HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1987-11-03 i FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
,p
Dater' Y—"--p
Clerk �
• TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOVEMBER 3 , 1987
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday , November 3 , 1987 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ,
Ithaca , New York ,, - at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , David Klein , Carolyn Grigorov ,
William Lesser , Robert Kenerson , John C . Barney , Esq . , ( Town
Attorney ) , Robert R . Flumerfelt , P . E . ( Town Engineer ) , Susan
C . Beeners ( Town Planner ) , Andrew Frost ( Town Building
Inspector / Zoning Enforcement Officer ) ,
ALSO PRESENT : Valerie Littlefield , John Littlefield , E . S . Phillips ,
E . E . Bredbenner , Barbara J . Bredbenner , Marie Cario ,
Douglas Armstrong , Edgar M . Raffensperger , Shirley A .
Raffensperger , Dick Anderson , Edward A . Mazza , Esq . ,
Ralph Iacovelli , Orlando Iacovelli , David C . Auble .
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 October 26 , 1987 and October 29 , 1987 , respectively ,
together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said
• Notice upon each of the various neighbors of each of the properties
under discussion , upon the Clerk of the City of Ithaca , upon the
Building Commissioner of the City of Ithaca , upon the Tompkins County
Commissioner of Public Works , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of
Planning , and upon each of the applicants and / or agent , as
appropriate , on October 28 , 1987 .
NON -AGENDA ITEM
Mr . Frost distributed to the Board copies of his October 1987
Report of Building / Zoning Activities .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD
OF APPEALS WITH RESPECT TO A REQUEST FOR SPECIAL APPROVAL OF A NURSERY
SCHOOL USE , PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IV , SECTION 11 , PARAGRAPH 4 , OF THE
TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE , FOR THE PROPOSED ADDITION OF FOURTEEN
ADDITIONAL CHILDREN ( 30 CHILDREN NOW ATTENDING ) AND FOR A ROOM
ADDITION AT LITTLE FEET MONTESSORI CENTER , LOCATED AT 139 HONNESS LANE
ON TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 . JOHN AND VALERIE
LITTLEFIELD , OWNERS / APPLICANTS .
Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 30 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . John and
Valerie Littlefield were present .
Mr . Littlefield addressed the Board and stated that there are 32
children enrolled at the present time , adding that they would like an
increase of 12 children . Chairman May asked if it was presently
t 1
Planning Board - 2 - November 3 , 1987
• approved for 32 or 30 . Mr . Littlefield responded that it is presently
approved for 32 .
Mr . Littlefield read aloud for the record the cover letter
attached to his Appeal to the Zoning Board of Appeals dated October
21 , 1987 . Also , attached to the cover letter is a schedule of drop -
off and pick -up times .
Chairman May , noting that this was a Public Hearing , asked if
there were anyone present who wished to speak .
Mr . E . Bredbenner of 141 Honness Lane spoke from the floor and
asked for any plans or sketches of the proposal . Mr . Bredbenner read
aloud for the record a letter addressed to the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board , as follows .
" RE : PROPOSAL FOR ADDITION TO FAMILY HOME AT 139 HONNESS LANE FOR AN
ADDITIONAL FOURTEEN ( 14 ) CHILDREN TO BE LOCATED AT THAT RESIDENCE .
ONCE AGAIN WE HAVE HAVE BEEN ASKED BY OUR NEIGHBORS TO REPRESENT THEM
AND SEEK SUPPORT AGAINST THE PROPOSED ADDITION TO THE FAMILY HOME AT
139 HONNESS LANE AND FOR AN INCREASE OF FOURTEEN ( 14 ) CHILDREN AT THE
SCHOOL HOUSED THERE ,
THE FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AGAIN ARE AGAINST ANY PROPOSALS TO
EXPAND THIS SCHOOL LOCATED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ALREADY HAS HAD MORE
• THAN ITS SHARE OF ZONING EXCEPTIONS . WE ALL FEEL THAT WE HAVE ENOUGH
DENSITY AND TRAFFIC PROBLEMS IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD ALREADY .
AT THE LAST HEARING ON THIS SCHOOL WE PRESENTED SIGNATURES AND
COMMENTS FROM MOST OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD . ALL OF THE
MANY THAT WERE CONTACTED AND THE SIGNERS TO THIS PETITION EXPRESSED
THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE MANY CHANGES THAT HAVE
ALREADY TAKEN PLACE IN THE HONNESS LANE AND PINE TREE ROAD AREA . WE
ALL FEEL THAT THE LAST HEARING TOOK CARE OF ANY PROPOSALS TO EXPAND
AND ANY MORE EXCEPTIONS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD .
WHEN THIS SCHOOL STARTED FIFTEEN ( 15 ) CHILDREN WERE HOUSED THERE . AT
A LATER DATE THIS WAS DOUBLED TO THIRTY . ( 30 ) THIS CHANGE WAS
PRESENTED AND TOOK PLACE WITHOUT ANY PERSON IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
RECEIVING ANY NOTICE OF THIS PROPOSED CHANGE . WE ALL FEEL THIS
ALREADY IS TOO MANY FOR THIS FAMILY HOME TO ACCOMMODATE AND ESPECIALLY
WITH ALL THE PARKING AND TRAFFIC PROBLEMS THAT ALREADY EXIST IN OUR
NEIGHBORHOOD .
cc NOEL DESCH - SUPERVISOR
SHIRLEY RAFFENSPERGER - COUNCILWOMAN
SUSAN BEENERS - PLANNER
EDGAR & BARBARA BREDBENNER
141 HONNESS LANE "
• Mr . Littlefield stated that the State has approved , as far as
square footage is concerned , the present home without an addition ,
Planning Board - 3 - November 3 , 1987
• adding that the State has approved the present home for 49 children .
Mr . Littlefield felt that 32 children should not be the limit set at
this school . Mr . Littlefield stated that the children are not housed
at the home , they are educated there . Mr . Littlefield referred to a
study prepared by Robert Flumerfelt , P . E . on traffic in the
neighborhood which shows that Honness Lane has not reached even half
of its capacity for traffic .
Valerie Littlefield pointed out that when the School was
established the number of children allowed was 32 .
Shirley Raffensperger of 139 Pine Tree Road spoke from the floor
and stated that 'in 1979 the Zoning Board of Appeals approved a
day - care facility for 15 children . At that time there was no
opposition from the neighborhood as a replacement for a non - conforming
use of student housing across the road from 139 Honness Lane and at
that time it was proposed that the proprietor would be in residence .
and there would be an apartment in the building , with 15 children in
the facility . Mrs . Raffensperger noted that the Littlefields decided
that the building , upon examination , was not suitable for that and did
not go ahead and set up that facility . In 1981 the Littlefields came
to the Town of Ithaca for the house that had been a one - family house
and had been converted to a two - family house , and asked for a 30
children facility and the neighborhood did not oppose that facility .
At that time , Larry Fabbroni was the Town Planner as well as the Town
• Engineer , and at a Planning Board meeting on July 7 , 1981 raised a
question of whether or not this was an appropriate use in an R- 15
zone . Mr . Fabbroni ' s main comment had to do with general zoning and
having a Comprehensive Plan that shows a residential neighborhood , and
about the area requirements in place for such a residential zone .
Mrs . Raffensperger stated that Mr . Fabbroni commented that if the same
house were situated on five acres " we " might be able to look at it in
the spirit of what R- 15 was intended by the Ordinance . Mrs . '
Raffensperger stated that , in her opinion , this is no longer a little
day - care facility for the neighborhood , it is really a commercial
enterprise . Mrs . Raffensperger noted that in an R- 15 zone a Nursery
School is permitted , adding that in the same zone an office of a
resident professional is permitted , but only two additional persons
may be employed . Additionally , a home occupation is permitted , but no
additional persons not residing on the premises may be employed .
Elmer Phillips of 131 Pine Tree Road spoke from the floor and
stated that said area is primarily an area for homes . Mr . Phillips
pointed out that perhaps when the Ordinance was written a mistake was
made in regard to Honness Lane . The road is exactly a half-mile in
length , and has two feeders from two large developments , with at least
four income properties , an educational property that wants to expand ,
and two churches . Mr . Phillips felt that the density was too high for
this particular area .
John Perialas , owner of the property at 139 Honness Lane , stated
• that the approval for 32 children was granted for this location ,
regardless of whether 15 was granted across the street . Mr . Perialas
felt that the property across the street had nothing to do with the
Planning Board - 4 - November 3 , 1987
• present proposal . Mr . Perialas noted that 12 more cars would be
involved , adding that 12 vehicles would not create that much more
traffic , and commenting that the applicants are operating a school ,
not a babysitting service .
Shirley Raffensperger of 139 Pine Tree Road stated that the
neighbors are not opposed to day - care facilities , but there is a
difference as to where it is appropriate .
John Littlefield , applicant , referred to the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board minutes of July 7 , 1981 in which Mr . May noted that
there is a proposed total of 30 - 32 children . Mr . Littlefield
submitted a list of persons in the immediate vicinity that over the
years have used the facility . The New York State Department of Social
Services licensed the facility as a Montessori Nursery School .
Valerie Littlefield , applicant , stated that the facility is an
educational institution that provides resources . Mrs . Littlefield
noted that the school has evaluation forms that are filled out every
six weeks by the group teachers .
John Littlefield , applicant , again referred to the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board minutes of July 7 , 1981 , noting that a letter was
written to the Planning Board stating that he and his wife had
canvassed the neighborhood asking for any objections to a Montessori
School being located at 139 Honness Lane . The letter was signed by
quite a few of the neighbors voicing no objection .
Douglas Armstrong of 121 Honness Lane stated that everything that
has been mentioned tonight in regard to requesting the approval is
simply hiding the fact that was brought out initially by Shirley
Raffensperger in regard to the increase of the number of students .
Mr . Armstrong noted that when the school was permitted in 1981 the
number was 30 - 32 , with the number requested now at 12 more . Mr .
Armstrong felt that if this proposal is granted what would prevent the
applicants from coming back at a later date for an additional number
of students . Mr . Armstrong stated that the proposal was initially
granted in a private home ( two - unit house ) , but still was in an R- 15
single - family area . Mr . Armstrong felt that the addition of 12 more
students is simply increasing an already unusual usage for the
premises .
Valerie Littlefield mentioned the fact that Tompkins County needs
quality day - care , and to get that quality day - dare we cannot have
day - care centers stuck in the middle of a parking lot or housed in a
jail -cell where the homeless were spending the night a few hours
before . Mrs . Littlefield felt that day - care centers should be in an
R- 15 situation with a backyard , country setting and a well taken care
of lot .
John Littlefield stated that there seems to be quite a concern
• with the density of the area . Mr . Littlefield mentioned that there
are other things happening on Honness Lane that involve an increase in
traffic .
Planning Board - 5 - November 3 , 1987
• Chairman May asked if anyone else present wished to speak . No
one spoke . Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 09 p . m . and
asked for questions or comments from the Board .
Chairman May noted that 12 more cars backing out of the parking
lot in the wintertime is a significant amount . Mr . Perialas responded
that a circular drive is proposed .
Board Member Lesser inquired as to the number of employees in the
facility , with Mr . Littlefield answering , seven teachers . Mr . Lesser
also wondered about the parking across the road . Mr . Littlefield
stated that the area across the road has been used for parking for the
last six years , adding that this helps alleviate some of the problems
with traffic on Honness Lane . Mr . Littlefield noted that the teachers
park across the street in permanent parking places . Mr . Lesser asked
about the proposed turnaround in regard to spaces for three cars . Mr .
Littlefield responded that the three spaces would be used as a
drop - off point . Mr . Lesser asked about the drop - off schedule . Mrs .
Littlefield said that the times are staggered to alleviate any problem
with delivering or picking up the children . Chairman May commented
that , most of the time the system works fairly well , but was concerned
about the winter months .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , stated that , as far as the character
of the community and this particular parcel , this property is within
• and near the edge , or virtually near the fringe , of a large East
Ithaca R- 15 District , and near lands zoned R- 30 north and backlots of
Honness Lane which are owned by Cornell . Ms . Beeners remarked that ,
in her opinion , Honness Lane is not an interior local residential
street . The geometrics here do not work that way so that Honness Lane
could be considered a street such as a local street within Eastern
Heights . Ms . Beeners stated that it appears to her it would be better
to have a school where there is careful monitoring in a controlled
situation on a route that is convenient to the neighbors , and also to
the major employment generators , such as Cornell and East Hill Plaza ,
rather than having it in the center of Eastern Heights , for example .
Ms . Beeners stated that it does not appear to her that there is a
situation here that is amenable to saying that there is a
single - family residential character along this street . Ms . Beeners
appended a large colored map of the land uses in the area , such as
single - family homes , business properties , two - family residences and
churches .
Shirley Raffensperger commented about the changing character of
the neighborhood .
At this time , John Littlefield referred to Article IV , Section
11 , Paragraph 4 , Residence District R- 15 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Ordinance . Mr . Littlefield stated that , as he understood it , the
Ordinance does not discriminate between private schools or nursery
schools . Mr . Littlefield also referred to Article XIV , Section 77 ,
• Paragraph 7a .
Chairman May commented that , in his opinion , Little Feet has
always been a good neighbor , but felt that the facility is large
Planning Board - 6 - November 3 , 1987
• enough at this point .
David Klein wondered , if this facility were enlarging by
increments , at what point does it become a problem . Mr . Klein stated
that , obviously , this is a commercial enterprise , and generates a lot
of traffic . Mr . Klein was also concerned about the lot size and also
the parking .
Mr . Lesser noted that the Draft Resolution presented to the
Planning Board November 3 , 1987 suggests approving the proposal for a
period of time ( 24 months ) . Mr . May felt that 32 children were
sufficient in this neighborhood .
Mr . Perialas stated that in this location [ 139 Honness Lane ] the
12 additional students would be the maximum .
Ms . Been.ers wondered if a more refined site plan would be in
order that would show the possibilities of how improvements could be
made at both locations , and showing the front of 139 Hon ness Lane not
necessarily being totally paved . Mr . Beeners asked if the above would
be useful to the Board to assist in their decision . Mr . May responded
that there is 100 feet of frontage and with a 16 - foot drive - through ,
there would be a 10x20 grassy plot in the front , and the rest of the
area would be paved with a small area off to the side .
• Mr . Lesser stated that , in his opinion , he recognized very well
the changes that have occurred on Honness Lane , and was very
sympathetic to the neighbors . However , in terms of the overall
community Mr . Lesser felt that one of the major needs in this area is
quality day - care , and understood that the Littlefields provide that
quality care . Mr . Lesser also stated that , weighing all the factors ,
the proposal for 12 additional children should be approved for the
existing facility , but that no more would be permitted in that very
tight location .
Mrs . Grigorov wondered if it were possible to place a limitation
on the number of children permitted in the facility . Mrs . Grigorov
felt that one of the things the neighborhood was concerned about was
the number of children in the facility . Town Attorney Barney stated
that it could be noted that the 12 additional children would be the
final increment on a lot this size , adding that , if this proposal were
approved , the limitation would prevent the applicant from coming back
at a later date for additional children .
Mr . Perialas stated that if the property were sold the business
would not be transferable to the new owner .
There appearing to be no further comments or questions , Chairman
May asked if anyone cared to make a motion .
MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mr . Robert Kenerson :
•
Planning Board - 7 - November 3 , 1987
• WHEREAS :
1 . This action is 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 IV , Section 11 ,
Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the
proposed addition of 12 additional children ( 32 children
originally approved and now attending ) and for a room addition to
the Little Feet Montessori Center , at 139 Honness Lane , Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 .
2 . This is an Unlisted Action for which the Zoning Board of Appeals
has been legislatively designated to act as Lead Agency , and for
which a recommendation of a negative determination of
environmental significance has been made by the Town Planner ,
3 . The proposal has been reviewed by the Planning Board at a Public
Hearing on November 3 , 1987 .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Zoning Board of Appeals that a negative determination of
environmental significance be made , subject to certain mitigating
measures which would be made part of any further project
• implementation .
2 . That the Planning Board has determined that :
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 .
3 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Zoning Board of Appeals that Special Approval be granted for
the proposal as presented , subject to the following conditions .
a . The Special Approval be granted for expansion of the school
for a total enrollment of no more than 44 children .
b . The Special Approval be granted for twenty - four ( 24 ) months ,
with the possibility of extension of such 24 - month period
upon review .
c . The Special Approval be subject to all conditions and
regulations required by the New York Department of Social
• Services and the Tompkins County Health Department .
Planning Board - 8 - November 3 , 1987
• d . That all parking and standing be on the sites at 139 and 142
Honness Lane , with no parking or standing to be permitted on
Honness Lane .
e . That parking , delivery and loading rules , and scheduling be
implemented and strictly enforced by the applicant .
f . That final site improvement plans , prepared by a registered
professional engineer or registered landscape architect , be
submitted for approval by the Town Engineer for the
improvements at both 139 and 142 Honness Lane , with no
parking at either location to be within the required 25 - foot
front yard setback , and with parking areas to be suitably
landscaped , and with six pick - up and drop -off parking spaces
to be provided , as well as ten staff parking spaces and six
parking spaces for the tenants at 142 Honness Lane .
g . That , subject to the approval of the Town Engineer , the
pick- up and drop- off arrangements with respect to 139
Honness Lane be revised to limit to the fullest . extent
possible automobiles backing out onto Honness Lane .
h . That the final planting plan , schedule , and installation be
subject to approval by the Town Planner .
• i . That no further applications for any additional expansion be
entertained .
j . That the Special Approval be granted to the extent applicant
only , not to be passed with the property .
k . The Zoning Board of Appeals reserve the right to impose
additional conditions at any time .
There being no further discussion , Chairman May called for a
vote .
Aye - Lesser , Kenerson .
Nay - May , Grigorov , Klein .
Chairman May declared the MOTION defeated .
Chairman May declared the matter of the Little Feet Montessori
Nursery School duly closed at 8 : 49 p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING . CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN AND SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
FOR A PROPOSED MOVING AND STORAGE FACILITY , PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ON
A 1 . 5 ± ACRE PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 2 , 90 . 23
ACRES TOTAL , IN A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT AT 608 ELMIRA ROAD ,
EARLAND AND ROBERT MANCINI , PROPERTY OWNERS ; RICHARD ANDERSON ,
APPLICANT .
• Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 8 : 50 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Planning Board - 9 - November 3 , 1987
• Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above . Mr .
Anderson was present .
Mr . Anderson addressed the Board and stated that he proposed to
build a 5 , 000 square foot warehouse and approximately 960 feet of
office space . Mr . Anderson noted that said building would be
constructed on approximately 1 $ acres of land . Mr . Anderson stated
that the building would be constructed of metal , and stand 26 feet in
height , adding that the building would be built in such a position
that it would be in the lower area than what is viewed from the road ,
noting that the area off the road is about 20 ± feet down into the
Mancini parcel of land . Mr . Anderson offered that a letter , dated
October 26 , 1987 , addressed to Mr . Anderson , was received from Earland
Mancini confirming that Mr . Anderson could egress and exit from their
existing private roads to Route 13 and 13A . Chairman May read aloud
said letter for the record , as follows .
" October 26 , 1. 987
Richard R . Anderson
246 Iradell Rd .
Ithaca , N . Y . 14850
Dear Dick :
• Regarding proposed purchase of bldg . lot at the rear of 606
Elmira Rd .
This is to confirm egress and exit from our existing private
roads to route 13 and 13A .
Mancini Realty
Earland Mancini "
Mr . Anderson commented that there would be three trucks entering
and exiting at least twice a day . The tractor trailer usage would be
minimal as they are out on the road for 6 - 12 weeks at a time , and the
amount of public in and out would be minimal . The applicant stated
that the building would be somewhat obscured from the road because of
the landscaping . At this point , Mr . Anderson distributed pictures of
the property for the Board ' s viewing .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
there were anyone present who wished to speak . No one spoke .
Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 55 p . m . , and asked for
questions or comments from the Board .
Chairman May wondered about the elevation change of the land .
Mr . Anderson responded that it would be 26 - feet to grade at the back ,
as well as the front .
• David Klein commented that it is certainly a good location since
it is one of the few areas zoned industrial in the Town . Mr . Klein
Planning Board - 10 - November 3 , 1987
. voiced a concern regarding egress and exit for the vans , because that
particular section of the Elmira Road does not have the best site
distances . Mr . Anderson remarked that Route 13A and Route 13 would be
used for egress and exit , as noted in the above -mentioned letter from
Mr . Mancini ,
Mr . Lesser asked about the extent of the Industrial zoning in
that particular area . Susan Beeners answered that the Light
Industrial zoning extends down to just about where Wonderland Motel is
located and then there is an area that is Business " C " . Ms . Beeners
stated that she received a telephone call from John Andersson of the
Health Department regarding the Mancini property . Mr . Andersson
stated that because of the brook that runs along on the north side of
the property , which is a Department of Conservation classified stream ,
the septic would have to be located 100 feet away .
Robert Kenerson asked Mr . Anderson if he owned the land . Mr .
Anderson answered that the Board ' s decision is contingent upon his
purchasing the land .
Town Attorney Barney wondered about the status of the road , as
this is the second parcel in this area that is being considered off a
private road , and noted that at some point there should be a condition
imposed that that road be improved to Town specifications and
conveyed , rather than have subdivisions on a private road continue
indefinitely . Mr . Anderson offered that the private black - top road is
approximately 20 feet wide . Mr . Barney noted that Section 280 - a of
Town Law states that a building permit cannot be issued on an
undeveloped road , adding that a variance would have to be applied for .
Mr . Barney was concerned about this becoming an ad hoc subdivision on
what amounts to a private road without the safeguards that are
normally imposed on a developer . Attorney Barney stated that the
applicant should obtain a waiver of the requirements of Town Law
Section 280 - a from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals .
There appearing to be no further comments or questions , Chairman
May asked if anyone cared to make a motion .
MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval and
Subdivision Approval for a proposed moving and storage facility ,
proposed to be located on a 1 . 5 ± acre portion of Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 2 , 90 . 23 acres total , in a Light
Industrial District at 608 Elmira Road ,
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 Site Plan and Subdivision , and for which
the Town Planner has recommended that the Planning Board also act
as Lead Agency in the consideration of a variance of the 25 - foot
maximum height requirement to permit a 26 - foot high building .
Planning Board - 11 - November 3 , 1987
• 3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance , subject to certain mitigation
measures which are being included in the further implementation
of the project .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the
environmental review pertinent to this Unlisted Action , make and
hereby does make a negative determination of environmental
significance .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Gr :igorov , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mr . Robert Kenerson :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the consideration of Site Plan Approval and
Subdivision Approval for a proposed moving and storage facility ,
• proposed to be located on a 1 . 5 ± acre portion of Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 2 , 90 . 23 acres total , in a Light
Industrial District at 608 Elmira Road ,
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 .
3 . The Planning Board , at a Public Hearing on November 3 , 1987 , has
reviewed -the following material :
" Map of a Portion of Lands of Mancini Realty Company ,
Showing 1 . 5 ± acre Parcel with Proposed Anderson
Building , Location off Elmira Road , Town of Ithaca ,
Tompkins County , New York " , dated October 13 , 1987 ,
signed and sealed by Clarence W . Brashear , L . L . S .
SEQR Short EAF , dated October 26 , 1987 , signed by Richard R .
Anderson ,
Appeal Form , dated October 23 , 1987 , signed by Richard R .
Anderson .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board waive and hereby does waive certain
requirements for Preliminary 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 .
Planning Board - 12 - November 3 , 1987
• 2 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Preliminary
Subdivision Approval of the subdivision as herein proposed , and
grant and hereby does grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval to the
proposed facility , subject to the following conditions .
a . The granting of any necessary variances for the proposed
facility by the Zoning Board of Appeals .
b . That the applicant obtain a waiver of the requirements of
Town Law , Section 280 - a , from the Town of Ithaca Zoning
Board of Appeals .
c . The submission of a final subdivision plat and final site
plan , to be subject to approval by the Town Engineer ,
showing the dimensions of the overhead transmission line
right of way , proposed drainage and other site improvements ,
and information on the right of the applicant to use the
private roads shown on the plan for access to Elmira Road
and to Five Mile Drive .
d . That such final subdivision plat show the location , approved
by the Town Engineer , of any roads which may be proposed as
public roads .
e . The approval of the water supply and septic system by the
• Tompkins County Health Department , such approval to be shown
on the final plat .
f . The approval of the building color and landscaping plan by
the Town Planner .
g . The approval of restoration of the spoil storage area by the
Town Engineer .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Grigorov , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser .
Nay an, None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Chairman May declared the matter of Consideration of Site Plan
and Subdivision Approval for the Mancini property , Richard Anderson ,
Applicant , duly closed at 9 : 44 p . m .
SKETCH PLAN REVIEW : CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLANS FOR PROPOSED
" KLONDIKE MANOR " , A CLUSTERED DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED ON
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO . 6 - 53 - 1 - 17 . 1 , - 17 . 2 , - 5 , AND - 10 , 9 . 63
ACRES TOTAL , ON CODDINGTON ROAD , NORTHWEST OF JUNIPER DRIVE . ORLANDO
AND RALPH IACOVELLI , APPLICANTS .
Chairman May opened the discussion on the above - noted matter at
9 : 45 p . m . , and read aloud from the Agenda as noted above . Mr .
Iacovelli was present , along with his Attorney , Edward Mazza , and
Planning Board - 13 - November 3 , 1987
• Consulting Engineer Larry Fabbroni .
Mr . Fabbroni appeared before the Board and appended three large
maps to the bulletin board .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that Mr . Iacovelli was proposing a 33 - unit
cluster subdivision between Coddington Road and Pennsylvania Avenue
Extension , with the total acreage being 9 . 63 ± acres . The lots are
approximately 17 , 000 square feet in size . Mr . Fabbroni commented that
there are a number of considerations for clustering . One of the
reasons is because of the convoluted history of the subdivision of at
least three of the four parcels in question . Secondly , as far as what
exists on the land , this particular parcel has a very dense and high
spruce forest . Mr . Fabbroni mentioned the rock consideration in terms
of efficiency of utilities , noting that in some cases , the rock is at
the surface in this particular part of the Town . Mr . Fabbroni
remarked that because of the rock the likelihood of proposals of
cluster on South Hillis more than in any other part of the Town . The
land use is another consideration , as this is the old original land
tract . Continuing , Mr . Fabbroni stated that the name , KLONDIKE MANOR ,
that was chosen for this subdivision was not by accident because the
area , historically , was known as " The Klondike " . Mr . Fabbroni stated
that , basically , when the railroad brought in workmen for the
railroad , plots were made available for use for the workers . The
plots were small parcels , approximately 9 , 000 square feet in size .
• Mr . Fabbroni stated that the area in question is sort of a mixed use
character , with R- 15 zoning . Mr . Fabbroni noted that subject parcel
has access from Coddington Road and Pennsylvania Avenue . Mr . Fabbroni
noted that , in his opinion , there are three clear options in regard to
the road once this land is developed . One is to complete the loop ,
bring it out to Coddington Road and to extend Kendall Avenue
eventually out to the ploted streets as shown on the map . Mr .
Fabbroni stated that circulation is another reason to consider
clustering . Mr . Fabbroni mentioned that the water comes from the
Northview Road tank , down Pennsylvania Avenue , Kendall Avenue , and
loops itself here [ indicating on map ] . Mr . Fabbroni stated that NYSEG
owns the old railroad right - of -way , and historically , NYSEG has
allowed public and private roads to go over that right- of - way .
Chairman May wondered about the developers ' intentions with
respect to marketing the units , with Attorney Mazza responding that
the intent is rental with three bedrooms per unit .
Mr . Lesser stated that , in his opinion , the proposal is way off
track for two reasons . One is where the proposed road location enters
Coddington Road across from Spruce Way , which is just over the crest
of a hill . Secondly , Mr . Lesser did not see how approval can be given
for two one - unit lots with rights - of -way without a Town approved road .
Mr . Lesser also stated that , most importantly , the units certainly
look and act like apartment houses . The area is zoned R- 15 single and
two - family housing . Attorney Mazza pointed out that a right - of -way
• currently exists on this land [ indicating on map ] , which is unclear
when the title is reviewed whether the people from Pennsylvania Avenue
also have that right - of -way . Again , indicating on map , Mr . Mazza
Planning Board - 14 - November 3 , 1987
• stated that this property line would be the center line , coming out
onto Coddington Road " here " , with the subject lots serviced by that ,
so we are proposing that " that " would be less desirable than " this "
[ pointing to map ] . Mr . Mazza commented , instead of having an entrance
over " here " , and having two entrances onto this road , that the
entrances be at the same point . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the
applicant does not have clear enough access by way of Pennsylvania
Avenue Extension to show a road coming in from the north . The
right- of - way that Mr . Mazza mentioned is only 20 - feet wide .
Chairman May commented that he has a problem in that the
applicant has taken a conventional subdivision and used that as a
number , and wondered if all the lots were buildable lots . Mr . May
questioned the number and stated that the applicant was approaching
using cluster as a dodge to acquire multiple family .
Mr . Fabbroni responded that , if the applicant were asking for
multiple family , 30 multiple family units would be requested , plus
three single family lots .
. Robert Flumerfelt , Town Engineer , asked Mr . Fabbroni if he had
measured the site distance from the proposed intersection location at
Spruce Way . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he would check on it .
Board Member Klein commented that he did not like to see cluster
• used as an end - run to a multiple family district , and noted that the
basic feeling was that the cluster should be used for owner -occupied
housing as an alternative way to provide it , for the reasons that were
indicated that cluster makes sense here . Mr . Klein stated that in a
rental housing scheme , perhaps a larger building would be preferable
rather than scattering smaller structures throughout the site . Mr .
Mazza stated that the density would not be increased , and secondly ,
the applicant is proposing something in between the one huge building .
Chairman May stated that the Board members will view the site at
their earliest convenience .
Chairman May declared the matter of the " KLONDIKE MANOR " Sketch
Plan Review duly closed at 10 : 30 p . m .
FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH RESPECT TO LITTLE FEET MONTESSORI CENTER .
Town Attorney Barney wondered about the recommendation , or lack
thereof , to the Zoning Board of Appeals on Little Feet , Mr . Barney
said that it would be wise to adopt another resolution since there was
a vote three to two against a resolution in favor of the proposal .
Discussion followed as to appropriate wording .
MOTION by Mr . David Klein , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May :
WHEREAS :
• 1 . This action is the Consideration of a Recommendation to the
Zoning Board of Appeals with respect to a request for Special
Planning Board - 15 - November 3 , 1987
Approval of a School Use , pursuant to Article IV , Section 11 ,
Paragraph 4 , of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , for the
proposed addition of 12 additional children ( 32 children
originally approved and now attending ) and for a room addition to
the Little Feet Montessori Center , at 139 Honness Lane , Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 6 .
2 . This is an Unlisted Action for which the Zoning Board of Appeals
has been legislatively designated to act as Lead Agency , and for
which a recommendation of a negative determination of
environmental significance has been made by the Town Planner .
3 . The proposal has been reviewed by the Planning Board at a Public
Hearing on November 3 , 1987 .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Zoning Board of Appeals that the Special Approval be denied .
2 . That the Planning Board has determined that :
a . there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed
location , but that ,
• be the existing and probable future character of the
neighborhood will be adversely affected by the increased use
of what amounts to a single - family house on a minimal
residential lot ,
c . The proposed change is not in accordance with a
comprehensive plan of development of the Town .
3 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Zoning Board of Appeals that Special Approval be denied for
the proposal as presented .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Grigorov , Klein .
Nay - Lesser , Kenerson .
The MOTION was declared to be carried by a three - to - two vote .
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the November 3 , 1987 meeting
of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10 : 30 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
• Mary S . Bryant , Recording Secretary ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board .