HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1989-06-27 4
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Clerk
JUNE 27 , 1989
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday , June 27 , 1989 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca ,
New York , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov , Virginia Langhans , James
Baker , Stephen Smith , Montgomery May , Robert K: enerson , John
C . Barney ( Town Attorney ) , Sally S . Olsen ( Town Engineer ) ,
Susan C . Beeners ( Town Planner ) , George R . Frantz ( Assistant
Town Planner ) .
ALSO PRESENT : Doris Bonnett , Ralph Bonnett , Gladys E . Kalman , Alice
LSarkissian , Samuel Sarkissian , George Sarkissian , Sammy
Sarkission , John Pearson , Ruth M . Pearson , Lyman Baker ,
Richard Gere , Elaine Gere , Phyllis Gere , Ruth E .
Johnson , David Lorenzini , Chris Black , C . Vogel , Bonnie
ISimpson , Jean Brockway , Suzanne Fullagar , Itzick
Vatnick , Harrison Rue , Myrtle Whitcomb , Ed Hallberg ,
Tom Niederkorn , Nancy Ostman , Peter D . Novelli , Terry
Harbin , Mark Adams , Rick Holt , Doug Wilcox , David C .
Auble , Sara Beth Canaday , Laura Marks , Sandra Rogers ,
, Don Sweezy , J . Wilcox , Peter Trowbridge .
• Chairperson Grigorov 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 June 19 , 1989 , and June 22 , 1989 , 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 Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , 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 / o`r agents , as appropriate , on June 21 , 1989 .
Chairperson Grigorov read the Fire Exit Regulations to those
assembled , as required by the New York State Department of State ,
Office of Fire Prevention and Control .
AGENDA ITEM
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 6 , 1989
MOTION by Montgomery May , seconded by Virginia Langhans :
RESOLVED , "that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Meeting of June ', 6 , 1989 , be and hereby are approved as presented .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
• Aye - Grigorov , Langhans , Baker , Smith , May , Kenerson .
Nay - None .
Planning Board - 2 - June 27 , 1989
• The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR A PROPOSED
5 , 000 ± SQ , FT . '1ADDITION TO THE OFFICES OF THERM , INC . , HUDSON STREET
EXTENSION , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 54 - 2 - 1 , LIGHT INDUSTRIAL
DISTRICT . THERM , INC . OWNERS ; ROBERT R . SPROLE II , APPLICANT .
Chairperson Grigorov 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 .
Maps were appended to the bulletin board .
Chris Black , Development Engineer at Therm , Inc . , addressed the
Board and stated that the proposed project would be an absolute
minimum impact . '
Mr . Black ' stated that the original roof line of the original
Therm , Inc . building , which was built about 1932 , has a peaked roof
attic , with steel A- frame construction . Mr . Black added that every . 15
feet there is an A - frame thing that goes directly through the center
of the building , and does not allow use of that space for what Therm ,
Inc . hopes to be space for engineering expansion , and computerizing
the firm . Mr . Black commenting that , in additon to that , Therm , Inc ,
would like to recover the present engineering space for additional CNC
• types of equipment , which is a temperature and environmental control
requirement for their equipment .
Continuing , Mr . Black stated that the proposal is to construct
another story with a flat roof on top of the original building . Mr .
Black noted that the proposed construction would be consistent with
the present construction . Mr . Black offered that the building would
be constructed of grey - tone block , with subtle brown frame windows .
Mr . Black said that Therm , Inc . investigated the visual impact on
the neighborhood , and concluded that the proposed extension would have
less impact than the current growth already in motion , adding , in
addition , Mr . Sprole has taken the time to plant very densely
populated greenery along the fence line .
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if there were anyone from the public who had any comments or
questions .
Doris Bonnett , of 133 Pearsall Place , addressed the Board and
stated that she did not want the factory to expand , ever again . Mrs .
Bonnett commented that she has been bothered by noise , and traffic ,
and she is totally opposed to granting approval for the extension .
Virginia Langhans wondered if Therm , Inc . would be hiring extra
personnel . Mr . Black answered that , at the most , there would be a
• half- dozen new people hired , adding that , actually they are trying to
accommodate the present staff .
Planning Board - 3 - June 27 , 1989
• Sam Sarkissian , of 149 Pearsall Place , spoke from the floor and
stated that he was concerned about any expansion , and also he was
concerned about the noise level at 3 . 00 a . m . Mr . Sarkissian felt that
the noise was a safety factor . Mr . Black stated that he would look into the noise
problems .
Gladys Kalman , of 153 Pearsall Place , spoke from the floor and
voiced her objection to the expansion , as she felt it is big enough as
it exists .
Doris Bonnet , of 133 Pearsall Place , again spoke from the floor
and stated that if Therm , Inc . is allowed to expand the problems just
get bigger and bigger . Ms . Bonnett felt that they should contain what
they have at the present time .
There appearing to be no one else from the public who wished to
speak to this matter , Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing
at 7 : 51 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion .
Mr . May wondered about the overall height . Mr . Black responded
that from the floor of the building it would be 28 feet . Chairperson
Grigorov wondered why Mr . Black would need a variance . Attorney
Barney replied that the height limit is 25 feet in a Light Industrial
Zone , or one - story , plus , under the new Zoning Ordinance , height is
measured from the lowest point on grade to the highest point of the
building , adding , apparently this building drifts uphill , or downhill .
Mr . May wondered if one would only look at the building that the roof
was on . Attorney Barney responded that it depends , if it is a
detached building , yes .
Ms . Beeners noted , however , in that it is an aggregate of a
number of wings attached , going down a hillside , then it is estimated
that the total interior height from the lowest wing to the highest
point on the roof , which would be the new addition , and which would be
about 45 feet . Ms . Beeners offered that it is a similar situation to
the Ithaca College Alumni Center , where there is a rambling type of
thing stepping . '! down a hillside . Ms . Beeners stated that Mr . Black
should show that overall height , indeed if it is 45 feet that the
Board is looking at , from the lowest basement floor to the new
addition , commenting that that should be documented on the plans for
the ZBA .
Ms . Langhans stated that she cannot see that adding office space
above would enlarge the plant .
George Sarkissian , of 149 Pearsall Place , spoke from the floor
and wondered how long the construction would take . Mr . Black
responded that , pending the ZBA approval , it is estimated that the
walls would be up , the roof on , and the place sealed up , before
November 1989 .
There appearing to be no further questions or comments from the
• Board , Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a
motion .
Planning Board - 4 - June 27 , 1989
• MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Site Plan Approval for a
proposed 5 , 000 ± sq . ft . addition to the offices of Therm , Inc . ,
1001 Hudson Street Extension , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No .
6 - 54 - 2 - 1 .
2 . This action 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 . The Zoning Board
of Appeals is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for
environmental review of any required variances .
3 . The Assistant Town Planner has recommended that a negative
determination of environmental significance be made for this
proposed action .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental
review of the proposed site plan , make and hereby does make a negative
determination of environmental significance for the proposed action .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye Gri orov , May , Baker Langhans , Ken erson Smith
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Site Plan Approval for a
proposed 5 , 000 ± sq . ft . addition to the offices of Therm , Inc . ,
1001 Hudson Street Extension , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No .
6 - 54 - 2 - 1 .
2 . This action is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board ,
acting as Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposed
site plan , has , on June 27 , 1989 , made a negative determination
of environmental significance .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on June 27 , 1989 , has
reviewed plans for the proposed addition , the Short Environmental
Assessment Form , and other relevant materials .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
•
Planning Board - 5 - June 27 , 1989
That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Site Plan
Approval for the project as proposed , subject to the granting of any
required height variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Grigorov , May , Baker , Langhans , Kenerson , Smith .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
At this time , Attorney Barney announced that , for everyone ' s
information , the above matter would now proceed to the Zoning Board of
Appeals .
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the Consideration of
Site Plan Approval for an addition at Therm , Inc . duly closed at 8 : 04
p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF A RECONFIGURATION OF LOT
DIMENSIONS WITH RESPECT TO TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS N0 , 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 2
AND 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 3 , LOCATED AT 873 CODDINGTON ROAD , RESIDENCE DISTRICT
R- 30 . CYNTHIA AND RICHARD VOGEL , OWNERS / APPLICANTS .
Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the
• above -noted matter duly opened at 8 : 05 p . m . and read from the Notice
of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Ms . Vogel addressed the Board and stated that she would like to
get the line changed in the center of her property , so that she could
sell off the property that does not have the house on it , as a
building lot . Ms . Vogel stated that someone would like to build a
house on the proposed three - acre building lot .
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if there were anyone from the public who had any comments or
questions .
Lyman Baker , of 838 Coddington Road , spoke from the floor and
wondered if the proposal was for one house or an apartment house . Ms .
Vogel replied that it would be one house on three acres . Mr . Baker
commented that the road is a pretty dangerous stretch of road , adding ,
right now there is 300 feet of road with 11 driveways . Mr . Baker said
that he has no objection to one house , but would object to an
apartment house . Assistant Town Planner George Frantz offered that an
apartment house would entail a rezoning .
Ruth Pearson , of 832 Coddington Road , approached the Board and
expressed her concern about the safety feature . Ms . Pearson wondered
about the house being numbered 873 . Ms . Pearson also expressed her
concern about students inhabiting the house , if the property were ever
• sold to another owner .
Planning Board - 6 - June 27 , 1989
There appearing to be no one else from the public who wished to
speak to this matter , Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing
at 8 : 16 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion .
Ms . Langhans , directing her comment to Ms . Vogel , wondered why
Ms . Vogel wanted to reconfigure her property . Ms . Vogel responded
that she wanted more acreage .
There appearing to be no further discussion or comments from the
Board , Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone were prepared to offer a
motion .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Approval of a reconfiguration
of lot dimensions with respect to Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No .
6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 2 and 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 3 , 5 . 12 ± acres total , located at 873
Coddington Road ,
2 . This action is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board
has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for
environmental review of the proposed action .
• 3 . The Assistant Town Planner has recommended that a negative
determination of environmental significance be made for this
proposed action .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency for environmental
review of the proposed action , make and hereby does make a negative
determination of environmental significance for the proposed action .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Grigorov , May ,, Baker , Langhans , Kenerson , Smith .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mr . Robert
Kenerson :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Approval of a reconfiguration
of lot dimensions with respect to Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No .
6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 2 and 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 3 , 5 . 12 ± acres total , located at 873
Coddington Road .
Planning Board - 7 - June 27 , 1989
• 2 . This action is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board
has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for
environmental review of the proposed action .
3 . The Planning Board has , on June 27 , 1989 , made a negative
determination of environmental significance with respect to the
proposed action .
4 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on June 27 , 1989 , has
reviewed the map showing the proposed lot reconfigurations , the
Short Environmental Assessment Form , and other relevant
materials .
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 Approval to
the reconfiguration of lot dimensions with respect to Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcels No . 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 2 and 6 - 47 - 2 - 2 . 3 , located at 873
• C oddington Road , subject to the following conditions :
a . approval of on - lot water and sewer facilities by the
Tompkins County Health Department ;
be approval of the final subdivision plat plan by the Town
Engineer prior to its filing with the Tompkins County Clerk .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Grigorov , May , Baker , Langhans , Kenerson , Smith .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the Consideration of
Approval of a reconfiguration of lot dimensions , with respect to
Cynthia and Richard Vogel , duly closed at 8 : 24 p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR
THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION OF PHASE - III OF THE " DEER RUN " SUBDIVISION
PRELIMINARY PLAT TO REPLACE 71 TOWNHOUSE UNITS , FOR WHICH PRELIMINARY
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WAS GRANTED BY THE PLANNING BOARD ON MARCH 17 ,
1989 , WITH 54 SINGLE - FAMILY , DETACHED DWELLING UNITS , LOCATED BACKLOT
OF THE INTERSECTION OF TROY AND EAST KING ROADS , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
PARCEL NO . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 32 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 15 . DEER RUN INVESTORS ,
• L . P . , OWNERS ; EDWIN A HALLBERG , APPLICANT .
Planning Board - 8 - June 27 , 1989
® Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the
above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 25 p . m . and read aloud from the
Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Maps were appended to the bulletin board .
Mr . Tom Niederkorn approached the Board and pointed out that the
appended drawings are a reiteration of what the developer is trying to
do .
Mr . Niederkorn stated that the original design of Deer Run was to
put in an entire development , with the exception of Teton Court and
Marcy Court , in cluster townhouse type of units , adding , Teton Court
and Marcy Court were going to be the conventional single - family
detached housesion large lots , as the lots are located in the woods .
Mr . Niederkorn stated that Phase I . Phase IA , and Phase II have
been built . Mrs. Neiderkorn noted that Phase IA is 16 townhouse units ,
IA is 16 units , , and Phase II is 49 units .
Mr . Niederkorn stated that the developer would now like to change
the building style , commenting , the reason for that is a response to
the market , andlialso the expense of building townhouses in the Town of
Ithaca is , what the developer feels , pricing the units beyond his
reasonable market . Mr . Niederkorn noted that the developer still
• wants to stay with the cluster concept , but instead of having attached
townhouse cluster , the developer would like to have single - family
detached cluster houses on smaller lots . Mr . Niederkorn stated that
there would be152 of the detached cluster houses , which would be a
decrease in density in the number of units of about 28 % . Mr .
Niederkorn stated that the developer wants to go to the zero lot line
type of development , where one wall of the unit is placed on the lot
line . Mr . Niederkorn stated that also included in Phase III would be
the construction of about 2100 feet of linear roadway . Mr . Niederkorn
indicated on the map the locations of islands . Mr . Niederkorn said
that the developer will be constructing all the houses himself , and
will have certain covenants on each sale of the houses and lots to
enable the maintenance to provide for the cutting of grass , etc . Mr .
Niederkorn offered that the HOA presently exists , and is functioning
for the first two phases of the project , noting that there is
additional green space that would be included in the present concept .
Chairperson Grigorov wondered if the HOA would take care of the
islands , and the common areas , with Mr . Hallberg answering , yes . Mr .
Hallberg stated that the people who live in the single - family homes
will be part of the same HOA as the townhouse residents .
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if there were anyone from the public who had any comments or
questions .
Jean Brockway , of 166 Ridgecrest Road , spoke from the floor and
stated that she thought she was glad the development was changing into
single - family homes , as she thought the diversity would be good to
Planning Board - 9 - June 27 , 1989
• have both , adding , although it was mentioned there would be a lot
fewer units , it would be a lot more buildings . Ms . Brockway stated
that she would like to see a roadway connecting Deer Run and Chase
Pond , Mr . Niederkorn responded that a walkway would be provided from
the Deer Run public space into the Chase Pond area . Ms . Brockway
expressed . a concern that there was not a lot of yard space for
children , and wondered if sidewalks could be mandated . Mr . Hallberg
said that 40 % of the green space was donated to Cornell . Ms . Beeners
said that plans are being designed for the park site .
Myrtle Whitcomb , of 233 Troy Road , spoke from the floor and
stated that the South Hill Association finds it very awkward to
address the plan tonight , noting that the Association had initially
extended an invitation to Mr . Hallberg back at the Sketch Plan Review
that the Association was interested in getting together and talking
about the issue when he was ready to come for his Preliminary
Approval , Ms . Whitcomb expressed a concern about the view impact .
Ms . Whitcomb also expressed a concern with the green space natural
area . Ms . Whitcomb wondered if the proposed homes would have any
accessory apartments . Mr . Hallberg replied that they would not have
apartments in them . Ms . Whitcomb stated that the Association has a
concern with the development that is happening in this particular area
of South Hill , adding , the residents feel that they are losing a
country atmosphere , and replacing it with a city atmosphere . Ms .
Whitcomb stated that the Association is greatly concerned about the
• traffic impact . Ms . Whitcomb mentioned a reduced speed limit .
Ms . Whitcomb stated that the Association has a great concern
about affordable housing . Ms . Whitcomb said that the Association
would like to , perhaps , interest developers in setting aside a segment
that would truly be affordable housing , commenting that Better Housing
of Tompkins County is interested in helping to work through the
legislative and legal backgrounds necessary to do this . Ms . Whitcomb
brought up the issue of the proposed South Hill water tank , which is
to the tune of about $ 400 , 000 . 00 . Ms . Whitcomb stated that the
question arises for the Association of whether or not Deer Run and
Chase Pond will be benefiting from this , and , if so , the Association
would like to encourage them to be good citizens and provide a
contribution that would help to offset the cost of the construction of
that tank , and help also to decrease some of the impact of the extra
infrastructiure costs on current residents . Ms . Whitcomb mentioned
the inclusion of a sunset clause , in that there should be some kind of
an expiration for approval .
Itz Vatnick , of 153 E . King Road , spoke from the floor and stated
that he was concerned about the area changing from a rural area .
Laura Marks , of 302 E . King Road , spoke from the floor and
wondered where the proposed water tower was going to be located . Mr .
Hallberg [ pointing to the map ] indicated where Teton Court was
located , and stated , . that there is an easement to a triangular piece of
land on the east side of the power lines , which is completely wooded ,
adding that he has offered the Town whatever size they need in that
location for the water tower . Ms . Marks stated that one of her major
Planning Board - 10 - June 27 , 1989
concerns was the major impact the development would have on the entire
county . Ms . Marks was concerned about the landscaping . Mr . Hallberg
said that the installation of landscaping will be a priority .
There appearing to be no one else from the public who wished to
speak to this matter , Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing
at 9 : 01 p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion .
Ms . Langhans stated that she thought there was going to be a
visual impact because of the many building units , as compared to the
townhouse idea , adding , 71 townhouse units will be replaced with 52
single - family , detached dwelling units .
Chairperson Grigorov asked about the water tank situation .
11
Ms . Beeners stated that the Town Board , at their last meeting ,
granted a negative determination of environmental significance for a
tank to be located in an area with the site actually subject to their
further environmental review . Ms . Beeners said that the site that is
primarily under consideration has been the approximately one - acre site
that Mr . Hallberg did put into a letter of intent a few years ago to
give to the Town , in that triangular open space area , however , because
of the expenses of running the mains to a fairly remote location , the
Town is currently investigating other possible sites along that same
elevation . Chairperson Grigorov wondered if any of the costs would be
borne by the developers . Ms . Beeners responded that , as far as she
knew , not in any manner that would represent a great increase over
what would normally be assessed on a Townwide basis . Ms . Beeners
stated that as she understood it , there has not been any requirement
of any kind of an impact fee for these particular developments , i . e . ,
this project , or the other ones that are within this service area ,
because the Ridgecrest Road system was originally designed with a
certain population density within this area . Town Engineer Sally
Olsen stated that the Deer Run project and the Chase Pond project will
be serviced by the Ridgecrest Road zone , as they are far enough uphill
that they would not be able to be , serviced by the proposed tank , so
they are not building a new tank especially for the two projects
mentioned above .
Ms . Langhans mentioned the size of the lots . Mr . Niederkorn
responded that the smallest lot is 9 , 400 sq . ft . , the largest one is
22 , 000 sq . ft , and they seem to group in the 13 , 000 - 18 , 000 sq . ft .
range . Mr . Niederkorn said that there is no frontage less than 70
feet .
Ms . Langhans asked how the Highway Department likes the islands
in the roads , as to plowing purposes . Mr . Hallberg said the roads
would be conveyed to the Town , and the HOA would maintain the islands .
Attorney Barney noted that he would look into that , because the Town
would be owning land surrounding the island completely , adding that
this should be discussed with the Highway Superintendent John Ozolins .
Ms . Beeners stated that Mr . Ozolins reported to her , after looking at
the Sketch Plan , that he was a little more amenable to this situation
than to the one that was proposed in the Chase Farm project .
Planning Board - 11 - June 27 , 1989
Attorney Barney wondered about the reason for the islands . Mr .
Hallberg replied , mostly aesthetics . Mr . Hallberg offered that it
would be one -way traffic around the islands .
Ms . Beeners asked about the land donated to C; ornell . Mr .
Hallberg answered that , [ pointing to map ] basically , everything north
of " that " line . Mr . Hallberg mentioned the triangle . Ms . Beeners
responded that ,; she hoped Mr . Hallberg has not closed on any conveyance
of that triangle to Cornell , with Mr . Hallberg noting that the idea
was that when he set it aside it was to preserve it forever wild , and
he does not want the Town putting a heavily used , in the woods , hard
to get to , park in there . Ms . Beeners stated that perhaps this does
need further confirmation , but her recollection was that the land to
the west of the NYSEG right -of - way was to be managed by Cornell ; the
land in that triangle to the east of the right - of -way was presented as
something that had the possibility for joint development by Cornell
Plantations and by the Town , so that there could be some kind of a
passive type nature trail in there . Ms . Beeners added that she does
acknowledge that there are some problems crossing that ravine within
the NYSEG right - of-way , however , as the project was originally
presented , the ' NYSEG right - of - way was , at least in concept , supposed
to represent a ,': possible recreational trail connection that eventually
could go to Ithaca College , Mr . Hallberg said that that was never
proposed . Mr . ' Hallberg offered that , at Cornell ' s pleasure , if they
wanted to use that as an educational facility , not dissimilar to
Sapsucker Wood's where they have a unique eco - system with plant
species , then they could do so . Continuing , Mr . Hallberg' . stated that ,
as a practical matter , where one would cross the NYSEG right-of - way ,
the cost of a bridge to bring half a dozen people a year that would
use that area ; is simply incredible , and mentioned the liability
crossing that gorge , commenting that he cannot speak for the Town , but
it would be more than he would want to handle . Ms . Beeners remarked
that that ravine does need some additional design consideration , and ,
indeed , if Deer Run is proposing to have any conveyance to Cornell ,
then the Planning Board will have to review a delineation of those
areas as a natural subdivision . Mr . Hallberg stated that he did not
want that original intention of that gift of land to Cornell to be
misconstrued at this time . Ms . Beeners mentioned the grail easement
on the south side .
At this point , Mr . Niederkorn stated that the minimum set - back
pertaining to the zero lot line would be 30 feet , and there is a
requirement of 1, 30 feet for the rear yard set- back , but the distance
between the back of the building and the back of the lot set - back will
vary , depending upon the buildings built , commenting that no building
will be built closer than 30 feet to the back line .
Town Engineer Sally Olsen stated that she has reviewed the
drainage plans :for the project . Ms . Olsen stated that to the best of
her knowledge , the Highway Superintendent , John Ozolins , is happy with
the islands in the road as to maintenance . Ms . Olsen offered that she
• has reviewed the roadway profiles , commenting that she has requested
the DOT to grant a speed limit restriction of 30 mph in the area of
the Deer Run project .
Planning Board - 12 - June 27 , 1989
• At this point , Chairperson Grigorov re - opened the Public Hearing .
There being no new questions or comments from the public present
Chairperson Grgorov closed the Public Hearing .
At this time , Town Planner Susan Beeners referred to the EAF ,
commenting that in Part I , Page 3 , under PROJECT DESCRIPTION , B - l . g . ,
Maximum vehicular trips generated per day - Ms . Beeners stated that
the estimated trips per day would be 520 not 204 .
Ms . Beeners referred to Part I . Page 4 , Number 8 . Ms . Beeners
asked Mr . Hallberg , with that depth to bedrock , if he anticipated any
blasting . Mr . Hallberg answered , no . Ms . Beeners then referred to
Page 4 , lba , under - Will the project generate solid waste - the amount
per month of domestic waste would be six tons .
Ms . Beeners referred to Part I . Page 5 , as far as permits and
other things that are needed . Ms . Beeners stated that the Town Board ,
besides having ' covenant approval of any modifications , would have to
approve any proposed roads and public facilities . Ms . Beeners
commented on Other Local Agencies , in that the County Highway
Department had asked back in 1986 or 1987 that any projects in said
area be subject to their approval as far as drainage goes , and it
should be noted that the County Highway Department approval will be
needed for drainage plans . Ms . Beeners asked Mr . Hallberg why a SPDES
permit would be needed for the project . Mr . Novelli responded that
• that was taken care of in the beginning ; the Health Department
reviewed the whole project . Mr . Novelli offered that SPDES is a State
Pollution Discharge Elimination System .
At this point , Ms . Beeners referred to Part 2 of the EAF , Page 7
under IMPACT ON WATER , Number 4 - Will proposed action affect any
non - protected existing or new body of water ? Ms . Beeners noted that
under Other Impacts it should be added that there will be a small to
moderate impact on the existing retention pond . Ms . Beeners referred
to Page 8 - IMPACT ON AIR , Number 7 , Will proposed action affect air
quality ? Ms . Beeners stated that that should be a N0 . Ms . Beeners
referred to Page 10 - IMPACT ON ENERGY , Number 15 - Proposed Action
will require the creation or extension of an energy transmission or
supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or
to serve a major commercial or industrial use . Ms . Beeners said that
there would be a Small to Moderate Impact . Ms . Beeners now referred
to Page 11 IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY OR
NEIGHBORHOOD - I Number 18 , Development will create a demand for
additional community services ( e . g . schools , police and, fire , etc . )
Ms . Beeners noted that there would be a Small to Moderate Impact . Ms .
Beeners said that there would be a Small to Moderate Impact on : the
Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects .
There appearing to be no further discussion , Chairperson Grigorov
asked if anyone were prepared to make a motion .
• MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May :
WHEREAS :
Planning Board - 13 - June 27 , 1989
• 1 . This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision
Approval for the proposed modification of Phase III of the " Deer
Run " Subdivision preliminary plat to replace 71 townhouse units ,
for which „ Preliminary Subdivision Approval was granted by the
Planning Board on March 17 , 1987 , with 52 single - family , detached
dwelling units , located backlot of the intersection of Troy and
East King , Roads , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 32 ,
Residence District R - 15 ,
2 . This is a Type I action for which the Planning Board , on March
17 , 19871' made a negative determination of environmental
significance for the proposed original preliminary plat . On June
27 , 19891 the Planning Board has reviewed the staff
recommendation that a negative determination of environmental
significance be reaffirmed for the modified plat .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the
environmental review of this Type I action , reaffirm and hereby does
reaffirm a negative determination of environmental significance .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Grigorov , May , Baker , Langhans , Ken erson , Smith .
Nay - None .
• The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .y .
MOTION by Mr . Stephen Smith , seconded by Mr . Robert Kenerson :
WHEREAS ;
1 . This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision
Approval for the proposed modification of Phase III of the " Deer
Run " Subdivision preliminary plat to replace 71 townhouse units ,
for which Preliminary Subdivision Approval was granted by the
Planning Board on March 17 , 1987 , with 52 single - family , detached
dwelling units , located bac,klot of the intersection of Troy and
East King. Roads , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 32 ,
Residence District R- 15 .
2 . This is a Type I action for which the Planning Board , acting as
Lead Agency for environmental review , has , on June 27 , 1989 ,
re affirmed a negative determination of environmental
significance .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on June 27 , 1989 , has
reviewed the preliminary plat modification submissions for Phase
III .
• THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
Planning Board - 14 - June 27 , 1989
• That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Preliminary
Subdivision Approval to the proposed modification of Phase III of
" Deer Run " Subdivision , subject to the following requirements .
1 . Approval of the location of proposed roads , existence of proposed
islands , and other public facilities by the Town Board prior to
final subdivision approval .
2 . Approval of proposed drainage plans by the Tompkins County
Highway Department and the Town Engineer prior to any final
subdivision approval .
3 . Revision of the proposed access easement along the southeasterly
boundaries of Phase III prior to any final subdivision approval .
4 . Submission of " as - built " plans showing as -built utilities ,
drainage structures , and roadways for earlier completed phases
prior to final approval of Phase III , and submission of
" as -built " plans showing improvements in Phase III prior to any
final approvals for subsequent future phases .
5 . Revision of the plat to show the minimum side yard requirement of
30 feet , the minimum rear yard requirement of 30 feet , and such
other details as the Town Planner may require .
• 6 . Approval of any proposed modifications to the " Deer Run "
covenants and deed restrictions by the Town Board and the Town
Attorney prior to any building permit issuance .
7 . Submission of a letter of credit in an amount sufficient to
assure the satisfactory completion of site improvements for Phase
III , prior to the issuance of any building permits for Phase III ,
the amount of such letter of credit to be approved by the Town
Board and the Town Engineer and the form of such letter of credit
to be approved by the Town Attorney ,
8 . Compliance with all requirements of approval of prior phases of
the " Deer Run " Subdivision .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Grigorov , May , Baker , Langhans , Kenerson , Smith .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of Consideration of
Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed modification of
Phase III of the " Deer Run " Subdivision duly closed at 10 : 00 p . m .
SKETCH PLAN REVIEW : PROPOSED " CHASE POND " RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ,
• PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF 119 DWELLING UNITS IN ATTACHED AND DETACHED
CONFIGURATIONS ON 23 . 03 ACRES ON EAST KING ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
Planning Board - 15 - June 27 , 1989
• PARCEL NO . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 311 , MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT . DAVID C . AUBLE ,
OWNER , BUTTERFIELD ASSOCIATES I , APPLICANTS .
Chairman Grigorov opened the discussion on the above noted matter
at 10 : 01 p . m . and read aloud from the Agenda as noted above .
Mr . Auble approached the Board and stated that this is the second
sketch plan review presented for the above - noted project .
Mr . Peter Trowbridge , Landscape Architect for the project ,
addressed the Board and noted that the new entrance road to Chase Farm
is directly across from the new entrance at Chase Pond along East King
Road . Mr . Trowbridge [ indicating on map ] said that Ridgecrest Road
runs out at an angle approximately at the lower right-hand side of the
appended map . Mr . Trowbridge stated that the property was previously
known as ButterField , but is now known as Chase Pond , Mr . Trowbridge
remarked that it is MR zoned , with fee simple lot structures within
the MR zone . Mr . Trowbridge noted that the presented plan is probably
the most complete product of the " Charette " that was offered several
weeks ago by the Duany / Plater- Zyberk team .
At this point , Mr . Trowbridge reported on a history of the
project . [ Site history attached as Exhibit 1 . 1
Mr . Trowbridge said that open space is preserved both
• functionally and visually , adding that Cornell received 4 . 8 acres as
open space exaction in a prior site plan approval and as a buffer to
their land on the western end of the project . Mr . Trowbridge said
that out of the remaining 23 . 1 acres , an additional 7 . 3 acres are
preserved as open space within the project , noting that this includes
a more formal green at the entrance , a green traffic island , and open
space surrounding the existing pond . Mr . Trowbridge stated that , in
addition , sight lines have been preserved between buildings and along
streets so that the site will appear less dense and the views will be
reserved for the entire community .
Indicating on the map , Mr . Trowbridge noted that the plan calls
for a maximum of 119 dwelling units , with the tightest townhouse
grouping and spacing of units on the site at the westerly edge . Mr .
Trowbridge said that included in the plan are 65 townhouses fronting
on the greens and boulevard , 41 detached single - family sideyard units
organized in a traditional town pattern , along with one large
single - family home , and up to twelve " carriage - house " units , or studio
apartments , above a garage . Mr . Trowbridge stated that the
" carriage -house " units are associated with certain house types , in
that at either end of the townhouse units that flank East King Road ,
the end unit , the possibility is to have a two - story garage with a
studio apartment rental unit , which would be associated with the
garage .
Continuing , Mr . Trowbridge said that unlike many of the previous
• proposals that were discussed , this plan is attempting to preserve a
large open space that is associated with the South Hill Swamp area ,
and the abutting public open space , which is primarily in the
Planning Board - 16 - June 27 , 1989
northwestern corner . 'Mr . Trowbridge noted that the village green and
the large open space would be maintained by a not - for- profit
corporation , adding that there have been investigations with the
Attorney General ' s office as to what is possible . Mr . Trowbridge
stated that it is his understanding that that is quite an acceptable
mechanism , but additional information will be secured prior to the
Preliminary Approval review process of the project . Mr . Trowbridge
commented that right now the intent is to have those areas commonly
maintained by a not - for - profit corporation which individuals would
Join as a part of the project , or perhaps as a part of the Chase Farm
project , or others across the street . Attorney Barney wondered what
would be the incentive to join if it was not mandatory . Mr .
Trowbridge responded that there would have to be , obviously , some
kinds of benefits that the individuals would get back , adding that
Attorney Barney ' s question would have to be considered and addressed .
Mr . Rick Holt , directing his comment to Attorney Barney , added that ,
typically , if it is like a civic association that is going to have
meetings or gatherings , it might be around the pond or in the common
area . Mr . Holt noted that there would be a very minimun membership
fee , it would primarily just be required to maintain the grass and the
insurance for it . Attorney Barney stated that his concern was that ,
if one moved into a unit , and did not have to pay the fee , but able to
use all the facilities as if the fee were paid , then why spend the
money if you do not have to . Attorney Barney offered that , normally ,
a Homeowners ' Association is a compulsory organization , and it is a
• perq , but also an obligation of residing there , therefore , a budget
can be created knowing that with 119 units , there would be 119 people
paying . Mr . Holt stated that there will be more information available
at the preliminary stage , but . further description has been included in
the supplementary that would indicate that the developer would endow
the organization with enough funds to maintain that , adding that he
felt an organization such as this gets reasonably high participation
at a low cost .
Mr . Trowbridge stated that having a broad mix in the project will
give a sense of community that is both visually and socially diverse ,
with a wider range of prices and a broad cross - section of residents .
Mr . Trowbridge offered that within the MR zone the building to
building separation is 20 feet .
Mr . Trowbridge stated that the first phase would be primarily
addressing [ indicating on map ] " this " group of townhouses that face
the green , and the side yard units . Mr . Trowbridge said that , while
there has not been a surface run - off set of calculations that have
been done for the project , the general direction intent is to use the
existing pond as a detention basin . Mr . Trowbridge offered that the
project has been reviewed with Brian Wilbur of the Ithaca Fire
Department , and he indicated he would get back to the developer as to
hydrant locations and densities , commenting that Mr . Wilbur has some
concern about having greater . hydrant densities in the areas where
there is the greatest townhouse density , but for the most part Mr .
• Wilbur is quite happy with the turning radii .
Planning Board - 17 - June 27 , 1989
• Mr . David Auble addressed the Board and stated that there have
been at least two neighborhood meetings outlining the project ,
commenting , there were close to 50 people at the last meeting . Mr .
Auble remarked that he felt that the response to the project has been
very positive , noting that the " carriage - house " units were very
favorably received . Mr . Auble stated that the homes would be
constructed by AMG and offered " For Sale " . Mr . Kenerson wondered if
the height would hold to 26 feet , including outside grade measurement
to the ridge , with Mr . Trowbridge replying , that is our current
calculation . Mr . Auble said that the homes are , basically , on pretty
shallow topsoil to bedrock .
Ms . Langhans mentioned the townhouse units being in one solid
line . Mr . Trowbridge noted that the intent is to develop different
facade treatments , so they are not all identical . Mr . Trowbridge
offered that the townhouse units would be masonry , with one height
overall . Ms . Langhans asked about the price range . Mr . Auble replied
that the projected price for the townhouse units would be under
$ 100 , 000 . 00 for the smaller units , and up to $ 115 , 000 . 00 , depending on
extra items an individual might desire . Mr . Auble noted that the
single - family units would range from $ 115 , 000 . 00 - $ 135 , 000 . 00 .
Mr . Trowbridge clarified that there has been a right - of -way
concession made , at [ pointing to map ] " this " easterly corner , as to the
future bikeway / trail connection , to allow for the connection to occur
into the Hallberg property , adding , this will have to be coordinated
with staff as to how it will occur . Chairman Grigorov wondered if
that would fit into the sewer . Ms . Beeners responded that it is
close , and somewhat in the right direction , but suggested it be
revised along [ indicating on map ] " this " edge . Mr . Trowbridge said
that they have a 20 - foot wide sewer easement that was brought up
prior , as well , and runs out behind the Manos ' property , and the sewer
line currently under construction runs in " this " direction , and
services the Chase Farm project across the street , adding , there is a
30 - foot buffer that runs continuously around the property .
Ms . Beeners stated that the developer is trying , at the present
time , to be in total compliance with the MR zoning , rather than
diverging into anything like cluster , adding , the only way the 50 - foot
front yard would count as a front yard would be if the " no parking " on
that road were absolute , with Mr . Trowbridge responding that the
intention is for " no parking " on " this " road . Mr . Trowbridge noted
that the side yard lots have parking for probably 6 - 8 cars , and the
townhouses have a minimum of at least two parking spaces , noting that
no unit has less than two off - street spaces . Mr . Trowbridge stated
that the only street one could not park on would be the service road
that runs parallel to East King Road ,
Mr . Trowbridge stated that in keeping with the traditional
neighborhood concept , the community is designed to encourage
pedestrian activity , commenting that the relationship of buildings ,
• trees , sidewalks , streets and greens has been carefully planned in
accordance with time - tested designs for traditional communities .
Planning Board - 18 - June 27 , 1989
• Ms . Beeners stated that , if these yards are accepted , then not
only would one be accepting a street with no parking signs on it in
the front within that yard , but one would also be accepting paved
areas , which Ms . Beeners did not see any prohibition from on the two
sides of the property , noting that it does appear that cars could be
pulled outside of that zoning area , and the little 10 - foot strip to
the exterior of the two " alleys " could be planted to act as buffer .
Ms . Beeners stated that there would have to be a definite commitment
that those buildings along the north edge [ rear ] of the property
absolutely could not be any higher than 20 feet , in order to have the
40 - foot rear yard set - back . Ms . Beeners stated that this project
would require final subdivision plat and final site plan approval ,
being that it is MR . Ms . Beeners mentioned the distance between
buildings in that , if there is a 26 - foot high building , one is looking
at a 26 - foot yard , except that it can , under certain circumstances ,
have a 2 - foot projection on each building , so there is 22 feet as a
minimum requirement and not 20 feet . Mr . Trowbridge responded that
there needs to be more conversation regarding Ms . Beeners ' comment .
Ms . Beeners stated that she wants the Board to understand that there
has been , in trying to review this project , a good deal of discussion
about what is being talked about , as far as zoning goes .
Chairman Grigorov wondered if there was a problem . Ms . Beeners
responded that , generally , about little things like this , and trying
to see just how all of this is complying with the Ordinance . Mr .
• Trowbridge said that the developer tried , in all cases , to conform to
the MR requirements . Ms . Beeners referred to Section 66 , Page 41 , of
the Zoning Ordinance , which states : " Projections in Yards . Every
part of a required yard shall be open from its lowest point to the sky
unobstructed , except for the ordinary projection of sills , belt
courses , pilasters , leaders , chimneys , cornices , eaves and ornamental
features , provided that no such projection may extend more than 2 feet
into any required yard . "
At this point , Ms . Beeners referred to the Chase Pond / ButterField
Historical Approval Summary . [ Summary attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . ]
Ms . Beeners stated that to her recollection , without going
through every single bit of Town Local Laws , the above - noted Summary
is pretty accurate as to what has happened . Ms . Beeners said that she
has the site plans for the previously approved plans , and the plans
are available for review in the Planning Department , adding that the
plans show a number of different styles . Ms . Beeners noted that it
appears to her , subject to her final confirmation , prior to any
preliminary approval , that , indeed , the developers have been , on
several occasions , approved for 119 dwelling units within the area
that is excluding the Cornell buffer , and excluding the Manos ' piece .
Ms . Langhans wondered , for her own information , if it would be
possible to build townhouses for $ 751000 . 00 - $ 85 , 000 . 00 . Mr . Holt
responded that he felt it is not impossible , but it depends on the
• features , square footage , and materials . Mr . Auble said that he
thought AMG could do a good quality unit in that cost range . Ms .
Planning Board - 19 - June 27 , 1989
• Langhans said that she meant the selling price . Mr . Auble noted that
he could do it on a different site .
Mr . Holt offered that the townhouses in the subject project run
about 1250 square feet , with the side - lot houses being about 1400 - 1500
square feet . Mr . Frantz , Assistant Town Planner , offered that he
thought American homes are bigger than what they really have to be .
Ms . Beeners noted that she had to do some heavy consideration of
the 50 - foot front yard with a road in it , with no parking signs ,
commenting whether or not that would , eventually , erode into no
50 - foot front yard , noting that also a major item is that there have
been some MR projects , not subdivisions , which have had the yard
requirements pertain to the entire site . Attorney Barney noted that
he was not convinced that there is not a variance involved , or a
cluster - type decision that has to be made . Mr . Auble responded that
he would be glad to sit down with Attorney Barney and review his
concern .
At this point , Chairman Grigorov stated that this discussion is
not a public hearing , but if anyone wanted to comment , then it would
be alright to do so .
Myrtle Whitcomb , of 233 Troy Road , spoke from the floor and
stated that the South Hill Community Association would be responding
• to Mr . Auble ' s project in writing , along with a copy to the Planning
Board .
Nancy Ostman , of Cornell Plantations , spoke from the floor and
commented that the past site plan approvals for said project have
included a number of restrictions in regard to the Plantations '
natural area , adding that she would like to see those restrictions
included in this site plan again . Ms . Ostman offered that there are
restrictions in the Deer Run project , and they are written into the
Homeowners ' Agreement .
Chairman Grigorov asked if there were any other comments . There
being none , Chairman Grigorov declared the matter of the " Chase Pond "
Residential Community Sketch Plan Review duly closed at 11 : 00 p-. m .
AGENDA ITEM : Planning Department Report
Ms . Beeners stated that the Planning Department would be getting
some additional space within the next two weeks .
Ms . Beeners commented that Stuart I . Brown Associates has been
extremely tardy in returning her telephone calls , adding that she sent
Mr . Brown a letter stating to produce something , or propose an
alternate timeframe . Ms . Beeners noted that Mr . Brown should have
received the letter on June 26 , 1989 .
• At this point , Assistant Town Planner George Frantz talked about
the possibility; of allowing a loop road at the end of the very long
Planning Board - 20 - June 27 , 1989
• cul de sac at Cayuga Lake Estates , commenting about R- 9 zones , with
1000 - foot cul de sacs and the number of possible dwelling units .
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Chairperson Grigorov declared the June 27 , 1989 ,
meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 11 : 30
Pam *
Respectfully submitted ,
Mary Bryant , Recording Secretary ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board ,
•
•
•
CHASE POND
AN AUBLE HOMES /AMG PROJECT
SITE HISTORY
JUNE 14 , 1989
1973 - Beacon Hills started construction of a large residential / commer -
cial project . The Chase Pond site was Phase I of this project . The
entire area was disturbed , utility trenching done , foundations
installed , and the pond was built , before the developer stopped work .
1983 - The property was rezoned to Multiple Residence District as part
of the approval of Bill Manos ' Majestic Heights Project . This was
approved as 119 units of rental housing , one single family home , and a
15 , 000 square foot laundry / service / commercial building . The area at
the western end of the project was reserved as open space and a buffer
for the Cornell Swamp under the terms of a 1982 agreement between Bill
Manos and Cornell University .
1987 - Dave Auble purchased the property and received approval for a
revised version of Manos ' original 1983 Majestic Heights plan , allowing
119 units of multi - family housing .
• 1987 - Auble and partners decided that " For Sale " type housing program
would better suit the neighborhood as well as AMG ' s long term goals for
a planned community .
1987 - 88 - Dave Auble and his partners purchased the site across the
street from the Butterfield parcel , and had Trowbridge Associates
design Chase Farm , a 100 unit single family subdivision on 68 acres .
As construction continued on Chase Farm over the winter , Dave and his
planners became acquainted with the " neotraditional " community - building
concepts of Andres Duany and Elizabeth Plater - Zyberk , nationally
recognized award-winning architects and urban planners .
In consultation with the Duany / Plater - Zyberk Team and his local
planners , Dave decided to slow the construction of the Butterfield
site , linking it conceptually with Chase Farm across the street , and
renaming it Chase Pond .
The Duany / Plater - Zyberk Team then came to Ithaca and conducted an
intensive master - planning session , or charette , to look at all of the
AMG holdings , with a focus on the Chase Pond site as most appro -
priate to start implementing their traditional design concepts .
The charette included meetings with local planners and engineers , Town ,
City , County , and State planning and transportation staff , elected
officials , and neighborhood groups , to include as much community input
into the various plans as possible .
• The current Chase Pond plan is the most completely developed product of
this planning session .
EIIBIT 1 .
Chase Pond /Butterfield
Historical Approval Summary
June 13 , ' 1989
Local Law No . 3- 1983 established a Multiple Residence District on approxi -
mately 30 acres of land previously zoned R- 15 ( Tax ' Parcel 44 - 1 -4 . 31 ) . It
also recognized the " western buffer zone , based on . Bill Manos ' s 1982 ' agree-
ment. with . Cornell University ,. . which . set.. up the area .at' . the western .:end of . . .
the parcel as open space for a 120-unit development .
The same law. appears . to . .... have. set . . up ., a review, mechanism . for building .
permits if construction had not been started within eighteen months or
completed within four years from the enactment of Local Law
No . 3- 1983 . No mention is made about reversion to R- 15 zoning .
Local Law No . 3 - 1983 was further modified and the above time limits
-extended by Local Law No . 3- 1987 and again . by Local Law No . ' 8 of 1988 .
Both of these laws clearly refer to • . the . parcel as a Multiple Residence
• District , with each law further' amending ' certain requirements and
restrictions , primarily the . above dates .
-- Local Law No . 3- 1987 was passed after the .revised Majestic Heights plan
was approved by the Planning Board on 6 /20/87 . . . It stated . that no units
in excess of those approved in 1983 be permitted , 120 units , except as
may be permitted by the Planning Board .
- The 1987 approved plan , a modified version of the 1983 approved plan , -
was - tor 119 - multi - family rental . units , one private residence , and a
15 , 000 .SF commercial laundry and service building .
Local Law No . 8- 1988 amended Local_ Law No . . 3- 1983 ( as already amended
- -by Local Law No . 3- 1987 )—by-changing-the date of completion to 9/ 30 / 91 .
It repeats the language allowing the Planning Board to review building
permits and again does not mention any zoning ' reversion .
The area at the western end of the project has been considered as both " open
space " for the project and a buffer to Cornell ' s natural area since Manos '
original 1982 agreement with Cornell . It was seen as such in the 1983 plan ,_ -7 _ _. -the 1987- revised- plan ,-- and -in-fact-was-not- subdivided from the larger tract -- - - -
until Final Subdivision Approval was granted for Phase I of the Butterfield
plan on 8 / 16 / 88 . At this point , the parcel was subdivided into two parcels
of 23 . 1 + /- acres and 4 . 8 + /- acres .
EXHIBIT 2
Elm• i_ r .. Sys $a.rj_— Q •• I • Y/1 .. . . '.�.
�i♦ _
•�. v lit
j• `aaaaTr_L ,��a.. a Tf. 1 .. . :J _g._ i:3•. i_' L
�- V gra`.. sc. a y _ L
• -y - : +aGvv_: i TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING
% •'_+�.i:i'• -!_ --�. a •� - .FrA0A _ r _ i">'• ., ' • a i BOARD, NOTICE OF . PUBLIC • "
s r HEARINGS .TUES. , JUNE 27
By direction of the Chairman
-> _ _ _ of the Planning Board, NOTICE ;
S
f IS HEREBY GIVEN, that Public ,
� �' �. �,.•+ �^+,jr,•�•• � K�� Hearings will be held by the
• i Planning Board of the Town of
" Ithaca on Tuesday, - June -27;
-. � 1989, - in Town Hall, - 126 East *. -'
i L Seneca Street, Ithaca, N . Y. , at
Va . Va. the following times and on the
following matters: III
rzz . GSL ZL!.1C� coun !'� Ln r= tt Lf �r=-kja infi 7:30 P. M. . Considerdtion �_ofj
.4 . _ * Site Plan Approval for a pro-,,.-
' ., posed 5,000 plus/minus sq. . ft:
_ . . .y _
_ east. .. .
•_ _ addition to the offices .. of
- Therm, Inc. , Hudson Street Ex;
. tension, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 6-54.2- 1 , Light In=`%
'�TiGrL�t C�?`` /1In Ik 4,�bc J* i '1D' LD> PR6: ,yt dustriol District. Therin9 Inc. , r
_ _ '� '� �� F ' - Owners; Robert R: Sprole II, `' '
�'1a 'testyp ; �F , �L E ■ T .,'� �` - Applicant.~r ' 7:45 P. M. Consideration - a f
; : - - - _ Approval of a reconfiguration
'-" - z— a" , -- ' — - - - V. - -- - , � - of lot dimensions with respect
aa
to Town of Ithaca
ax
srr ?t 1D li: ' pit . _ - - -- - --- - .. No. 6-47-2-2. 2 and T6-47-2-2. 3,
X11 . # j�: -ice'
- "_ - located at 873 Loddington ,
' Road, Residence District R-30. 1
-. . -
. - ,- � ��_• __ . T • __ - -. Cynthia and Richard Vogel,
_ " " " '-• Owners/Applicants. .
8:00 ' P. M. Consideration of .
Preliminary Subdivision Ap
.. ^._ ._._.. . - -- - --.• . . . . _. . . _ . . _ ._ . . .._._ .. . . . .__- - • _ ..._ ._. - ^ proval for the proposed mod-
' . .. .-.. . ._ .. - - -----•
ificotion of Phase III of the
�i "Deer Run" Subdivision re- I
C. & a.: : DOS :% O :: Lt: .. , .__ . . _-__- • liminary plat to replace 71
townhouse units, for which
e -- jg _$ �
Preliminary
a S d b h
mina Subdivision p-
- • • • - • P al was granted y the
1
- -- -• - • -- -. _ .. . . ._. . . _ . . _. . .. Planning Board on March 17,
1987, with 54 single-family,
_ detached dwelling units, lo-
cared backlot of the intersec• ,
� : � ^+- _'� !►= = = * ' O � '� .. . . . . . . _ . .. .. . . . ... . _ . ... ...__- . s, Troy
of Ithaca Tax Pla9
tion f and East
Road To
-• Wit , cel No. 6-44- ) -4:32, Residence
District R- 15.. Deer Run' Inves='`
r tors, L. P. , Owners; Edwin A. ;
Hallber, Applicant.
_ . . _ 9, PP
- 6 - 4 .
_Said Planning Board will of
said times and said place Hear
all persons in support of such )
- ' - • ---. _ •. _ ... .. -_. __.____ _ •-- matters or objections, thereto. a
_ JEAN FORD ' . 1�' t'r.,^-y C [lJLs::' Persons may appear by agent!
- T State of New
York
—. - _ . or in person . {
Jean H . Swartwood
. �otary Pub I Town Clerk
0. June— . 273- 1721
kins COunty� June 22, 1989
Qualified in Tomp '
Commission expires May 31, 19 . •
-- . . a . : -
!47
.
- _ . -
Waaaa
a .
9�r tr '. .•1_ _.7. .—. , . . _. ..a • - --•_ — ) , .. . .-11`r • : ._.♦•— —.• . • T- _ — lti• .Mn ti• ` s . .l-•_ - . . . _
\ ' C'• p
as aa aa`aka aaa,
--
_ ..
a '.
. . \
.. — . �1. _
t