HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1992-11-03Ll
•
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date/tw /.,,��iiJ
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
Clerk
NOVEMBER 3, 1992
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday, November 3, 1992, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street,
Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, James
Baker, Candace Cornell, Herbert Finch, Stephen Smith,
Virginia Langhans, William Lesser, Dan-Walker (Town
Engineer), Floyd Forman (Town Planner), Richard Eiken
(Planner I), John Barney (Town Attorney).
ALSO PRESENT: Judy Malloy, Bernie Malloy, Gerald E. Nye, Eva
Hoffmann, Robert Walpole, Fred Brown, Betty Brown,
Peter Newell, George Schlecht, Dan McClure.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly
opened at
7:36
P.M. and accepted for the record the Clerk's
Affidavit
of Posting
FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date/tw /.,,��iiJ
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
Clerk
NOVEMBER 3, 1992
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday, November 3, 1992, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street,
Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairperson Carolyn Grigorov, Robert Kenerson, James
Baker, Candace Cornell, Herbert Finch, Stephen Smith,
Virginia Langhans, William Lesser, Dan-Walker (Town
Engineer), Floyd Forman (Town Planner), Richard Eiken
(Planner I), John Barney (Town Attorney).
ALSO PRESENT: Judy Malloy, Bernie Malloy, Gerald E. Nye, Eva
Hoffmann, Robert Walpole, Fred Brown, Betty Brown,
Peter Newell, George Schlecht, Dan McClure.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the meeting duly
opened at
7:36
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, 1992,
and October
29, 1992,
respectively, together with the Secretary's
Affidavit
of Service
by
Mail of said Notice upon the various -
neighbors
of each of
the
properties under discussion, as appropriate,
upon the
Clerks of
the
City of Ithaca and the, Town of Danby,
upon the
Tompkins County
Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins
County
Commissioner
of
Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or
agents,
as appropriate,
on October 28,
19920
Chairperson Grigorov
assembled, as required
Office of Fire Prevention
AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO
read the Fire Exit Regulations to those
by the New York State Department of State,
and Control.
BE HEARD.
There were no persons present to be heard. Chairperson Grigorov
closed this segment of the ;meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX —BED, 51000 + /— SQUARE FOOT
HOSPICE FACILITY WITH ASSOCIATED OFFICE SPACE, OFF — STREET PARKING AND
LANDSCAPING ON A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 44.1 -1 -1,
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO. 44.1 -1 -2 THROUGH 44.1 -1 -6, PORTIONS OF
TOWN OF ITHACA TAX °PARCELS NO, 44.1 -1 -7 THROUGH 44.1 -1 -15, AND TOWN
OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO.! 44.1 -1 -16 THROUGH 44.1 -1 -20, 11.8 + /- ACRES
TOTAL, LOCATED ON THE WESTERN HALF OF THE CHASE POND SITE ON EAST
KING ROAD ACROSS FROM CHASE FARM LANE, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30.
CITIZENS SAVINGS ,BANK, OWNER; HOSPICARE OF TOMPKINS COUNTY,
APPLICANT; PETER NEWELL, ARCHITECT, AGENT.
PLANNING BOARD
-2-
November 3, 1992
Chairperson Grigorov de:' clared the Public Hearing in the above -
noted matter duly openeddat 7:38 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice
of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
At this time, Board Member Virginia Langhans stated, for the
record, that she would not participate in any discussion of or vote
on this matter.
Peter Newell, Architect for Hospicare, addressed the Board
stating that the purpose of this meeting was to receive preliminary
site plan approval, describe what Hospicare's intentions are, and
then obtain a recommendation for special approval. Mr. Newell stated
that Hospicare plans to develop on the site known as Chase Pond.
Mr. Newell referred to site plan maps [attached hereto are map
Exhibits 1 and 2]. Mr;. Newell stated that at this point they are
dealing with the R -30 lots where the approximately 5,500 square foot
hospice facility will be built with a 2,000 square foot future
addition. The hospice facility will be basically sited toward the
northeast with a view of the Valley and East Hill. A turnaround of
some sort will be in the front and at the moment approval for parking
twenty -six cars is being sought. Mr. Newell further stated that the
purpose of this meeting was to show the Board the intended location
of the parking turnaround entry, the building footprint, where the
easements are, the relationship of the faciltiy to the pond, and
where the parking is located. Mr. Newell also added that they will
�\ have some kind of landscaping and ;lighting scheme that is not
indicated on the plans.` Mr. Newell indicated on the maps the
landscaping and drainage plans.
Chairperson Grigorov asked if anyone on the Board wished to speak.
No one commented at this time.
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if anyone from the public wished to speak.
Eva Hoffmann, Chairperson of the Town of Ithaca Environmental
Review Committee addressed the Board and passed out a Memo dated
November 2, 1992 from the ERC concerning their review of Hospicare of
Tompkins County on East King Road in Ithaca, New York. [The memo was
passed out to each Planning Board member and is attached hereto as
Exhibit # 3.]
Ms. Hoffmann stated to Mr. Newell that in the ERC memo she had
noted the parking spaces', as 14 total, plus 2 for handicapped
parking. Mr. Newell stated that 2 of the 14 parking spaces were for
handicapped parking and the additional spaces were for future parking
spaces. Ms. Hoffmann stated that since these additional spaces are
for the future, then perhaps they should not be built until the
future when the additional spaces are needed.
Ms. Hoffmann also stated that the ERC did not look at the area
where there are some houses" developed to the east.
PLANNING BOARD -3-
November 3, 1992
. Chairperson Grigorov read paragraph 2b of the ERC memo concerning
a deed restriction which would be advisable ensuring that herbicides
and pesticides would mever';be used. Town Attorney John Barney stated
that the word never should be removed concerning herbicides and
pesticides.
Richard Eiken, Planner I, stated that a letter from the County
was received. The County had reviewed the site plan and indicated
that no deleterious impacts were found. [The referenced letter is
attached hereto as Exhibit # 4.]
Chairperson Grigorov referred to the ERC memo under paragraph 2c:
"Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to
the community ? ", and noted that the.answer by Hospicare was no.
Ms. Hoffmann stated that the question noted in paragraph 2c on
the ERC memo can be taken two ways. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she
thought the question meant ',',that there are views that you can see from
within the site and from areas adjacent to the site, like neighbors
from and across the road. Those are the ones that would be important
to the community, so those are the views that one would want to
preserve or do as little damage to as possible. Ms. Hoffmann also
stated that it would be, nice to see a more specific layout of the
building on the lot and a configuration of the building itself. Ms.
Hoffmann suggested that when the architect looks at the layout and
the height of the building,' he try to look at it and maximize the
views for everybody; not only the people who will live in the
Hospicare facility, but also the people who live around there.
Chairperson Grigorov again referred to the ERC memo concerning
Question B.3. where the answer was stated as not applicable.
Question B.3.b referred to topsoil that is disturbed during the
construction which, it is hoped, would be saved for reuse and not
discarded.
Town Engineer Dan Walker stated that the entire site has been
disturbed already; the topsoil has been piled up. Mr. Walker stated
that he thought this topsoil would be used to rebuild and grade on
the site.
Chairperson Grigorov noted again that this was a Public Hearing
and asked if anyone else present wished to speak. No one spoke.
Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter
back to the Board for discussion.
Chairperson Grigorov asked the Planning Board members what they
thought of the view at the Hospicare site.
Planning Board Member; Herbert Finch stated that he had been by
the site and did not see any problem with any obstructions pertaining
to the views of the area.
0 11
Planning Board Member William Lesser asked if the location of the
bike path had been resolved to everyone's mutual satisfaction. Town
PLANNING BOARD
MC
November 3, 1992
Attorney Barney and Town Planner Forman stated that they had no
• problem with the bike path.„
Planning Board Member Stephen Smith stated that he had no trouble
with the additional parking spaces.
Planning Board Member Candace Cornell asked Mr. Newell if there
would be more landscaping. Mr. Newell stated that it had been
discussed.
There appearing to be no further discussion, Chairperson Grigorov
asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion.
MOTION by Robert Keners'on, seconded by James Baker.
WHEREAS:
19 This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed construction of a six -bed, 5,000 + /-
square foot hospice facility with associated office space,
off- street parking and landscaping on a portion of Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 44.1- 1 -1 „, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 44.1 -1 -2
through 44.1 -1 -6, portions of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No.
44.1 -1 -7 through 44.1- 1` -15, and Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No.
44.1 -1 -16 through 44.1-1 -20, 11.8 + /- acres total, located on the
western half of the Chase Pond site on East King-Road across from
• Chase Farm Lane, Residence District R -30, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board has been 'legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in
environmental review, and
3. The Planning Board, at'a Public Hearing held on November 3, 1992,
has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Long Environmental
Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, Part II and
recommendation prepared by the Town planning staff, a letter from
the Tompkins `County Department of Planning dated September 28,
1992, and a preliminary site plan entitled "Hospicare of Tompkins
County ", dated October 27, 1992, prepared by Peter Newell,
Architect, and
4. The Tompkins County Department of Planning has been notified of
the proposed development, pursuant to Sections 239 -1 and m of
General Municipal Law, and
5. The Town planning stafffhas recommended a Negative Determination
of Environmental Significance for the site plan, as proposed;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT'RESOLUED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a Negative
• Determination of Environmental Significance in accordance with the
New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the site plan as
•
C
•
PLANNING BOARD
proposed and,
°be required.
-5-
therefore, an,Environmental Impact
November 3, 1992
Statement will not
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Smith, Finch, Cornell, Lesser.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared °to be carried unanimously.
MOTION by William Lesser, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
WHEREAS.
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed construction of a six -bed, 5,000+/ -
square foot hospice facilty with associated office space,
off - street parking, and 'landscaping on a portion of Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 44.1 -1 -1, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 44.1 -1 -2
through 44.1 -1 -6, portions of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No.
44.1 -1 -7 through 44.1 -1 -15, and Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No.
44.1 -1 -16 through 44.1- 1-20, 11.8 + /- acres total, located on the
western half of the Chase Pond site on East King Road across from
Chase Farm Lane, Residence District R -30, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has, on
November 3, 1992, °made a- Negative Determination of Environmental
Significance, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on November 3, 1992, has
reviewed and accepted' as adequate the Long Environmental
Assessment Form Part 'I prepared by the applicant, Part II and
recommendation prepared by the Town planning staff, and a
preliminary site plan; entitled "Hospicare of Tompkins County ",
dated October 27,'1992,';,prepared by Peter Newell, Architect, and
4. The subject parcel is part of the pending "Chase Pond
Subdivision ", for which the Planning Board, at a Public Hearing
on October 6, 1992, granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and
5. The Tompkins County Department of Planning, in a letter dated
November 3, 1992, has indicated that the project as proposed will
have no significant deleterious impacts on intercommunity, County
or State interests, and',
6. The Town has requested that all of the site not to be disturbed
for construction of the! hospice and parking be maintained as
permanent "green space ":! and
7. The site plan shows a "building footprint" of 5,500 + /- square
feet which is in fact a' proposed "envelope" of 7,000 + /- square
feet within which the 5,500 + /- square -foot building will be
sited, and
PLANNING BOARD
-6-
. 8. The proposed use requir ' es a
Appeals following approval
Planning Board, as specified
Town Zoning Ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
November 3, 1992
Special Approval from
the
Board
of
of a preliminary site
landscaping
plan by
the
by Article V, Section
18(4)
of
the
1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed construction of the proposed hospice
facility with' associated office space, off - street parking and
landscaping on a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
4401 -1 -1, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 44.1 -1 -2 through
44.1 -1 -6, portions of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 44.1 -1 -7
through 44.1 -1 -15, and Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 44.1 -1 -16
through 44.1 -1 -20, as shown on a site plan entitled "Hospicare of
Tompkins County ", dated October 27, 1992, prepared by Peter
Newell, Architect, subject to the following conditions.
a. The use of herbicides and pesticides will be kept to the
utmost minimum' consistent with good horticultural,
scientific, and environmental practice.
b. Submission of a deed restriction for the portion of the
parcel to remain as open space where no future construction
activity may occur, in a form to be approved by the Town
Attorney, and delineation of said portion of parcel to be
left as open space on a revised site plan, prior to final
site plan approval'.
c. Submission
to
and approval by
the Town Planner
of a
landscaping
and
lighting plan for the proposed hospice
prior
to final site
plan approval.
All lights in the
parking
roposed,''
area, if proposed,!:
I
should be low to
the ground and
remain
unobtrusive
to
adjacent residential
properties.
d. Submission to and approval by the Town Engineer of a soil
erosion and sedimentation control plan prior to final site
plan approval, said plan to be implemented during
construction of the proposed hospice facility.
e. Submission to and approval by the Town Engineer of a
maintenance plan for the pond structure prior to final site
plan approval.
f. Submission to and approval by the Planning Board, prior to
final site plan approval, of proposed architectural
renderings showing, at a minimum, elevations, roof lines,
exterior appearance, and other architectural features of the
proposed hospice facility.
g. Revision of the site plan to show the specific footprint and
• location of the proposed hospice facility.
•
•
n
U
PLANNING BOARD
-7-
November 3, 1992
2. That the Planning Board hereby recommends that the Board of
Appeals give _favorable consideration to granting the Special
Approval for the proposed use as described above.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Smith, Finch, Cornell, Lesser.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed construction of a six -bed hospice facility
with associated office space duly closed at 8:15 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING. CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR
PHASE II OF "CHASE FARM" SUBDIVISION," INVOLVING THE PROPOSED
SUBDIVISION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 45- 1 -2.21 33.89 + /- ACRES
TOTAL, INTO 49 RESIDENTIAL LOTS INCLUDING CONSTRUCTION OF
APPROXIMATELY 3,450 FEET OF ROAD AND WATER AND SEWER IMPROVEMENTS,
LOCATED AT THE END OF CHASE LANE, BACKLOT OF RIDGECREST ROAD,
RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -15. PHASES I AND II OF "CHASE FARM SUBDIVISION"
WERE GRANTED PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, WITH CONDITIONS, ON
SEPTEMBER 20, 1988. SOUTH FARM ASSOCIATES, OWNER /APPLICANT; DOUG
WILCOX, HARRISON RUE, AGENTS.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the Public Hearing in the
above - noted matter duly opened at 8:16 p.m. and read aloud from the
Notice.of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
Chairperson Grigorov asked who was representing the Chase Farm
Subdivision.
Mr. George Schlecht,1 Engineer /Surveyor, addressed the Board
stating that he was' representing the Chase Farm Subdivision.
Town Planner 'Floyd Forman addressed the Board stating that
Candace Cornell, a Planning Board Member, and George Frantz,
Assistant Planner for the Town of Ithaca, took a tour of the site and
noticed a significant amount of wetland on the site.
Ms. Cornell stated that there is open marsh under the power
lines, open marsh swamp area with royal ferns that are wetland plants
and there are cattails and things like that. There is a water tower
and to the south of the tower there is a marsh area and the remainder
of the land is woodland wetland. There are some large trees in this
wetland and one of the obvious features is the surface roots that are
there.
Town Attorney John Barney asked Mr. Schlecht what he wanted to do
since there were a numberi of wetlands found on the Chase Farm
Subdivision.
• PLANNING BOARD
-8-
• Mr. Schlecht stated he would like to
any action at this meeting and adjourn to
stated he would like to meet with Tow
what alternatives they have.
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this
asked if anyone present wished to speak.
•
•
November 3, 1992
submit a request to postpone
a later date. Mr. Schlecht
n Planner Floyd Forman to see
was a Public Hearing and
Dan McClure,
one of 'the primary
builders
of
the
Chase Farm
project, addressed
the Planning
Board stating that
in
his
judgement
is
of the wetlands
area
this has been largely
due
to
what
NYSEG
has
done underneath the
power
lines, which is
to artificially
manipulate
the drainage with
their
ruts and clearings
and bulldozing.
There
are
pockets of standing
water
throughout the
woods there
which
are
not
fundamentally different
from what was
on Chase
Farm
I or
woodland
areas on South
Hill.
It
was pointed out
that there
is
going
to be
a
retention pond connecting with and draining into the adjacent wild
area. Mr. McClure stated that he had looked at this land two years
ago and nothing has changed.
Robert Wolpole
of
Groton, New York,
addressed the Board stating
that he represents
the
Sawyers who own
the abutting property, and
noted
that
there
is
a break between
the property and 481 feet of
their land would be landlocked. Of the 481 feet of Mr. and
Sawyer, their rear property would be landlocked, they would no
accessibility to Chase Lane. Originally, the way Chase Lane was
out, it created a strip about five feet wide almost along its
length between the edge of the Sawyer property and the edge of
Lane. Mr. Wolpole stated that originally this strip of land
be dedicated to the park, but in his most recent conversation
the Town it was suggested that it not be included in-the pa
that it was to be dedicated to the Town for whatever purpose
wanted it. There is access to the Sawyer's land from Ridgecrest
Mrs.
t have
laid
entire
Chase
was to
with
rk and
they
Road.
Chairperson Grigorov noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if anyone else present wished to speak. No one spoke.
Chairperson Grigorov closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter
back to the Board for discussion.
Attorney Barney asked Mr. Schlecht what timeframe he wanted to
talk about since no action was going to taken by the Board at this
time. Mr. Schlecht said he wanted to seek guidance from Mr. Forman
and would ask for an adjournment of this matter to a later date.
Chairperson Grigorov asked for a MOTION to adjourn for the first
meeting in December.
MOTION by Stephen Smith, seconded by James Baker:
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board adjourn and
hereby does adjourn the matter of the consideration of Final
Subdivision Approval for Phase II of "Chase Farm Subdivision" until
December 1, 1992, at 7:35 p.m.
PLANNING BOARD -9- November 3, 1992
By way of discussion, Virginia Langhans asked Candace Cornell if
all the area of wetlands were different degrees of wetlands. Ms.
Cornell stated that she was thinking of compliance with the laws
under which you have to get permits to proceed.
Town Engineer Dan Walker-stated
to the Board
that
the
Corps
of
Engineers regulates
the amount
of material or
fill
into
wetlands;
that is their whole
basis for the jurisdiction.
as written.
The
Town
has
some
obligation to notify
the Corps about
this potential
project
and
that
they feel it should
be reviewed for
a permit, as
does
the
DEC
and
other agencies.
Chairperson Grigorov noted there was a MOTION before the Board
and called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Cornell, Baker, Kenerson, Finch, Smith,
Langhans, Lesser.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was .declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Grigorov declared the matter of the consideration of
Final Subdivision Approval for Phase II of Chase Farm Subdivision
duly adjourned at 8.46 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - April 21, 1992
• MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Virginia Langhans:
RESOLVED, that
the
Minutes
of
the Town of
Ithaca
Planning Board
Meeting of April 21,
1992,
be
and
hereby are
approved
as written.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Grigorov, Kenerson, Baker, Langhans, Smith, Finch, Lesser.
Nay - None.
Abstain - Candace Cornell,
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: REPORT OF THE TOWN PLANNER
Town Planner Floyd Forman stated that the New York Planning
Federation Meeting in Niagara Falls, New York, begins on Sunday,
November 8, 1992. It would be a good idea for those attending to
contact George Frantz concerning mileage. Assistant Planner George
Frantz will also be attending.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairperson Grigorov
is come before the Board.
EXECUTIVE SESSION
stated that there was no other business to
PLANNING BOARD -10- November 3, 1992
At 8:51 p.m., Chairperson Grigorov MOVED that the Planning Board
retire to Executive Session for purposes of discussion of a possible
appeal of the recent judicial decision in Baldassarre v. Town of
Ithaca. The MOTION was seconded by Candace Cornell. The Chair
called for a vote with the following result.
Aye - Grigorov, Cornell, Baker,
Langhans.
Nay - None.
Kenerson, Finch, Smith, Lesser,
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
RETURN TO OPEN SESSION
At 9:10
p.m.,
Herbert Finch MOVED that the Planning
Board return
to open
session
having discussed a possible appeal
of the recent
judicial
decision
in Baldassarre v. Town of Ithaca. The
MOTION was
seconded
by
William
Lesser. The Chair called for a
vote with the
following result.
Aye - Cornell, Baker, Kenerson, Finch, Langhans, Lesser, Grigorov,
Smith.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by William Lesser.
RESOLVED, that in the Matter of Ken Baldassarre v. Planning Board
of the Town of Ithaca and Town Board of the Town of Ithaca the
Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca recommends to the Town Board
that the Town of Ithaca pursue an appeal of the decision of the
Supreme Court of the State of New York dated October 13, 1992.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
Aye - Kenerson, Langhans, Baker, Finch, Cornell, Lesser.
Nay - Grigorov, Smith.
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion, Chairperson Grigorov declared the November 3, 1992
meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:15
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Wilma J.
Nancy M.
• Town of
Hornback, Recording Secretary
Fuller, Secretary
Ithaca Planning Board.
11
•
;I
t of 8 4,',
OF go,
or I
; �11r
ate
`' ; i1; 1 0 1 • I, li; '
to
,'Ff
, 1 i 1 , •; 11 I ,M
to
it I
1
�,11111 l 111 Il ll' i� 1 I 1 l ��
H•„I'I '111 ili 111 11� I, ���
b 17fiui 1111. �•1i'. i`� i .I�.
•11
111''1'1.
F p ' 111,1 • ',,11 • .. I
„. 1 •:1;,1,11`,; •1111 ,
It
Is ,
As 4p 1 ' ,1,,•111 . I
I IF
•t1
1
C 0 1
; of I 1
l ,1 '1
1 1 .00 ,If•'`,•
100.
"m
WWA
goIk IF
I1I
�I1
\II
1
1
,1
t-
1
33
�§ 7
� OW�001'� 7Z to
i111 `' 1'',•1 ;.1 �.
1 11
1 ` _ 1
11 •O
0
�Fork_
ill"" x 1 J e
e O A b
tit
� .. ISM
4
ri ,1 11g@ .
1 1
I �fF
1
I1:1 11 1
111 'I
11 1
I 1
0
�Fork_
ill"" x 1 J e
e O A b
tit
� .. ISM
4
ri ,1 11g@ .
1 1
I �fF
1
I1:1 11 1
I 1 c
1 - I
1
1 \�
f1
M1 P N Y• N � I�
gIIL
j 9 TZ?
FIE
C
F
111 IJ 1Y
1�II1I'�
lil. W
1' 'I
1
11�
1'.
G
4
i
el p�
ISMI
Z
q
z�
�o
H
w
I'.
it
1
•11'
I 1 c
1 - I
1
1 \�
f1
M1 P N Y• N � I�
gIIL
j 9 TZ?
FIE
C
F
111 IJ 1Y
1�II1I'�
lil. W
1' 'I
1
11�
1'.
G
4
i
el p�
ISMI
Z
q
z�
�o
H
w
I I
, I Ii I 11
I
I 1 1
I 1
i 1
f I \
1 \
1 11 I \
I II
1 I
1 r\
1 ,
/
` 1 1
i.
I
I
I
I
I /
wk
'I' / I
• , 1
.s�
i
8 /
� 9 ,
m
4
La
9
t
N
1
` E
r'
� ; 1
� , I
1 ,
1 � I
I
1 J I
1
v �
u f r d PZ
Zcl
1 I
I
1 II
'1
I 1
1
1
I
I
I
I�
'I 1
1,
I
II 1
II
II
I
to
1
I I:
I
I
Z
Q
l
w
r
0
m
H
Q�
H
x
W
•
•
0
MEMO
November 21,111921
To: Town of Ithaca Plannina Board,
From: Eva Hoffmann, Chairperson, Town of Ithaca Environmental Review Committee.
Subject: ERC Review of Hospicare of Tompkins County Convalescent Home, East King Road, Ithaca.
Candace Cornell, Phillip Zarriello and III have discussed the environmental aspects of this development
based on the information we received from the Town Planning Office on Oct. 29 (site plans 1 and 2 dated
10127/92, an aerial photo indicating the parcel dated 10/29/92, Full SEAR EAF dated 10/22/92 and a page
from a draft resolution prepared by Town staff listing eight conditions [a through h] proposed for the Planning
Board's 11 /3/92 meeting regarding Hospicare). After our discussion of this case we came up with the
following points to consider:
1, We agree with the conditions a 'through h that the Town staff proposed in their draft resolution, and
hope you will adopt all of them.
2. In addition we would like you to consider the following:
a. The site plan drawings indicate a total of 26 parking spaces near the building footprint, the EAF (B.
I , f.) indicates 25 proposed parking spaces and the text on site plan 1 gives parking information that describes
the member of required parking spaces, which total 16, including 2 for handicapped travellers, We are
puzzled and concerned about the big discrepancy between required and proposed number of parking spaces. We
urge you to find out why 10 more spaces than required are indicated on the plans, and to reduce the final
number so that no more land than necessary is paved over.
b. We are concerned about the possible leaching of residues of herbicides and pesticides into the pond on
the property, and the Clausen swamp beyond it. The applicant has indicated in the EAF ( B. 18) that the project
will not use herbicides or pesticides. We feel it would be prudent to make sure that this applies to both the
construction phase and afterwards. Also, some deed restriction ensuring that herbicides and pesticides are
never used would be advisable, in addition we feel you need to discuss the problems that might occur if people
and pets have access to the pond and the environmentally delicate swamp areas, and the liability question to the
Town of such access.
c. A couple of questions on the EAF form are unclear, A. 14 asks: "Does the present site include scenic
views known to be important to the community ?" The applicant has answered "No ", It can be argued whether
the question deals with scenic views of areas located within this site, scenic views as seen from within this site
or scenic views as seen from land and roads adjoining this site, as well as from within. We would argue that
from the point of view of the community to which the scenic views are important, the last interpretation is the
correct one, We urge you to ask for a detailed site plan and elevation drawings so that you can determine that
the configuration and location of the building is such that it maximizes the beautiful views that both the
resident:; of Hospicare, the neighbors and the public on the roads can enjoy,
Question B. 3. has been answered as not .applicable. But we hope that any topsoil ( B. 3, b.) that is
disturbed during the construction will be saved for reuse, and not simply discarded.
EXHIBIT # 3
For the ERC, respectfully submitted,
I /.
1
•
•
•
tv
lx
s Co.U�t�
DEPA T E' +' ,f , 3'YNING dA
Biggs $�ulldiig jyQ�,Fatis�Aat Arice
Ithii�jt otv oc.k„l44so
James W. Hanson, Jr. „ " "' $AP:H,P ✓f
commissioner of Planning
To, Richard Eiker., Planner I
Town of Ithaca
PROM: Jatxies W. Hanson, Jr., Con=ssioner
DATE: November 3, 1992
RE: Zoning Review Pursuant to §239 -1 and -m of the New York State General
Municipal Law
r . rJ4.
TrIephene
.07) 274 -5360
.Action: Hospiaare Preliminary Site Plan. Tax Parcel No, 6-44.11 -1
through 37 (part).
This Incinvicuidwii acknowledgcs your mferral of the proposal identified above for review and
comment by tyre To mpkins County Planning Department pursuant to §239 -1 and -m of the New
York. StatC C3C;lC�al'_Vitu�iGlpal Law.
The proposal, as subuntwd, will havc no significant dc1ctcwrious impact on intercommunity,
County, or State interests, Therefore, no recommendation is indicated by the Tompkins County
Planning Department, and you are frce tv twi without prejudicc,
Please inform 6s of your decision so that we crux oAtahc it a part of the record.
��►., a NOV 3 M2
t
f
r�r rtf r HA
CA
or FIHAC.A
ZMoNG• E NGINEERING
EXHIBIT # 4
4M
fj Recycled paper