Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1987-07-21 iyS ���• FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date _ • TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Cler JULY 21 , 1987 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , July 21 , 1987 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , James Baker , Robert Kenerson , William Lesser , Virginia Langhans , Richard P . Ruswick , Esq . ( Town Attorney ) , Robert R . Flumerfelt ( Town Engineer ) , Susan C . Beeners ( Town Planner ) , Andrew S . Frost ( Town Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer ) , ALSO PRESENT : Jerold M . Weisburd , Claudia Weisburd , Andrea Coby , Herbert Monkemeyer , Paul Bennett , Esq . , Eugene Ball , Donald C . Ball , George W . Dengler , Leslie Reizes , R . C . Holgate , Timothy Ciaschi , Daniel McClure , Scot Raynor , Henry Aron , Bruce Rich , Heather Weiss , David C . Auble , Sandra Rogers . Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 38 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 July 13 , 1987 , and July 16 , 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 , upon the Tompkins County Administrator , upon the Tompkins County Department of Public Works , upon the Clerk of the Town of Ulysses , upon both the Clerk and the Building Commissioner of the City of Ithaca , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the applicants and / or Agent , as appropriate , on July 16 , 1987 . SKETCH PLAN REVIEW : CONSIDERATION OF POTENTIAL FUTURE USE OF THE PROPOSED MONTESSORI ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL PROPERTY , LOCATED ON EAST KING ROAD ON A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 . Chairman May declared the sketch plan review of the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 40 p . m . and read aloud from the Agenda as noted above . Ms . Andrea Coby , Administrator of the Montessori Elementary and Secondary School of Ithaca , was present . Ms . Coby appeared before the Board and stated that the School had received the Special Approval of the Zoning Board of Appeals for their proposed location on East King Road on June 24 , 1987 . Ms . Coby stated that at this time they would like an indication from the Planning Board as to the potential feasibility of the rezoning of their property to Business " A " for professional or business offices . Ms . Coby stated that one of the questions the School ' s financers have asked is , if something should happen to the School , what would the building be used for , adding that the bank would feel more comfortable if there were consideration for some sort of commercial - type use . Planning Board - 2 - July 21 , 1987 • At this point , Ms . Coby introduced Jerold Weisburd , who is a parent of one of the children at the School , and who will also handle the construction of the School . Mr .. Weisburd appended two large colored maps to the bulletin board and pointed out Danby Road and East King Road , noting that at that intersection , both the northwest and southwest corner , there is a large area currently zoned Business " C " , with Business " D " right at the corner , and further noting that at the southeast corner there is an existing commercial use and on the northwest corner an area zoned Business " C " . Indicating on the map , Mr . Weisburd stated that the Monkemeyers have some plans for light commercial use on the northwest corner . Again indicating on the map , Mr . Weisburd noted that the " blue " areas are multi - family zones , adding that Ithaca College is located on " this " whole tract , and there is an industrial zone in " this " location . Mr . Weisburd pointed out on the map an area which is a proposed Town park and which the Monkemeyers have generously agreed to donate to the Town , if and when they develop the area around there , adding that the School would be happy to take part in developing the site . Mr . Weisburd indicated on the map a proposed road which the Monkemeyers plan on constructing to serve " this corner " . Mr . Weisburd stated that , essentially , the School is a low-rise , one - story building built around a central courtyard with a multi - function space off to one side . Mr . Weisburd stated that the School has a very open kind of floor plan which would be very easy to convert to light industrial • use . Mr . Weisburd pointed out that the School has no intention of doing that , but they are discussing contingencies . Chairman May asked if anyone had any questions or comments . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer , 1058 Danby Road , spoke from the floor and stated that approximately ten years ago his son , Evan , appeared before the Planning :Board to seek approval for an office park and at that time the Planning Board did approve the park . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that , as he remembered , the map presented to the Planning Board at that time included this particular area . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that , subsequently , the Planning Board approved it , and the Town Board tabled the matter , never following up on it . Chairman May commented that he thought he remembered that as a planned unit development . Mr . Monkemeyer responded that he believed it was an office park . Dr . Lesser wondered if Business " A " pertained to office space . Ms . Beeners stated that there would be over two acres so it would meet the requirements with room for adequate parking . Ms . Beeners offered that she felt the concept was a good one regarding location and site size . Mrs . Langhans stated that its proximity to the other business districts seemed to fit in . . Mr . Kenerson asked if the Planning Board were suggesting something to the Board of Appeals . Chairman May stated that a t Planning Board - 3 - July 21 , 1987 N. • rezoning would be a recommendation to the Town Board , Ms . Beeners stated that the School has requested a preliminary indication on. the feasibility of rezoning the approximately two - acre site to a business use which the Board might consider approving the concept of , contingent upon the receipt of a formal application to the Planning Board , Ms . Beeners stated that it would probably be best to do it as a special land use district because it is not clear that a school and business and professional offices are permitted in Business " A " There appearing to be no further discussion , Chairman May asked what the Board ' s pleasure might be . MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approve and hereby does approve , in concept , the potential future use of the Montessori School property for professional or business offices , however , this approval in concept is subject to the submission of a formal application and environmental review for any such uses . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Kenerson , Lesser , Langhans . • Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the matter of consideration of potential future use of the Montessori Elementary and Secondary School of Ithaca duly closed at. 8 : 00 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED REZONING OF A 1983 ACRE PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 24 - 3 - 3 . 3 , LOCATED ON TRUMANSBURG ROAD AND CONTAINING THE FORMER ODD FELLOWS ' CARRIAGE HOUSE , FROM RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT . WILLIAM L . LOWER , OWNER , Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 00 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Lower was present , as was his attorney , Paul Bennett , Attorney Bennett approached the Board and gave a brief description of the project . Attorney Bennett stated that the old Carriage House is in a parcel that is adjacent to the land that was just rezoned as a Special Land Use District for offices , etc . Attorney Bennett stated that the subject building is a three - story building that is set back pretty well from Route 96 , adding that at • one time it was an old carriage house associated with the Odd Fellows ' . Attorney Bennett described the proposal as a seven - unit apartment building with two apartments on the first floor , three Planning Board - 4 - July 21 , 1987 • apartments on the second floor , and two apartments on the third floor . Attorney Bennett noted that architect ' s drawings are not available as yet indicating where and how those apartments would be configured . Attorney Bennett stated that Mr . Lower proposes to have eleven parking spaces which would be located in the rear of the building , adding that those spaces would be shielded by some existing shrubbery at the rear of the building . Attorney Bennett offered that the idea behind this project is to basically keep the building as it is from the outside , so that it retains its natural style . Attorney Bennett distributed pictures to the Board showing the back of the building , on the south side , noting that the old porch was apparently erected after the building was originally constructed . Attorney Bennett stated that it was his understanding that the Town Planner would like two restrictions placed on the parcel , one being a restrictive covenant limiting the occupancy of each unit in the building to no more than three unrelated occupants , which would be consistent with the current Town zoning law , and , secondly , having to do with - - as can be seen from the overall diagram - - a very small road that cuts across the parcel in question , and which is also the entrance to The Mayer School and to the Ci. aschi land , that curves around in a " C " and then back around to Route 96 , Attorney Bennett stated that it has been suggested that this also be part of the restrictions such that the road is one -way so that there would be safe entrance and egress for all three of those entitities on Route 96 , Attorney Bennett stated that it was his understanding that within a short period of time a • major entrance will be constructed and , presumably , when the roadway is built , the Lower parcel would no longer be affected by the one - way . Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if anyone were present who wished to speak to this matter . Mr . George Dengler , 250 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and asked where the property was located . Chairman May explained that it is the former Odd Fellows ' Carriage House property on Trumansburg Road . Mr . Dengler voiced his concern about traffic in the area . Mr . Leslie Reizes , 1061 Taughannock Blvd . , spoke from the floor and stated that he did not think it would be beneficial for the use of this land or the other remaining land . -to make a deed restriction to make this road one -way . Mr . Reizes stated that that is something that the owners and users can work out among themselves . Attorney Bennett offered that lie may have misspoken and stated that he thought the proposal was simply that that be one -way until the road is put in . Chairman May stated that , at the present time , he thought the Board felt that if work is done there it would be even more important to have it one •- way , as there is a definite concern regarding the exit and entrance off Route 96 , Ms . Beeners , speaking to Mr . Reizes , noted that , at this time , there is a question of whether he had the right to access it from that northern entrance to get to his land , adding that the Board is trying to achieve a safe temporary situation . Planning Board - 5 - July 21 , 1987 Mrs . Langhans wondered about the width of the road . Mr . Flumerfelt responded that the road is very narrow and there are a couple of stone posts located there . Mr . Flumerfelt stated that a major concern would be with traffic exiting from that drive onto Route 96 . There appearing to be no further questions or comments from the public , Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 14 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion . Chairman May noted that the Town Board will be the Lead Agency for the SEQR review and the Planning Board is merely making a recommendation to the Town Board , Mrs . Langhans asked Mr . Lower whom he envisioned renting the apartments to , with Mr . Lower responding , to anyone who can afford them . Ms . Beeners pointed out a couple of zoning technicalities - - one , parking in the required rear yard is prohibited . It was noted that Mr . Lower does have parking , but there is a hedgerow right along the back property line . Two , the rear yard would be about twelve feet shy of what would be required . Chairman May commented that parking in the front would be a real • shame because of the appearance of the building . There appearing to be no further comments , Chairman May asked if anyone were prepared to make a motion . MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Dr . William Lesser : WHEREAS : 1 . These actions are the consideration of site plan approval for the proposed conversion of the former Odd Fellows ' carriage house into up to seven apartments and the consideration of a recommendation to the Town Board with respect to the proposed rezoning of a 1 . 83 acre portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 24 - 3 - 3 . 3 , located on Trumansburg Road and containing said former Odd Fellows ' carriage house , from Residence District R - 30 to Multiple Residence District , 2 . These are Unlisted actions for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed site plan approval , and for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board has been legislatively determined. to act as Lead Agency for the proposed rezoning . The Town of Ithaca Planning Board and the Tompkins County Planning Department, are involved agencies in coordinated review . • 3 . The Planning Board at a Public Hearing on July 21 , 1987 , has reviewed the following material : Planning Board - 6 - July 21 , 1987 " Map Showing Proposed Multiple Residence District , Former Odd Fellows ' Carriage House " . " Parking Site Plan " . Shoat Environmental Assessment Form and Proposed Project Description . 4 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance for these actions . THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 1 . That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed conversion of the former Odd Fellows ' carriage house into up to seven apartments , make and hereby does make a negative declaration of environmental significance for this Unlisted action . 2 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed rezoning of a 1 . 83 acre portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 24 - 3 - 3 . 3 , located on Trumansburg Road and containing said former Odd Fellows ' carriage house , from Residence District R - 30 to Multiple Residence District , that a negative determination of environmental significance be made for this Unlisted action . • 3 . That the Planning Board find and does find the following : a . There is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location . b . The existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be adversely affected . c . The proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town . 4 . That the .Planning Board approve and hereby does approve the site plan for the proposed conversion , as shown on the site plan reviewed by the Planning Board on July 21 , 1987 . 5 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board the rezoning of a 1 . 83 acre portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 24 - 3 - 3 . 3 , located on Trumansburg Road and containing said former Odd Fellows ' carriage house , from Residence District R- 30 to Multiple Residence District , as proposed , subject to the following conditions : a . The approval , by the Town Attorney , of a restrictive covenant on the parcel limiting the occupancy of each unit in the building to no more than three unrelated occupants . • b . The execution of appropriate easements , subject to approval by the Town Attorney , such that there be one - way ingress at Planning Board - 7 - July 21 , 1987 • the southern Odd Fellows ' complex gate for the proposed apartments , the Mayer School , and the former Odd Fellows ' infirmary , and such that there be egress from the northerly Odd Fellows ' gate , until such time as a road is constructed along the 60 - foot right of way located in the complex . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Kenerson , Lesser , Langhans . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Chairman May declared the matter of site plan approval and the matter of a recommendation to the Town Board with respect to the proposed Odd Fellows ' carriage house rezoning duly closed at 8 : 20 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR A PROPOSED 21 - UNIT , SINGLE- FAMILY , DETACHED CLUSTER SUBDIVISION , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED OFF WOOLF LANE ON A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 23 - 1 - 11 . 112 ( 23 . 05 ACRES TOTAL ) , TIMOTHY CIASCHI , OWNER ; SCOT RA.YNOR , LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT , AGENT . Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 20 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of • Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr . Timothy Ciaschi was present , as was his Landscape Architect , Scot Raynor , and his Contractor , Daniel McClure , Mr . Raynor appeared before the Board , appended drawings to the bulletin board , and stated that Mr . Ciaschi is asking the Board to consider Preliminary Subdivision Approval for his proposed 21 - unit , single - family , detached cluster subdivision on his property which is located just north of the Tompkins Community Hospital , south of Poyer ' s Orchard , and which lies within the area of Route 96 and DuBois Road . Mr . Raynor stated that the proposal is to subdivide the land for single - family , detached housing , and that the area is currently zoned , as is most of the area , as R- 30 because of the lack of public water and sewer . Mr . Raynor noted that the Town has an interest in bringing water and sewer to the area and that would be , essentially , a de facto change in zoning to R- 15 . Continuing , Mr . Raynor stated that in proposing this project the idea is to have single family , detached , rather than attached , housing , adding that with conventional zoning under the R- 15 ,, a 100 - foot by 150 - foot deep lot allows you to put two units on each of these lots . Indicating on the map , Mr . Raynor , noted that they are showing the road extension of Woolf Lane out to DuBois Road and along there a 14 - lot conventional lot layout that they would be allowed to do under the R- 15 zoning , stated that , however , they are not pursuing this because they do not think it is aesthetically compatible with other housing in the immediate area . Mr . Raynor pointed out that under this conventional lot layout they • could put 28 families or 28 units on these 14 lots . Mr . Raynor indicated on the map that they also show a future extension up to Grove Road , adding that , at this time , however , they understand that Planning Board - 8 - July 21 , 1987 the most urgent need is to put water and sewer into the area . Mr . Raynor stated that they are working with the Town on this matter . Mr . Raynor indicated that the developer has put in a greenspace which is a requirement for a subdivision , adding that it is usually 10 % of the total subdivision area , and further adding that , at this point , they are showing 1 . 7 acres , plus a greenbelt , which is more than generous . Mr . Raynor , noting that they are showing the greenspace as a central location for what they call a park , stated that this is something they would deed over to the Town , but they will consider maintaining it , although this is something they still have to evaluate further . Mr . Raynor stated that the difference in plan from that previously presented is in the lot configurations and lot sizes , adding that they are seeking to have the Planning Board consider a cluster subdivision rather than a conventional subdivision . Mr . Raynor pointed out that each one of " these " [ indicting ] clusters has three houses off a private drive , so , they have 21 lots with 21 houses - - 7 less than the conventional . Mr . Raynor stated that their objective is to provide a greenbelt all the way around the property to tie in to the central greenspace , which would be accessible by most of the people living in the development , and would also provide key areas " here " and " here " for people who do not live in the area but wish to drive up here and park and use the greenbelt . Mr . Raynor stated that that pretty much concluded his presentation and offered to answer any • questions . Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if anyone present had any questions or comments . Mr . George Dengler , 250 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and asked about the width of the greenbelt . Mr . Raynor responded that the greenbelt varies , ranging anywhere from 12 feet to 15 feet to 24 feet . Mr . Raynor noted that the greenbelt is not part of the setback , as they are showing this greenbelt as an additional buffer to that which is required by zoning for setbacks , and added that the rear yard setback is 40 feet . Mr . Donald Ball , 244 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and asked what the average size of the lots is , with Mr . Raynor responding that they are roughly 12 , 000 square feet . Mr . Henry Aron , 106 Woolf Lane , spoke from the floor and stated that under the original plan that was presented to the Planning Board about a year ago , if he remembered correctly , where the developer ' s line cuts in toward the Ulysses line , it looks like on this plan that there is a lot. missing . Mr . McClure replied that the lot has been deeded over . Mr . Aron questioned whether it was a subdivision or not . Ms . Beeners stated that the applicant has been advised that this matter should come before the next Planning Board meeting . • Continuing , Ms . Beeners stated that , in order to have 21 houses , the land has to be rezoned to R - 15 and , in order to have it rezoned to R- 15 the Town Board will have to look at the recommendation of the Planning Board - 9 - July 21 , 1987 • Planning Board . Ms . Beeners , noting that public utilities have to be in place , asked if the applicant could address the matter to the public present as to his intent regarding utilities . Mr . Raynor stated that it is pretty obvious that they cannot ask the Planning Board for R- 15 zoning if there are no public utilities , and that is something which Mr . Ciaschi is negotiating with the Town . Mr . Aron stated that it was his understanding that there is a draft agreement available and that Chairman May has a copy of that draft agreement . Mr . Aron wondered if , in order to make a recommendation to the Town Board for rezoning , would that not be part of having the! agreement signed . Chairman May responded that , yes , that would have to be part of it . Chairman May stated that he was having a little difficulty with Mr . Ciaschi ' s concept of cluster . Mr . Daniel McClure , Mr . Ciaschi ' s contractor , commenting that the parties involved in this project are using a little different definition than most other builders , stated that these are all detached homes , adding that when " cluster " is mentioned , one immediately thinks of 2 , 3 , or 4 units together . Mr . McClure stated that the developer is going back to a more traditional arrangement - - detached , single - family homes on individual lots - - with the lot being owned by the buyer and with each lot having frontage on a public road . • Mr . Raynor interjected that the only concession of clustering they have here is that there is approximately a 30 - foot front section of driveway . Mr . McClure noted that that is the only difference between this development and just single - family homes and individual lots , and the fact that the lots are 12 , 000 square feet instead of 15 , 000 square feet . Mr . McClure stated that , on the other hand , there is a huge public space that is being deeded over to the Town and part of it is well over one acre , and , the greenbelt which , in its full length , is over a mile , would constitute almost another two acres based on the width , and so , in other words , they are deeding over three acres to the Town and it is accessed for the whole neighborhood , not just those lots . Ms . Beeners stated that the developer has followed procedure in presenting a conventional plat which does show the permitted number of dwelling units that one would be able to have under the conventional zoning , and one showing the alternate plat which actually has a slightly higher acreage than shown on the conventional one , but is still complying with the requirements of the cluster regulations . Ms . Beeners pointed out that the density proposed is approximately 3 . 0 units per acre which is less than the maximum 3 . 5 units per acre permitted under the cluster regulations . Ms . Beeners stated that , under the conventional zoning , the alternatives for this property under the proposed R- 15 zoning would be anywhere from 2 . 2 units per acre for single - family homes to 4 . 4 units per acre with homes with accessory apartments in them . Ms . Beeners stated that these figures • are all including the same open space requirements . Ms . Beeners stated that the plan that is shown on the master plan for the open space would indicate to her that the Town would be receiving more than Planning Board - 10 - July 21 , 1987 • the 10 % open space that would be required in the entire site . Ms . Beeners noted that that is subject to further review and consideration of other subsequent phases , but , it appeared to her that it is following the cluster regulations . Ms . Beeners offered that the unusual thing about the project is the proposed single - family , detached houses , and stated that , in her opinion , the project is a very interesting one and also one of very marketable type of housing in this area . Mr . Aron spoke from the floor and asked if an environmental assessment form had been completed , with Ms . Beeners responding , yes . Mr . Bruce Rich , 253 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and asked about the type! of homes and the price range . Mr . McClure stated that , whether they are stick built or modular , there is not going to be any distinction from the outside , adding that the homes will be priced from $ 80 , 000 . to $ 90 , 000 . , Cape Cod style , one - and- one - half story , with , possible , some two story . Mr . Rich asked how many acres are owned in the Town of Ulysses , with Mr . Raynor responding , six acres . Mr . Rich wondered if the six acres would be developed later and , if so , could water and sewer go into that area as it is in a different Township . Mr . Raynor stated that the six acres will be the last part of the project to be developed , and the Town of Ulysses is another jurisdiction . Mr . Raynor stated that the developer ' s preference would be to extend water and sewer to those areas , but he , obviously , does . not have the final decision . Mr . Aron spoke from the floor and stated that , going up toward the Town of Ulysses within the Town of Ithaca , the developer is showing a road which is connecting toward Grove Road , and also a road going down to the Hayt farm . Mr . Aron stated that the developer intends to construct 21 detached homes on the site , so , there will be approximately 21 vehicles exiting in the morning and entering in the afternoon . Mr . Aron asked , since there are to be 21 more cars travelling back and forth , would it be feasible to ask to have a caution light , or traffic light , installed on DuBois Road , as well as from Woolf Lane onto Trumansburg Road , since Trumansburg Road at that point has a 55 mph speed limit , and if a number of cars are filtered in there it could be a very dangerous situation . Chairman May stated that the Planning Board has no jurisdiction for that , but consideration of that will be taken into account at the Town Board level . Ms . Heather Weiss , 105 DuBois Road , spoke from the floor and expressed her concern about the increase in traffic . Chairman May asked Mr . Flumerfelt if the Town had a current traffic study for the area . Mr . Flumerfelt responded that there would not be a problem with 21 cars as the traffic involved would be relatively insignificant . • Mrs . Langhans asked if the homes would be for sale or rental , with Mr . McClure responding , for sale . Mrs . Langhans wondered about Planning Board - 11 - July 21 , 1987 • the parking facilities regarding the greenway . Indicating on the map , Mr . Raynor pointed out where parking could occur , noting that there is plenty of space to park along the side of the road also , and adding that the parking question would be decided by the Town . Mr . Aron spoke from the floor and stated that he had no objections , adding that he was also speaking for the neighbors who could not attend the meeting , to the proposed cluster development providing that , number one , the houses being proposed are not at the lower price range than those which are in existence today , and secondly , and more importantly , that the water and sewer will be accepted which will then pass through there into the Woolf Lane area as well as the Grove Road area , and third , that the traffic pattern to be accepted such that there is an even flow of traffic and , also , parking facilities taken care of . Mr . Aron noted that we cannot stop progress . Mr . Rich spoke from the floor and asked about the drainage problem . Mr . McClure , commenting that , as he understood it , Grove Road and Woolf Lane creates its own drainage problems , stated that there are roadside ditches that are used for dumping and the drainage goes absolutely nowhere . Mr . McClure stated that the new road system will collect water from " these " ditches , as well as the adjacent area , and take it on down to DuBois Road , which is the existing drainage pattern , and the only area that will not really be drained by that is • a narrow edge " here " . Mr . McClure stated that 80 % of the property is going to be drained through the system that is built with the road . Chairman May pointed out that before final subdivision approval is granted a detailed drainage plan must be presented to the Board . Mr . Rich wondered if the timetable projected for the project would coincide with the timetable for the water and sewer . Mr . McClure responded that it has to , adding that they would like to work it at the same time . Chairman May noted that there is an agreement pending regarding the water and sewer between the Town and Mr . Ciaschi . Mr . Rich stated that he would like to say , for the record , that he was against developing this area . There appearing to be no further questions or comments from the public , Chairman May closed the Pubic Hearing at 8 : 56 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion . , Dr . Lesser stated that , basically , this development is going to be slightly less dense than what is permitted under the R- 15 zoning for two - family dwellings . Dr . Lesser wondered if we are not , indeed , moving to the point now where we are essentially acceeding to substantially denser building look than would likely occur , and stated that he thought it was a little bit of a misuse of the cluster arrangement . Chairman May stated that he had a concern about the Town ' s liability and responsibility as far as fire protection and emergency vehicles accessing this kind of design . Mr . Flumerfelt wondered about access to the triangular lots in Planning Board - 12 - July 21 , 1987 • the rear , adding that he had heard a mention of public driveways or public roads to serve the groups of three houses , however , the map he had before him does not indicate that access . Mr . McClure apologized and presented a new map indicating that - these " dotted lines represent lot lines and they come down to the public roads , so , in fact , " this " does have access . Indicating on the map , Mr . McClure stated that " this driveway " is approximately 120 feet long and 20 feet wide , adding that that , based on his casual observation , was not a lot longer than some of the driveways on DuBois Road . Chairman May asked about the frontage on the back lot of the three being below standard , with Mr . McClure responding that the frontage for every cluster is 200 feet . Chairman May offered that the developer is talking about probably 85 - foot lots in actuality for the two that come up to the road , and then he is saying a 30 - foot frontage on that road for the back lot . Mr . McClure stated that that was correct . Chairman May noted that there does not appear to be 100 feet of frontage on any of the three lots , with Mr . McClure responding that they had not claimed that they did . Chairman May pointed out that what is " here " shows that , with Mr . McClure responding that that shows a lot line , adding that they had made a revision . Chairman May stated that he had considerable concern about what • the Board has before it and with what the developer is asking the Board to act upon , as it does not seem to be what the developer is actually asking for , adding that he had a great deal of concern with the developer ' s definition of cluster . Mrs . Langhans wondered if the rest of the property were going to be developed in the same way , with Mr . McClure replying that he would prefer to build higher priced homes on larger lots , but they do not see that as their first option at this point . Ms . Beeners stated that she did not understand where the frontage fits into this project as it is a cluster plan , adding that she did not see any deficiency being shown . Ms . Beeners noted that there is not a frontage requirement in cluster except for the setback , and that would be provided , as indicated on the plan . Mr . Flumerfelt noted that the Board is reviewing a sketch and that there does not appear to be a turnaround spot for a larger vehicle . Ms . Beeners pointed out that it is less than 300 feet . Discussion followed as to requirements with respect to private drives and fire truck turnarounds as they pertain to R15 and R30 zoning and cluster . Chairman May stated that it is very much a requirement that the Board provide life safety access . Dr . Lesser stated that he was concerned if the Board allows this that most future developments of any size are indeed going to cluster in this fashion because , aesthetics aside , it is going to allow more individual family units per acre than with the R - 15 . Mr . Ciaschi stated that they are proposing a fresh new idea on a Planning Board - 13 - July 21 , 1987 • hill that is not moving . Chairman May commented that , basically , it is the density standpoint . Ms . Beeners stated that it would meet the requirements of Section 280 - a of the Town Law because more than 15 feet of access for the back property is provided , adding that these homes will be modestly sized single family homes that would probably appeal to an older group . Mrs . Langhans asked about the square footage of the homes , with Mr . McClure responding that they will be in the 1 , 200 square foot range . Mr . Fluraerfelt asked if there were to be a homeowners ' association or some type of maintenance , with Mr . McClure responding , no , adding that if they are selling individual people their lots they do not have any requirement as far as maintenance is concerned , and further adding that they do propose to make available maintenance contracts for those homeowners who are interested . There appearing to be no further comments or questions , Chairman May asked if anyone wished to make a motion . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker : WHEREAS : 1 . This action is the consideration of Preliminary Subdivision • Approval for a proposed 21 - unit , single - family detached cluster subdivision , proposed to be located on a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 23 - 1 - 11 . 112 ( 23 . 05 acres total ) , and , further , a request for the rezoning of said parcel from Residence District R- 30 to Residence District R- 15 . 2 . This is an Unlisted Action for which the Planning Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed subdivision , and for which the Town Board has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for the proposed :rezoning . The Tompkins County Planning Department and the Town of Ulysses are potentially involved agencies which are being notified of this action . 3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance , with certain conditions . THEREFORE , IT I: S RESOLVED : That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the environmental review of this Unlisted action , make and hereby does make a negative determination of environmental significance , with the following conditions : a . Filing and publication of the conditioned negative declaration herein pursuant to 6NYCRR617 . 6 ( h ) ( SEQRA ) , to include a 30 - day • public comment period , prior to any further consideration of preliminary subdivision approval . w Planning Board - 14 - July 21 , 1987 . b . Execution of an agreement between the Town of Ithaca and the developer- pertaining to the design and development of site improvements including water and sewer mains and streets , substantially as described in a July 15 , 1987 draft agreement , prior to consideration of final subdivision approval , and prior to the consideration by the Town Board of the proposed rezoning . c . Approval of a final drainage plan showing drainage improvements and including runoff calculations as part of any consideration of final subdivision approval . d . Approval of a site plan showing the proposed location of buildings and other site improvements and demonstrating a 30 - foot peripheral buffer as part of any further consideration of preliminary subdivision approval . e . Review of any draft covenants or deed restrictions by the Planning Board as part of any consideration of final subdivision approval , and approval of any covenants and deed restrictions by the Town :Board prior to the issuance of any building permits . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Baker , Kenerson , Lesser , Langhans . Nay - None . • The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Discussion of the proposed Chiaschi subdivision ended at 9 : 25 p . m . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the July 21 , 1987 , meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9 : 30 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Mary S . Bryant , Recording Secretary , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board .