . 87 ± acres and 1 . 88 ± acres . 2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board has been legislatively designated to act as Lead Agency for environmental review . 3 . A negative determination of environmental significance has been recommended by the Town Planner , THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental review , make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance for this Unlisted action . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Ken erson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Planning Board - 19 - May 19 , 1987 • Chairman May asked if anyone wished to move the draft resolution . MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of a 7 . 75 acre parcel , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 39 - 1 - 25 , known as 371 Stone Quarry Road , contiguous to the west of lands of Cayuga Vista , into two parcels of 5 . 87 ± acres and 1 . 88 ± acres . 2 . The Planning Board on May 19 , 1987 , acting as Lead Agency in environmental review , made a negative determination of environmental significance for this Unlisted action . 3 . The Planning Board , at a Public Hearing on May 19 , 1987 , has reviewed -the following : SEQR Short Environmental Assessment Form , dated May 7 , 1987 . " Property Survey - Dell L . Grover , William P . Grover , and Edward A . Mazza " , by Paul B . Koe rts , Professional Land Surveyor , May 5 , 1987 . 4 . The proposed 5 . 87 ± acre parcel would be served by a 60 - foot future road right of way from planned Vista Lane in Cayuga Vista . • THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval , having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board , 2 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to the subdivision as herein proposed . By way of discussion , Town Attorney Barney stated that there has to be some access provided to " that " rear lot that is reasonably acceptable . Town Attorney Barney , stating that for the two - lot subdivision there will be a preliminary and then a separate hearing on final subdivision approval , asked if that is not what Attorney Mazza had said . Attorney Mazza responded that that is not what he had said . Attorney Mazza stated that , if in fact they obtain approval to move the blue house to that parcel , he had said that the location of the blue house would be the subject of a site plan approval . Attorney Mazza stated that , if in fact they do not obtain approval to move it , and they are not going to move it , he did not think that the • subdivision of this one parcel should be delayed . Attorney Mazza offered that he did not see why a site plan is being talked about if it is just this two - lot subdvision being discussed . Attorney Mazza Planning Board - 20 - May 19 , 1987 • pointed out that there have been a lot of houses built and subdivisions approved where there has not been an existing Town road . Town Attorney Barney , commenting that most of them have gone to the Zoning Board of Appeals to get a variance , stated that most of them show at least where the Town road is going to go and very few of them show the Town road running through somebody ' s parking lot . Attorney Mazza. pointed out that it was at the Town ' s insistence that that 60 - foot reservation was put in to open up the backland because no one wanted to go out Stone Quarry Road , adding that it should not go out Stone Quarry Road . Attorney Mazza , pointing out that at the time they did not own any of " this " property , noted that it was to access Mrs . Rumsey ' s property and to access Mr . Snyder ' s property that this was put in . Attorney Mazza stated that , as he recalled , they did not want a road running through the property but it was imposed , reiterating that that was something the Town did to him . Commenting that he really did not care about what had happened to him , Town Attorney Barney stated that Attorney Mazza was before the Board for subdivision approval of two lots - - a de minimus kind of subdivision in the normal course of events - - one of which is landlocked as shown on the plot plan . Town Attorney Barney stated that the question is - - how is somebody buying the lot going to get to that lot and the applicant is saying - - over this road , but , by the same token , is saying that it is a parking lot for Building # 8 . Town Attorney Barney suggested that this subdivision should be reconfigured is a little bit so that it is not cutting into a road , adding that the applicants have indicated that they do not want to do that . Continuing , Town Attorney Barney stated that , if the applicants are going to come back to the Planning Board for final site plan approval , this will give them some time to put something together and come up with a different access , that is , to give access to this road which does not do damage to their other existing subdivision . Town Attorney Barney asked Attorney Mazza if he thought this was reasonable , with Attorney Mazza responding , yes , he thought so , and adding that because they are the same owners , he thought that is what is clouding their decision -making on this . Mrs . Grigorov commented that if they were not the same owners they could not possibly subdivide it without gaining access from Stone Quarry Road . Attorney Mazza disagreed , stating that they could because of the 60 - feet which the Town required be reserved for a future road . Mrs . Langhans wondered what would happen if she came in and said that she was going to buy the backland and that she was going to go over your proposed road , and , you say - - oh , . no , - - you are not going to go through my parking lot . Attorney Mazza stated that Mrs . Rumsey had already mentioned that and he had suggested that she could build a road through there , adding that that idea was suggested some time ago - - before the offer to purchase made with Mr . Snyder . • Mrs . Langhans asked how the problem of access would be resolved without going through the parking lot . Attorney Mazza stated that if w Planning Board - 21 - May 19 , 1987 • those units are sold , parking would have to be provided in another area , however , at the present time , they did not know where that would be . Chairman May pointed out that if parking is moved - - which would be a change - - the developers would have to come before the Planning Board for site plan approval . Mrs . Langhans also commented to Attorney Mazza that if a requirement is made for the parking , he will have to come before the Planning Board . Attorney Mazza queried about what would happen if they do not own the land " back: here " at that point , and pointed out that the land is going to be conveyed to a homeowners ' / residents ' association at some point . Attorney Mazza , noting that the road will be deeded to the Town and commenting that someone has to own it , stated that he failed to see how this two - lot subdivision is so difficult and added that he has closed many real estate transactions where there have been subdivisions granted subject to roads being built at a later time . Mrs . Margie Rumsey , 110 East Buttermilk Falls Road , spoke from the floor and stated that she has been told that she could not bring a road into her property in back , which is next to the property under discussion , because the Town has given Cayuga Vista a road so close to her land up on the road that she cannot come in from Danby Road . Mrs . Rumsey stated that she must go though Cayuga Vista property to get to her land . Mrs; . Rumsey stated that it is important to her to be able to get to her land , otherwise , she will be landlocked because of the 300 feet minimum space requirements between roads off Route 96B . • Chairman May pointed out to Attorney Mazza that , if this road gets built , he will have to come before the Planning Board for site plan approval on Building # 8 modification . Continuing , Chairman May asked if that: would prevent him from coming back 'for site plan adjustment at the time the building is to be constructed . Attorney Mazza stated -that they probably will ask for some minor site plan adjustments on other things , but he did not know that , and wondered - - what if they determine that there is ample parking ? Chairman May noted that the plan is different from the site plan proposed tonight [ May 19 , 1987 ] . Attorney Mazza stated that it is the same as the site plan that was approved by the Planning Board . Chairman May asked about the road , with Attorney Mazza stating that that was approved . Chairman May pointed out that there was a MOTION on the floor and asked if anyone were prepared to move its withdrawal , it appearing that the matter cannot be resolved at this time . MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : RESOLVED , by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , that the Motion on the floor with respect to the Snyder Subdivision be and hereby is withdrawn . • There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . J 6 Planning Board - 22 - May 19 , - 1987 Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Dr . William Lesser : RESOLVED , by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , that the matter of the Snyder Subdivision be and hereby is adjourned until June 2 , 1987 , at 7 : 50 p . m . , in order to give the applicants time to reconfigure the subdivision plat . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the matter of the Snyder Subdivision request duly adjourned . Mr . Mazza resumed his place at the Board table . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - March 3 , 1987 MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn • Grigorov : RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of March 3 , 1987 , be and hereby are approved as written . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Mazza . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . JOINT MEETING - TOWN BOARD , PLANNING BOARD , AND ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS - TUESDAY , JUNE 30 , 1987 . Ms . Beeners stated that Supervisor Desch had asked her to inform the Board that a joint working meeting of the three Town boards on cluster and other zoning matters has been scheduled for Tuesday , June 30th , at 7 : 30 p . m . in the Board Room of Town Hall . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the May 19 , 1987 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 11 : 10 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Mary S . Bryant , Recording Secretary , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board .