Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1995-04-04I. r • • , APRIL 4, 1995 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date 7 `5 Cler The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, April 4, 1995, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca- :Stt.eet`; Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Stephen Smith, Robert Kenerson, Eva Hoffmann, Gregory Bell, James Ainslie, Herbert Finch, Candace Cornell, Fred Wilcox, Jonathan Kanter (Town Planner) , George Frantz (Assistant Town Planner), JoAnn Cornish. (Planner II), Daniel Walker (Town Engineer), John Barney (Town Attorney), ALSO PRESENT: Joe & Lee Leonardo, Clara Leonardo, Rich Leonardo, Larry Fabbroni, J. Fred Pritt, James Pritt, James Eisenburg, Lora Watts, Glenn Hubbell, Anthony Cerrache, J & C Weisburd, Joan Boaker, Jay Jacobson, Karen K. Smith, Joan Burgett, Don Burgett, Patti Rotunno, Rob Rotunno, Karen Knudson, Nancy Brown, Kate Benjamin, Liz Walker, Arthun Godin, Sara Pines, Steve Gaarder, Yvonne LaMontagne, Aaron Pines, Erica Powers, Bill Webber, Doug Shire, Robert Mitchell, Chairperson Smith declared the meeting duly opened at 7:35 p.m. and accepted for the record the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on March 27, 1995, and March 29, 19951 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 Ithaca, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, upon the New York State Department of Transportation, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on March 29, 1995. (A copy of the Affidavit of Posting and Publication is attached,hereto as Exhibit #1) Chairperson Smith 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: PERSONS TO BE HEARD. There was no persons to be heard. Chairperson Smith closed,. this segment of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION. APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED "REVISED SUBDIVISION PLAT, LEONARDO LAND ", PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF MODIFICATIONS TO THE LOT LINES OF LOT, NOS, 21 31 41 5 AND 6, A.K.A. TAX PARCEL NOS. 37 -1 -20.3, -20.4 20.51 -20.61 AND -20.7, FOR WHICH FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL - .WAS.. GRANTED BY THE TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD ON MAY 161 1978 .;` MODIFICATIONS TO THE LOT LINES OF LOT NO, 10, A.K.A. TAX PARCEL NO:. 37- 1- 20.10, FOR WHICH FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WAS GRANTED'ON.." r. Planning Board Minutes rd April 4, 1995 JUNE 6, 1978; MODIFICATIONS TO THE LOT LINES OF LOT NO. 9, A.K.A. TAX PARCEL NO 37 -1- 20.12, FOR WHICH PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL WAS GRANTED ON MAY 16, 1978; MODIFICATION OF THE EASTERLY LOT LINE OF TAX PARCEL NO, 37 -1 -20.2 FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADDING LAND TO LOT NOS. 41 51 AND 6; AND SUBDIVISION OF TAX PARCEL NO 37 -1- 20.11, 1132 DANBY ROAD, INTO TWO LOTS, TOGETHER WITH MODIFICATIONS TO THE ALIGNMENTS OF SESAME STREET, AN EXISTING PUBLIC ROAD, AND ALLISON STREET, A PROPOSED PUBLIC ROAD SHOWN ON THE SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVED BY THE TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD ON MAY 161 1978, AND FURTHER, CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF TAX PARCEL NO. 37 -1 -20.8 A.K.A. LOTS NO. 7 AND 8 ON THE ABOVE- REFERENCED PLAT, ALL OF THE ABOVE PROPERTIES COMPRISING +/ -23.8 ACRES TOTAL, LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF DANBY ROAD AT SESAME STREET, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -15, CLARA Y. LEONARDO, RICHARD M. AND MARY LEE PARK, CHARLES W. AND SANDRA J. FIRENZE, AND JOSEPH M. AND MARLEA ANNE LEONARDO, OWNERS; LAWRENCE P. FABBRONI, P.E., L, S, AGENT. ALSO DISCUSSION OF SKETCH PLAN FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF THE REMAINING LANDS OF CLARA LEONARDO WEST OF THE ABOVE - REFERENCED SITE, A.K.A. TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 37- 1 -20.2, CONSISTING OF 16.25 +/- ACRES. Chairperson Smith declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7:36 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Rich Leonardo addressed the Board and stated that his mother, Clara T. Leonardo owns the property in question. His father Anthony J. Leonardo started subdividing this property back in the mid -70s, which was brought to the Planning Board in a series of meetings, and it had been decided that the project needed to be completed in phases. Mr. Leonardo stated that at one point they thought that they were completely approved. Mr. Leonardo stated that his father became ill, and they still needed to come before the Board for one more meeting to receive final approval on the project. In 1990, due to a tax burden, Mrs. Leonardo tried to sell a lot and was told by a Real Estate Broker that the subdivision had not received final approval, and that the subdivision regulations had changed since obtaining the preliminary approval. While discussing the status of the project with Town staff, they were asked to prepare a proposal of possible division of the lower lots owned by Mrs. Leonardo in addition to the proposal. Larry Fabbroni of 127 Warren Road and acting as agent for Mrs. Leonardo, addressed the Board and stated what was being proposed at this meeting. Mr. Fabbroni stated changes being proposed and they hoped that the changes were beneficial from the Board's outlook as well as the "salability" of the property. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they were asked to design a possible future subdivision for the remaining land of Mrs. Leonardo. Mr. Fabbroni stated that he - wanted to make it clear that Mrs. Leonardo's focus is not on the . rear land. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Lots number 1, 2, and 3 had final subdivision approval. Lots 4, 5, and 6 had final approval. The confusion began with the remainder of the lots. Lot 10 1 7 Planning Board Minutes 3 April 4, 1995 received final approval. Lots 7 and 8 received only preliminary approval, and Lot 9 never really went anywhere. Mr. Fabbroni stated that their focus is on the 12 lots represented. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there are many alternatives with the land located in back of the 12 lots involved in the proposal tonight. Mr. Fabbroni briefly described each of the two alternative future layout designs for the backlands. (Sketches entitled "Future Layout 1" and "Future Layout 2" are attached hereto as Exhibit #2) Mr. Fabbroni stated that Lot #1 is currently owned by Rich Leonardo, Lot #2 is owned by Clara Leonardo, and Lot #3 is owned by Chuck Firenze. Mr. Fabbroni described the changes that.would be made to Lots 2 and 3 on the proposal. (Subdivision Plat for the 12 lot subdivision is attached hereto as Exhibit #3) Mr. Fabbroni stated that if Sesame Street were relocated, a small wedge of land would be added to Lot 2, and a larger wedge would be added to Lot 3. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the relocation of the road was not essential to the proposal. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Lot #11 would be subdivided as a new lot to this proposal. Lot #10 is occupied by Mrs. Leonardo's daughter. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they would still make use of the water and sewer utilities that run through the property. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Lots 7 and 8 are currently committed to Mrs. Leonardo' s son, with the house on Lot #7 and tied into lot #8 for as long as it needs to be, until the road is a Town Road. Lot #7 has the house on it and Lot #8 constitutes the 100- • foot frontage on Danby Road. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there was a water way that runs through the front of Lot #8 and they would intend to leave that in its native state under this proposal. Mr. Fabbroni stated that very little of the project would add runoff to the water ways that flow along the property, and that he felt that he could learn a lot about how to buffer runoff because nature has done a good job on this property. Board Member Herbert Finch asked if Allison Road exists currently. Mr. Fabbroni responded that Allison Road is a gravel driveway that serves Lots 7 and 10. Mr. Fabbroni stated that if the Planning Board approves moving the roadway, it would then go to the Town Board to alienate the wedge of right -of -way that adds to the lot dimensions. Board Member Fred Wilcox asked if Mr. Fabbroni would address Lot #11. Mr. Fabbroni stated that where Lot 11 is located on the plat is where the road used to be, and there was an intention to have a second access on Danby Road. Mr. Finch asked if any variances from zoning would be needed. • Mr. Fabbroni responded that all of the lots are within Town standards. Planning Board Minutes 4 April 4, 1995 Board Member Robert Kenerson stated that Lot #11 had 25 feet of frontage on the cul -de -sac and approximately 100 feet of frontage on Danby Road. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the land would be given to Mrs. Leonardo in exchange for the road right -of -way. straight , line. Planning Board Minutes 4 April 4, 1995 Board Member Robert Kenerson stated that Lot #11 had 25 feet of frontage on the cul -de -sac and approximately 100 feet of frontage on Danby Road. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the land would be given to Mrs. Leonardo in exchange for the road right -of -way. Town Attorney John Barney stated that the Town has Sesame Street to the west as a straight to a 75 -foot radius as line. Mr. Fabbroni stated that it was a 60 -feet by 400+ feet of land for Sesame Street, Chairperson Smith noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. No one spoke. Chairperson Smith closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion. Chairperson Smith asked which Board Members had visited the site. Board Members Wilcox, Hoffmann, Cornell, and Smith had visited the site. Board Member James Ainslie asked if the Town of Ithaca plowed Sesame Street, 0 Mr. Fabbroni responded, yes. Mr. Ainslie asked if the residents along Allison plowed the road themselves. Mr. Fabbroni responded, yes. Chairperson Smith asked what changes would be made to lot #2. Mr. Fabbroni stated that a wedge approximately 5 square feet would be added on the corner. Board Member Fred Wilcox stated that he had driven to the site and looked east from the end of Sesame Street and was concerned that the movement of the road would entail moving or filling of the drainage ditch. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the changes would not effect the water way. The changes would be where the driveways already exists and at that point the culvert would need to be lengthened to take in the new intersection. The existing culvert would be as is. Town Attorney John Barney asked if the cul -de -sac could be enlarged to a 75 -foot radius as normally required by the Town. Mr. Fabbroni stated that enlarging the cul -de -sac would be a • major problem because of the existing layout of the property. Mr. Fabbroni stated that what is shown on the plat is 100 -feet in diameter. Planning Board Minutes E April 4, 1995 Attorney Barney asked what the physical problem would be to add 50 feet to the cul -de -sac. Mr. Fabbroni responded that once you take it out of the lots, it substantially affects the houses and the grading itself, so it would need to be filled to make it work. Mr. Ainslie asked if what was proposed would be sufficient for the snow plows that the Town uses. Town Engineer Daniel Walker responded that he would recommend to the Town Board not to accept the cul -de -sac without a 50 -foot inner radius. Mr. Walker stated that the additional 50 feet could be worked out without impacting the homes. Mr. Walker stated that they could keep the end of the cul -de -sac where it is against Lots 7 and 8 and actually start the cul -de -sac back a little bit further, Lots 5 and 6 could take a little bit more of the cul -de- sac and bring it around to fit into the standard design. Mr. Fabbroni stated that feet, it could come from Lots if it 8, 9, was and 11 necessary to because of get the 50 the grade. Attorney Barney asked if there was a fire hydrant there now. Mr. Walker stated that there was a terminal hydrant located there. The water line was designed originally as a loop. Mr. Ainslie stated that the Board can not accept the cul -de- sac the way it is unless it is redesigned, and asked Mr. Walker if that was correct. Mr. Walker responded that he would not recommend final approval on this subdivision until the Town Board has accepted the location of the roads. Mr. Walker stated that a preliminary approval with what is available is workable and then to the Town Board for acceptance. The Highway Superintendent needs to review this configuration as well. Mr. Walker stated that they were looking at a subdivision and an abandonment of a portion of an existing Town Road, although he feels it is a good design concept, and that Town would not be losing anything. Mr. Walker stated that he would definitely recommend that to the Town Board, but he believes that if the Board feels that the basic lot layout is appropriate then a preliminary subdivision approval would be appropriate with a condition that the road location and the cul -de- sac meet Town standards be accepted by the Town Board. Board Member Candace Cornell asked Attorney Barney if the former final approvals were still valid. Attorney Barney responded, yes. 1 ! • Planning Board Minutes 0 April 4, 1995 Assistant Town Planner George Frantz addressed the Board and stated that Lots 1 through 8, and Lot 10 had received final approval. Lots 7 and 8 were consolidated last year. Lot 9 has preliminary approval. And Lots 11 and 12 are new lots with this action. Mr. Frantz stated that sketch plans of the possible future layouts of the backlots were to show the Board what the future possibilities could be. Ms. Cornell asked about the 2.5 acre park dedication indicated on the sketch plans. Mr. Fabbroni responded that the 2.5 acres would be the park dedication for the entire 23 acres and that it would abut Buttermilk Falls State Park. Mr. Frantz stated that the idea of the open space abutting Buttermilk Falls State Park was that it would be dedicated and incorporated into the State Park, Board Member Gregory Bell asked if the State Park would take the land. Mr. Frantz stated that he had met with the State and discussed the idea of subdivisions such as this, where it may not be appropriate for the Town to acquire a park site, but the state would be happy to have the additional buffer added to their parks, Ms. Cornell asked if there were any park land plans made at that time of the original subdivision. Mr. Frantz stated that there was no record of any proposed park at that time. Board Member Candace Cornell stated that the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) had submitted comments about this proposal. (A copy of the comments made by the Environmental Review Committee is attached hereto as Exhibit #4) Ms. Cornell stated that they were interested in seeing a detailed drainage plan, and that they mention the sewage overflow problems in the City of Ithaca. The ERC also mentions the long range overview of the development in this area. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they would submit a detailed drainage plan if and when there is any intention of developing the backlots. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the lots being discussed are a very minor contributor to what are larger drainage ways through the perimeter of this project. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the proposal is only going to add one lot in this whole proposal. I I Planning Board Minutes 7 April 4, 1995 Mr. Walker stated that this small subdivision will not create an impact on the sanitary sewage flow in the City. Mr. Walker stated that the 20 lots in the back may have a potential impact. Mr. Walker stated that they needed to look at the bigger picture in the future so that the roads are located in the proper place. Mr. Walker stated that they were not changing any drainage ways on the little subdivision that the applicants want to finalize. Board Member Eva Hoffmann stated that she was present at the ERC meeting and she thought that the reason that the issues came up was because it was not clear whether they were to consider the entire parcel with the total number of lots or just the small subdivision. Ms. Cornell asked the Town Engineer if houses were Chairperson Smith asked if 'there would be a buildable area on Lot #4 because of the stream. Mr. Fabbroni responded that the lot was 22,000 square feet, and the setback lines are delineated on the map. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there was a site for a good -sized house that could face southwest on the parcel without disturbing the stream. Mr. Frantz stated that for purposes of the sketch plan, he had walked the entire site and that there were areas around the stream corridor that could possibly qualify as wetlands under federal criteria. Mr. Frantz stated that the issue of the wetland could be addressed in the future and that the plan could be modified, if needed, at that time. Mr. Frantz stated that the land that would be dedicated for park land would be an appropriate buffer for the wetlands as well as Buttermilk Falls State Park. Mr. Frantz stated that the park space indicated on the sketches shows what could be the loo setaside, and could encompass the wetlands and be incorporated into the state park, and that the area was mostly young woodland. Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that the proposed resolution referenced only the revised subdivision plat drawing itself and not any of the sketch plan drawings and would not be involved in any approval process at this point. Ms. Cornell asked the Town Engineer if houses were built on the lots that do not currently have homes on them would the City sewage system of the City be taxed. Mr. Walker responded that this subdivision would not significantly impact the sewer system. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the City sewage overflow problem is a wet weather problem, with a heavy rainfall is when the problem has shown itself. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there has been flooding 9 or 10 times over the past 10 years. Mr. Fabbroni stated that it is rainwater that is getting into the system, not dry sewage flow that is causing the overflow. Planning Board Minutes April 4, 1995 Board Member Gregory Bell stated that it looked as though 20 years from now this is going to be a part of a whole series of developments and it would be like a little community up there. Mr. Bell asked if there was going to be provisions for sidewalks and curbs there. Mr. Walker stated that Mr. Bell would need to direct that question to the Town Board about the sidewalk and curb issues. Mr. Walker stated that policy statements regarding what direction the infrastructure needs to go in would need to be made. Mr. Walker stated at this point the Town's design standards for roads are 20- foot wide roads, 4 -foot wide shoulders, and open ditches. Mr. Walker stated that the Planning Board could ask the Town Board to come up with a policy statement. Mr. Fabbroni stated that if the Board would accept an informal dedication of a pedestrian access to the Park would be an advantage because there are very few places on South Hill where someone could walk all the way to Cass Park without being on the street. Mr. Frantz asked Mr. Fabbroni how wide the walkway dedication was as shown on the sketch plans. Mr. Fabbroni responded that they showed 10 -feet wide. it Mr. Frantz stated that the Town would need a minimum of 20 feet. Board Member Fred Wilcox asked if the parkland was going to be adjacent to the Wiggins' dedication for parkland. Mr. Frantz responded that the two dedications would be contiguous pieces of park dedications. Ms. Cornell stated that she had a problem with a home being built on Lot #4 without disturbing the stream. Mr. Walker stated that a condition to modification could be added to the final resolution that states that before any building permit for Lot #4 be issued, a full evaluation of drainage and topographic evaluation be approved by the Town. Mr. Walker stated that he would be satisfied with the cul -de -sac with the condition that it be redesigned with a 50 -foot inner radius and a 75 -foot outer radius. Board Member Eva Hoffmann asked if there, was any problem with moving the culvert that goes under the driveway currently that accommodates the stream when Allison Drive is built. Mr. Walker stated that he did not think that the culvert would need to be moved, but it would need to be replaced. Mr. Walker • stated that he did not think it would be accepted as a Town road until there was a new culvert. i L I Planning Board Minutes 0 April 4, 1995 Ms, Hoffmann stated that the culvert may not need to be moved, but it would need to be extended. Mr. Walker responded, definitely, there would have to be an extension. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the culvert was shown with an additional 60 feet added to the existing culvert. There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion. MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Land ", proposed to consist of modifications to the lot lines of Lots No. 2, 31 41 5 and 6, a.k.a. Tax Parcel Nos. 37 -1- 20.3, -20.41 -20.51 -20.6, and -20.7, for which Final Subdivision Approval was granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on Mary 16, 1978; modifications to the lot lines of Lot No. 10, a.k.a. Tax parcel No. 37 -1- 20.10, for which Final Subdivision Approval was granted on June 6, 1978; modifications to the lot lines of Lot No. 9, a.k.a. Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.12, for which Preliminary Subdivision Approval was granted on May 16, 1978; modification of the easterly lot line of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.2 for the purpose of adding land to Lot Nos. 4, 5, and 6; and subdivision of Tax parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, 1132 Danby Road, into two lots, together with modification to the alignments of Sesame Street, an existing public road, and Allison Street, a proposed public road shown on the subdivision plat approved by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on May 16, 1978, and further, consideration of preliminary subdivision approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.8, a.k.a. Lots No. 7 and 8 on the above - referenced plat, said properties comprising +/ -23.8 acres total, located on the West side of Danby Road at Sesame Street, Residence District R -15. Clara T. Leonardo, Richard M. & Mary Lee Park, Charles W. and Sandra J. Firenze, and Joseph M. and Marlea Ann Leonardo, Owners; Lawrence P. Fabbroni, P.E., L.S., Agent, 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, and Planning Board Minutes 10 April 4, 1995 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 4, 1995, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a subdivision plat entitled "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Lands, Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York," prepared by Lawrence P. Fabbroni , L, S, , P, E, , and dated December 9, 1994, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed action, as proposed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 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 above - referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither a Long Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. Board Member Candace Cornell stated that she was concerned about the water quality since it goes into the Park. Assistant Town Planner George Frantz stated that the stream in Lot #4 enters Buttermilk Falls State Park just north of King Road. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Smith, Cornell, Hoffmann, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Wilcox, Bell. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. MOTION by Eva Hoffmann, seconded by Herbert Finch: WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Land ", proposed to consist of modifications to the lot lines of Lots No, 2, 31 41 5 and 6, a.k.a. Tax Parcel Nos. 37 -1- 20.3, -20.41 -20.51 -20.6, and -20.7, for which Final Subdivision Approval was granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on Mary 16, 1978; modifications to the lot lines of Lot No. 10, a.k.a. Tax parcel No. 37 -1- 20.10, for which Final Subdivision Approval was granted on June 6, 1978; modifications to the lot lines of Lot No. 9, a.k.a. Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.12, for which Preliminary Subdivision Approval was granted on May 16, 1978; modification of the easterly lot line of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.2 for the purpose of adding land to Planning Board Minutes 11 April 4, 1995 Lot Nos. 4, 5, and 6; and subdivision of Tax parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, 1132 Danby Road, into two lots, together with modification to the alignments of Sesame Street, an existing public road, and Allison Street, a proposed public road shown on the subdivision plat approved by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board on May 16, 1978, and further, consideration of preliminary subdivision approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.8, a.k.a. Lots No. 7 and 8 on the above - referenced plat, said properties comprising +/ -23.8 acres total, located on the West side of Danby Road at Sesame Street, Residence District R -15, Clara T. Leonardo, Richard M. & Mary Lee Park, Charles W. and Sandra J. Firenze, and Joseph M. and Marlea Ann Leonardo, Owners; Lawrence P. Fabbroni, P.E., L.S., Agent. 2, The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 4, 1995, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a subdivision plat entitled "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Lands, Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York," prepared by Lawrence P. Fabbroni, L.S., P.E., and dated December 9, 1994, and other application materials, and 3. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has, on April 4, 1995, made a negative determination of environmental significance. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. The Town of Ithaca hereby waived the requirement for dedication of land for public park and open space purposes, for the above - referenced action, having determined from 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, and with the knowledge that the applicant proposed to include a dedication of 2.4 to 2.5 acres of public park and open space purposes, as shown on the sketch plats entitled "Future Layout 1, Leonardo Lands" and "Future Layout 2, Leonardo Lands" dated February 6, 1995 respectively, when those additional lots are approved. Planning Board Minutes 12 April 4, 1995 2. That, subject to the conditions set forth below, the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed modification to the lot lines of Lots No. 2, 31 41 51 6, 9, and 10, a.k.a. Tax parcel Nos. 37 -1 -20.3, -20.41 20.51 - 20.6, -20.71 - 20.12, and 20.10; modification of the easterly lot line of Tax parcel No. 37 -1 -20.2 for the purposed of adding land to Lot Nos. 4, 5, and 6; and modification to the alignments of Sesame Street and Allison Drive as shown on the plat entitled "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Lands, Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York," prepared by Lawrence P. Fabbroni, L.S., P.E., and dated December 9, 1994, and further 3. That, subject to the conditions set forth below, the Planning Board hereby grants preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.22, 1132 Danby Road, into Lots No. 11 an 12, and Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax parcel No. 37 -1- 20.8, a.k.a. Lot Nos. 7 and 8 as shown on the above - referenced plat entitled "Revised Subdivision Plat, Leonardo Lands, Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins, State of New York," prepared by Lawrence P. Fabbroni, L.S., P.E., and dated December 9, 1994, and 4. That the Preliminary Subdivision Approvals herein granted are conditioned upon the following: a, redesign of the plat to enlarge the turn - around at the end of Allison Drive to conform to the standards of the Town of Ithaca Highway requirements showing a minimum inside turning radius of 50 feet, such redesign to be approved by the Town Engineer, Town Highway Superintendent, and Town Planner, b, approval by the Town Board of the locations of all proposed public roads and public utilities, as so redesigned, and approval of the abandonment of the requested portion of Sesame Street, C. approval of the proposed stormwater drainage improvements by the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent prior to the granting of Final Subdivision Approval, d. the Final Subdivision plat shall show such redesigned cul -de -sac, such redesign to be subject to the approval of this Board as part of the Final Subdivision Approval process, e. before any building permit is issued for Lot 4, a drainage plan in sufficient detail shall be submitted to and approved by the Town Engineer to provide adequate erosion and sediment control and to assure no adverse effects shall occur to surrounding properties by reason of any construction on Lot 4, Planning Board Minutes 13 April 4, 1995 Board Member Candace Cornell asked about the frontage for Lot 47 if subdivided, or if the house on Lot 7 have frontage on Allison Drive. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Lot 7 and 8 would remain as one until the road was constructed and accepted as a Town road. Mr. Barney suggested, and the Board concurred, that the following condition be added to the resolution: f. The subdivision of Lots 7 and 8 shall not be effective until Allison Drive is constructed and accepted by the Town. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote on the resolution as modified by Attorney Barney. Aye - Smith, Cornell, Hoffmann, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Wilcox, Bell. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Smith declared the Public Hearing in the matter of modification and subdivision of the Leonardo.Lands duly closed at 8:55 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: CONSIDERATION OF A SKETCH PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED "CANDLELIGHT PARK" SUBDIVISION, PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF 153 + /- LOTS, WITH +/ -2.3 MILES OF PUBLIC ROAD, PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER, AND +/- 9.7 ACRES OF PROPOSED PARK AND OPEN SPACE, LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MECKLENBURG ROAD (NYS ROUTE 79) JUST WEST OF THE CITY OF ITHACA /TOWN OF ITHACA BOUNDARY ON TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 27- 1- 13.12, 95 +/- ACRES TOTAL SIZE, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -15, ANTHONY CERRACHE, OWNER; IVAR AND JANET JONSON, APPLICANTS; LAWRENCE P. FABBRONI, P.E., L.S., AGENT, Chairperson Smith declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:57 p.m, and read aloud from the Planning Board agenda. Larry Fabbroni of 127 Warren Road, addressed the Board and stated that the land was intended to be suburban residential according to the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Ivar Jonson, the applicant on this project, is proposing to develop this land for single and two- family lots. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the parcel adjoins the City of Ithaca. Mr. Fabbroni stated when the parcel was looked at, there were a few things to consider, the Town of Ithaca had just run sewer to serve some properties on Mecklenburg Road and West Haven Road. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Mr. Cerrache gave the Town an easement that was anticipated to be 200 feet of property line so that it could include a portion of the 150 foot right of way. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they had considered the neighbors when considering the access in the layout presented to the Board in the sketch plan I • Planning Board Minutes 14 April 4, 1995 provided to the Planning Board Members. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the sight distances either way exceeds 1000 feet. Mr. Fabbroni stated that what they were hoping to accomplish with the Board over a number of meeting is to arrive at a plan that everyone could be happy with. Mr. Fabbroni stated that Mr. Jonson's immediate plans are to develop an initial 17 lots with the necessary entrance road of approximately 1,000 feet of road depth and that water and sewer are available. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they want to develop the project in phases. Phase I would consist of Lots 2 through 18 with access from north to south, because it is felt that better access is needed on this side of Town to the hospital and from the fire station. There was consideration to develop the lots to the north first because the views would be a selling point for those lots. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there would be retention /detention mechanisms put into place at ever phase. Phase II would be to develop Lots 19 through 41. The rest of the property have not been broken down into phases at this point. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the property lines would remain along the drainage ways which would retain sediment. The hope of the project is to maintain as much as possible the trees and hedge growth as possible which would help with drainage and runoff. Mr. Fabbroni stated that there are small portions of the land that could be considered as wetlands. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the total acreage for this project was 95 +/- acres, and that they had estimated approximately ll +/- acres for parkland set aside as required by the Town of Ithaca. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they wanted to take the nicest areas and make them into open spaces. The Board discussed the proposal with Mr. Fabbroni, and the Board expressed concerns about the wetlands shown on a vegetation map designed by Assistant Town Planner George Frantz, Mr. Fabbroni's sketch plan shows that a road would be constructed through a portion of the wetland. Mr. Fabbroni stated that the lots could be redesigned to avoid the wetlands and that the sketch plan was a very general outline to get something to work from. Mr. Fabbroni stated that they were asking that the Board provide them with directions as to what would be an acceptable development for this piece of land. Assistant Town Planner George Frantz stated that there was a lot of possibility for this particular piece of property and that a cluster similar to the Grandview development, which was done by Mr. Jonson, would be ideal. The layouts cluster the housing or use smaller lots and leaves more open space than the standard development. Mr. Frantz pointed out as examples of small -lot subdivisions older successful neighborhoods such as Bryant Park and Hawthorn Place in the.City of Ithaca. Planning Board Minutes 15 April 4, 1995 • Ivar Jonson, applicant, addressed the Board and stated that he felt that smaller lots were acceptable to him and that single family homes are what he would like to build on this piece of property. Mr. Jonson asked the Board how many lots could be put on this land to be considered an acceptable development. Mr. Jonson stated that he totally agreed with the idea of using smaller lots to provide more open space. Mr. Jonson also stated that the cluster setbacks are something that he was willing to consider. Mr. Jonson stated that he wanted to establish how many homes the Town of Ithaca is willing to consider. Mr. Jonson stated that the Town's regulations allowed him over 200 homes and that he was asking for only 157. There was further discussion of using smaller lots. The Board also discussed the location of the proposed open space which would be contiguous to already existing open space. Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that an additional option would be to use a mixture of different lot sizes. Cluster subdivision would allow for a buffer around the entire exterior of the proposed site, which deserved some thought as well. Ms. Cornell stated that she did not want to give any advice or try to determine what an appropriate use would be for the property without seeing the location of the streams, wetlands, vegetation • and other possible site features. Ms. Cornell stated that she would like to see a more imaginative layout. Chairperson Smith stated that he liked the suggestion measured made by Mr. Kanter to use a mixture of different sized that they wanted to be able to move ahead would be in the proposed Phase I, as meeting. lots on the land. The Board discussed the possible road locations and whether or not they measured up to Town specifications and regulations. Mr. Fabbroni with the 17 lots discussed earlier stated that in the that they wanted to be able to move ahead would be in the proposed Phase I, as meeting. time. Attorney Barney asked if Mr. Jonson owned the land at this Mr. Jonson stated that he had put his money down on the land. The Board discussed the possible future connector road that would go through this property. Mr. Frantz showed the Board a sketch of where the connector road was proposed to go. Mr. Walker asked what time frame Mr. Jonson was looking at for Phase I. Mr. Jonson responded that he wanted to build the roads for • Phase I this fall if possible. Planning Board Minutes 16 April 4, 1995 • Board Member Eva Hoffmann stated that she would like a tour of the property. Mr. Jonson remarked that it would not be a problem to give any of the Board members or Town staff a tour of the property if the wanted to see it. Board Member Gregory Bell stated that he would like to see a park that houses looked at not away from as a social space instead of simply an environmental area. The Board discussed the through roads to connect with the proposed roads to the north through the Shalebrook property. The Board indicated to that they would like the developer to prepare a clustered subdivision proposal designed in a manner to protect the wetlands and other site features. The Board decided that they would like to see the property before the considered the sketch plan any further. Mr. Jonson reiterated that he would be happy to give a tour of the property whenever it would be most convenient for the Board members. Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that the staff would contact him to set up a site visit. • There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith declared the Sketch Plan for the proposed "Candlelight Park" duly closed at 10:06 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NOS. 28- 1 -26.2 AND 28 -1 -26.8, TOTALLING 176.098 + /- ACRES GROSS (174.255+/ - ACRES NET), INTO THREE LOTS - "PARCEL All CONSISTING OF 56.007+/_ ACRES NET, "PARCEL B" CONSISTING OF 33.929 + /- ACRES NET (TO BE CONVEYED TO THE FIRST RESIDENTS' GROUP), AND "PARCEL C" CONSISTING OF 84.318 + /- ACRES NET; AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE ECO VILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE, TO BE LOCATED ON PARCEL B REFERENCED ABOVE, PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF 30 DWELLING UNITS IN 15 DUPLEXES, A COMMON HOUSE AND OTHER SITE IMPROVEMENTS, ALL OF THE ABOVE PARCELS LOCATED ON MECKLENBURG ROAD (ROUTE 79) JUST WEST OF WEST HAVEN ROAD, SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT (SLUD) AND RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30, ECO VILLAGE AT ITHACA, INC., OWNER; FIRST RESIDENTS' GROUP, APPLICANT; HOUSE CRAFT BUILDERS, AGENTS. Chairperson Smith declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 10:10 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. . Jerold Weisburd addressed the Board and stated that he had submitted amended drawings which now show only 8 offices in the proposed common house and that they were numbered 1 through 8 on the new drawings. Planning Board Minutes 17 April 4, 1995 • Mr. Weisburd stated that he had received a copy of the comments that were made by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and would like to take this opportunity to respond to the comments made. (A copy of the Comments made by the Environmental Review Committee is attached hereto as Exhibit #5) Mr. Weisburd stated that in reference to questions #1, all drawings have been submitted and that if they were submitted at the size of 11 by 17 inches, they would be illegible. In reference to comment #2, Mr. Weisburd stated that the chambered marsh systems was on Eco Village at Ithaca land, not the land that the site plan and subdivision was being proposed on. In reference to #3, Mr. Weisburd stated that the spillway is being worked on and will be submitted for engineering review, after preliminary approval and before final approval. In reference to comments #4, Mr. Weisburd stated that the lighting issue had been addressed in a letter dated March 21, 1995 under Item #10, which stated that lighting would be kept to a minimum. (Letter from House Craft Builders, dated March 21, 1995, is hereto attached as Exhibit #6) Mr. Weisburd stated that the items; mentioned in comment #5 and comment #6 had both been submitted to the Town. Mr. Weisburd stated that the sight distances were measures to be 875 feet to the east and over 1600 feet to the west. Liz Walker of Eco Village at Ithaca addressed the Board and stated that there were going to maintain a low -key approach to lighting by using walkway lights and that each house would have an outdoor light pointing at the walkway. Ms. Walker stated that the houses would be pointed at each other and that the residents would not be happy with bright lights shining directly into their homes. Karen Knudson made a statement regarding the Town's concerns about the roads. Chairperson Smith noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if anyone from the public wished to speak. Patricia Rotunno of 118 West Haven Road, addressed the Board and asked where the emergency access road would be located. Ms. Rotunno expressed concern for the safety of her children and the other neighborhood children. Ms. Rotunno asked if the road would be chained or barricaded and if the Board could insure that the road would not become a shortcut for other vehicles. Mr. Weisburd stated that the road would be chained or barricaded to prevent other vehicles from gaining access. Mr. Weisburd stated that the road was for emergency vehicles only and that all other traffic would be prohibited. • Planning Board Minutes 18 April 4, 1995 Town Engineer Daniel Walker stated that the easement for the emergency access road would go across Helen DeGraff Is property and that an easement had not been secured at this time. Mr. Walker stated that it was up to Eco Village to keep people off that road but that if the neighbors saw others on the road that it could be reported to either Eco Village or the Sheriff's Department. Robert Mitchell of 153 West Haven Road, addressed the Board and stated that it was fine to have an emergency access road and asked if there was a way that this Planning Board could bind future Planning Boards from making this into a permanent road. Attorney Barney stated that he was not sure that the Town would want to bind it like that, as development grows, the need for that road to become a permanent road may become necessary at some point in the future. Mr. Mitchell stated that he was concerned about the character and quality of the stream corridor downhill from the existing pond which might be degraded since the runoff pattern would be changed. Mr. Walker stated that the retention area would be a small one and should not effect the hydrology significantly. Robert to learn wh stated that would need controlled. access road Rotunno of 118 West Haven Road, stated that he wanted ere the retention areas would be located. Mr. Rotunno the access road is not a Town Road and that Eco Village to police the road, how would access to that road be Mr. Rotunno stated that he did not want the emergency to become a thoroughfare. Erica Powers addressed the Board and stated that she teaches City Planning at Cornell University and was at this meeting with some of her students to learn about the project. Ms. Powers stated that the neighbors had some legitimate concerns and suggested that Eco Village try to work with the neighbors and that they may find that they have many of the same concerns. Ms. Powers stated that an additional concern would be the smaller vehicles that would trespass on that road, such as dirt bikes and snowmobiles, etc. Jay Jacobson of Eco Village, addressed the Board and stated that he agreed with the concerns of the neighbors and that the group was committed to working with the community. Mr. Jacobson stated that the were concerned about the safety of their children as well as the safety and welfare of the neighborhood children, and that he would like to work with the neighbors. There being no further discussion, the Chair closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion. 0 Planning Board Minutes IM April 4, 1995 Town Planner Jonathan Kanter addressed the Board and stated that staff had drafted a separate SEQR resolution for the Subdivision with the staff recommendation attached, a SEQR resolution for the Site Plan Approval with the staff recommendation attached, the Full Environmental Assessment Form which was prepared to cover both the Preliminary Subdivision Approval and the Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as well as a proposed resolution for the Preliminary Subdivision Approval, Mr. Kanter stated that the reason there was not a resolution drafted for Preliminary Site Plan was due to the time frame that the information was received. Mr. Kanter stated that the staff did not have sufficient time to thoroughly review the materials for site plan. Town Engineer Daniel Walker stated that he wanted to be sure that the Planning Board was satisfied with the location of the proposed entrance road. Meeting when the SLUD was Mr. Walker stated that at the Town Board approved, the Town Board asked that the Planning Board give some consideration to the location of the road. Board Member Eva Hoffmann stated that the issues regarding the roadway had already been addressed. The issues were the location of the road cut on Mecklenburg Road and the location of road as it bypasses the wetland. Mr. Walker stated that if the Planning Board was satisfied with this road, then the preliminary subdivision was ready for approval. Mr. Walker stated that he thought that the issue had been raised by Mr. Kanter at the last meeting and wanted to be sure that the Board had addressed the issue. Mr. Walker stated that he wanted it to be on record that the road had been discussed. There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion. MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Fred Wilcox: WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8 totalling 176.098 + /- acres gross (174.255 + /- acres net) , into three lots - "Parcel All consisting of 56.007 + /- acres net, "Parcel B" consisting of 33.929 + /— acres net (to be conveyed to the First Residents' Group), and "Parcel C" consisting of 84.318 + /- acres net; for the proposed development of the Eco Village Cohousing Cooperative, to be located on Parcel B referenced above. Special Land Use District (SLUD) and Residence District R -30, Eco Village at Ithaca Inc., Owner; First Residents' Group, Applicants; House Craft Builders, Agents, and • 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, and • 0 Planning Board "Minutes 20 April 4, 1995 3, The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 4, 1995, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Long Environmental Assessment Form part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by the Town Planning Staff, a Part II prepared by the Town Planning Staff, a Preliminary Plat - "ECO VILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE, Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, Ne York ", dated 3.21.95, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C. Engineers and Surveyors and signed by Allen T. Fulkerson, Licensed Land Surveyor, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed action, as proposed; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above - referenced action as proposed and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Smith, Cornell, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Wilcox, Bell. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. MOTION by Candace Cornell, WHEREAS: seconded by Gregory Bell: 1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8 totalling 176.098 + /- acres gross (174.255 + /- acres net) , into three lots - "Parcel All consisting of 56/007 + /- acres net, "Parcel B" consisting of 33.929 + /- acres net (to be conveyed to the First Residents' Group), and "Parcel C" consisting of 84.318 + /- acres net; for the proposed development of the Eco Village Cohousing Cooperative, to be located on parcel B referenced above. Special Land Use District (SLUD) and Residence District R -30, Eco Village at Ithaca, Inc., Owner; First Residents' Group, Applicant; House Craft Builders, Agent; and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has, on April 4, 1995, made a negative determination of environmental significance, and • r • Planning Board Minutes 21 April 4, 1995 3, The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at a Publi April 4, 1995, has reviewed and accepted as adegi Environmental Assessment Form Part I and information prepared by the applicant, a Part I= the planning staff, and additional information House Craft Builders, Agent. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Hearing on ate the Long supplemental prepared by prepared by That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8 totalling 176.098 + /- acres gross (174.255 + /- acres net) , into three lots - "Parcel All consisting of 56.007 + /- acres net, "Parcel B" consisting of 33.929 + /- acres net (to be conveyed to the First Residents' Group), and "Parcel C" consisting of 84.318 + /- acres net; for the proposed development of the Eco Village Cohousing Cooperative, to be located on Parcel B referenced above as shown on the Preliminary Plat, dated 3/21/95, labeled ECO VILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C. Engineers and Surveyors and signed by Allen T. Fulkerson, Licensed Land Surveyor, conditioned upon the following: 1. Should the need for a set aside of land for recreational purposes be determined when the remainder of the 176.098+/ - acre parcel is further subdivided or proposed as development the set aside will be based on the acreage of the original total parcel, 176.098 + /- acres, not on the acreage remaining after subdividing out the 33.929 + /- acres being conveyed to the First Residents' Group to be known as "Parcel B" (once Preliminary Subdivision has been granted). 2. The Planning Board has determined that the approximate location and alignment of the proposed road, as shown on the Preliminary Plat, is satisfactory, and that any significant changes to the location and alignment of the. road will be subject to further review and approval by the Planning Board, 3. Provisions, in writing, to guarantee future access to the entrance road for Parcels "A" and "C ". 4. Before construction of any improvements anywhere in Special Land Use District is commenced, requirements of Final Site Plan Checklist shall be met and Final Site the the Plan Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. 5. The applicant should provide the Planning Board with Letters of Intent from all owners of adjacent properties (Eco Village At Ithaca and Helen DeGraff) from which easements will have to be obtained for utilities and /or emergency access to the 33.929 + /- acre parcel. • • Planning Board Minutes 22 April 4, 1995 6, The Preliminary Subdivision Approval is subject to all of the conditions which pertains to Subdivision Approval shall be met prior to Final Subdivision Approval as set forth in Local Law No. 1 for the Year 1995, "Local Law To Amend the Zoning Ordinance to Provide A Special Land Use District (Limited Mixed Use) For The Eco Village Cohousing Cooperative ". There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - Smith, Cornell, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Wilcox, Bell. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Board Member Fred Wilcox made a motion to accept the SEQR Resolution for the Preliminary Site Plan, which was seconded by Board Member Herbert Finch. Town Attorney John Barney stated that he would recommend that the Board hold off on a decision regarding the SEQR for the Preliminary Site Plan approval until a resolution for the action is provided and considered by the Planning Board at a later meeting. Upon Attorney Barney's recommendation, Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Finch withdrew the MOTION, with the Board's concurrence. Mr. Kanter asked what the Planning Board wanted from the applicants in order to consider preliminary site plan for approval. Claudia Weisburd of House Craft Builders, asked for clarification of why the Preliminary Site Plan Approval was not going to be considered at tonight's meeting. Mr. Walker stated that there were several items which were on the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist which had not been provided by the applicants at this time. Mr. Walker stated that he still needed to see a stormwater design, final site design, pond design, engineering cost estimates, details construction plans and cost, no grading plans had been submitted, and he also needed to see an earthwork design before he would recommend approval of this project. Mr. Walker stated that he did not feel that the parking details were complete. The drainage off the parking lot is not complete. I I r I Planning Board Minutes 23 April 4, 1995 • Mr. Weisburd stated that "we got a long list of stuff from the Town saying what had to be there and everything on this list has been submitted in spades and you just can't keep on adding to this so these people are not going to live there for another year. You just can't do that. We got a long list, I went through this, JoAnn and I yelled back and forth on the phone, we submitted everything that she wanted, everything. You just can't come up at the last moment and say, sorry folks but you are going to have to go back to the drawing board and spend another $15,000, lose the building season, and nobody is going to live there for a year. You can't do that!" Claudia Weisburd stated, "especially after saying it was sufficient for preliminary. We went through this at the last meeting, specifically on the engineering items, and you (Dan Walker) said oh well there's a whole lot that still needs to be done for final but it is sufficient for preliminary and that is in the minutes. if Ms. Hoffmann stated that she had not seen the minutes but it sounded to her as though there was a misunderstanding about whether it is preliminary site plan approval or preliminary subdivision approval. Mr. Walker stated that the subdivision approval is fine. Mr. Walker stated that there was no problem with the preliminary subdivision approval. Ms. Hoffmann stated that the misunderstanding earlier was perhaps that Mr. Walker stated I asked for a lot more detail on the pond, the drainage swails, the information that came in, there was some additional detail added to the site plan, it was not adequate. Joan Bokaer stated that we are here for a site plan approval. We have been meeting... Ms. Cornell said, excuse me, unless you... The Minutes Page 18 and 19. Board Minutes are Chairperson adding anything Smith to this said he's until we not sure, are try to iron out you going to be exactly what was said and get it on the minutes, and then proceed from there. Ms. Cornell about this. said could we all see the minutes before we talk The Minutes Page 18 and 19. Board Minutes are being discussed were the March 7, (Page 18 and 19 of the March 7, attached hereto as Exhibit #7) 1995 minutes, 1995 Planning • 1 i Planning Board Minutes 24 April 4, 1995 ® Ms. Weisburd asked if the Board wanted her to read them. It says that Mr. Walker stated that he had concerns about the pond, blah, blah, blah. stated that the level of detail was fine for preliminary approval. Ms. Weisburd then gave a copy of the minutes to Ms. Cornell, Mr. Walker said, of what subdivision or site plan? Ms. Weisburd responded, it doesn't say subdivision or site plan, but it talks about the pond and it talks about... Mr. Walker stated that he was talking about subdivision. Ms. Cornell asked for some time so that the Board could review the minutes. Mr. Walker stated that this is the Board's responsibility, right now. I will not sign off for preliminary site plan approval myself as Town Engineer until I see more details for the structures according to the preliminary site plan checklists that we have. This Board has the authority to either approve or not approve preliminary site plan, they've already done the preliminary subdivision. It's this Board's responsibility to make the approval, I will not recommend site plan approval until I have seen more detail. If you wish to go ahead without that recommendation,. that's fine, that's your (the Board's) choice. Ms. Hoffmann stated that it doesn't appear that at that point we were talking about subdivision approval. Mr. Walker stated my main concern with this pond is we have a life safety issue here. We have a Class B pond above residences which is going to be I think about 14 feet high of embankment. I can't tell because I don't have plans on this detail. I don't think the pond is needed for this first phase. so between preliminary and final we would Ms. Weisburd said, which is what you did say at the last meeting, and therefore what you said was so we will talk about negotiating the size of the pond because maybe it only needs to be for the first phase and so between preliminary and final we would come up with a time design. Mr. Walker stated, have you come up with a storm water management plan for the first phase. That's what I want to see. Mr. Weisburd said, we come up with a storm water management plan for the project, which is what was asked for and I'm happy to go through and have this thing conditional on having the design get checked off by the Town Engineer, What I'm not happy doing is going back now and we're back not much further than Mr. Jonson with . his project because we're first submitting things for preliminary site plan approval at this stage nine months later. And there's all kinds of possible combinations for this, you could do it for three phases for one phase we took the worst case scenario and Planning Board Minutes 25 April 4, 1995 • that's what we did it for. lesser case scenario, we beg approval with the conditio redesigned pond to meet-the need that approval. We can't attorney general without it. i And yes, we could come back with a the Board to give us the preliminary n that we will come back with a Town Engineer's satisfaction but we even submit our offering plan to the Chairperson Smith asked, could you give us a few minutes to read this. Ms. Weisburd gave Ms. Cornell what she felt was the rest of the relevant pages of information. Ms. Cornell asked, are there any more pages? Ms. Weisburd stated maybe you want to xerox the page just before that because it had the whole discussion about the pond. Ms. Cornell said, but then we get to read it. Ms. Weisburd said, yes. Ms. Cornell then made copies of Pages 18 and 19 for the rest of the Board Members to read. Mr. Walker read item (j) on the preliminary site plan checklist which reads: "Existing and proposed site topography represented by contour lines with intervals as required by the Planning Board, but not to exceed 5 (five) feet, including a grading plan describing the volumes of cut and fill materials and their composition, and including elevations of proposed buildings, signage, lighting, and other features." Mr. Walker stated that the checklist is very specific. Chairperson Smith stated that he felt that they had enough time to talk it over and try to reach some sort of conclusion of what we can do. Mr. Smith stated that we pushed to get this project on the agenda for tonight as it was, and have been able to get to the SEQR reviews at least and those sort of things. But I think the preliminary site plan review at this time given the fact that the staff has not had the time to put together a resolution, I think we are going to have to table it, or at least address it at the next meeting. I think we can probably get them on the Agenda for the April 18, 1995 Planning Board meeting. At that time, if Dan doesn't get further information that he may need, we may end up having to place a number of conditions on the preliminary approval if that is so passed. Chairperson Smith stated that he thought that was about the only solution we have at this time given the late time is to try to put it off until the next meeting which is just two weeks away. Planning Board Minutes 26 April 4, 1995 Board Member Gregory Bell stated that if the Board does not address the issue of whether or not they do have to do all of the drainage study for preliminary then the Board is in fact wasting two weeks. Chairperson Smith responded, that the Board was not wasting two weeks because the idea was that if there were substantial drainage questions that had to be addressed but were of such magnitude that they did not want to invest the cost into it, that it would be reasonable to make them conditions of the preliminary approval and that way they have something that they can go with to funding sources or whatever and have some assurance that if they do indeed meet those requirements they have a preliminary approval that will lead them into final presumably. Mr. Bell stated that he thought that the Board owed them a commitment to be able to answer that critical question before they leave. Ms. Cornell asked, the critical question being "what "? Mr. Bell responded is the Town going put that sort of condition on them. Chairperson Smith stated that would depended on if in the next two weeks Mr. Walker gets all of the information he needs, then there may not be a need for many preliminary conditions. Chairperson Smith stated that he hears what Mr. Weisburd has said, and he heard what Mr. Walker stated that he would need, there may be a middle ground that they both could meet on in the next two weeks. Chairperson Smith stated that he did not want to necessarily say that the Board is going to put these conditions on you in two weeks, when they may not be required. If it is decided between Mr. Walker and Mr. Weisburd that there is a smaller solution that is available that they can meet and come up with the appropriate drawings, Chairperson Smith stated that he did not see any reason now to say that we are going to put certain conditions on them. Ms. Cornell asked if there was a clear enough message of what that Board wants. Attorney John Barney stated that he assumed that it was the position of the Board, as he understands what is being said at this meeting, he does not wish to sit here at 11:45 at night and try to compose a resolution that has considerable significance with this project. Attorney Barney stated that he would think that between now and April 18, 1995 that the normal process would occur and the Town staff would prepare a resolution and that resolution would contain in it conditions that as while the preliminary approval is given the final approval would be subject to certain things • happening including the submission of the required drainage information. Attorney Barney stated that exactly what that condition would be, is subject to some discussion between now and \ \ a • • Planning Board Minutes 27 April 4, 1995 April 18th to work out between the Town and House Craft Builders what would be appropriate at this phase of this development. Ms. Cornell asked if Attorney Barney was saying that a $15,000.00 is a condition for final. Attorney Barney stated that whatever study is required, which may not have to be a $15,000,00 study, would be a condition for final, normally required for preliminary, which is Mr. Walker's point. Attorney Barney stated that either through misunderstanding or through a response at this same hour at night, not thinking completely through what the appropriate response should be, the applicants may have been mislead a little bit. Attorney Barney stated that he did not know which, but we now need to get on with how to deal with the matter at hand, which would be a conditional preliminary approval. Attorney Barney stated that the conditions needed to be worked out a little bit between now and the next Planning Board Meeting on April 18th, so that the condition is articulated so that everyone understands and knows what needs to be completed for final. Mr. Weisburd stated that he thought that he understood and that he thought that was alright. Mr. Weisburd stated that the one think that he would ask you, is that the understanding be that they would not be required to submit new information between now and the 18th. We would need only to go back and forth on the conditions for final approval. Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that one recurring thing that was in the minutes discussion for March 7, 1995 was the question of whether the pond, for instance, would even be required as part of the drainage plan and from anything Mr. Kanter had heard that had not been answered. Mr. Kanter stated that was one good example of something that would have to be answered between now and the next meeting in terms of being able to know then how to approach the further drainage studies level of detail that would need to be done. Mr. Weisburd stated that scoping out the level of detail that would need to be done for the final approval is fine, what is not fine is to have to, at this point, do more engineering work, submit it and then go start again the clock for this approval. If we can get an agreed upon conditional approval that says this is what will be submitted for final then that would be okay. And if that's your understanding and the Board's understanding. Attorney Barney stated to Mr. Weisburd that he did not want to be put in a box either. Attorney Barney stated that was also his understanding that with this caveat, that in order to reach a level of understanding as to what those conditions may be, may require the submission of additional information, not broad engineering types of information. Attorney Barney stated that some discussion is needed as to whether or not the pond is required, for example. Attorney Barney stated that was the level of discussion that needs Planning Board Minutes 28 April 4, 1995 to occur between Mr. Weisburd, Mr. Walker, Mr. Kanter, and himself. This would allow everyone to try to reach a level of agreement. Attorney Barney stated that he did not want to agree to Mr. Weisburd's statement and then have it thrown back in his face at the next Planning Board meeting that he had said something that The Resident's Group was entitled to subdivision approval or site plan approval on this basis. Attorney Barney stated that he thought that everyone should want to try to articulate what those conditions are and if in the process of trying to articulate those conditions we need to develop some information, we need to develop that information and have it available by the meeting on April 18th, Claudia Weisburd stated that they can not develop more drainage analysis for the 18th, we can not do that. Ms. Weisburd stated that it read in the minutes of March 7, 1995 that the level of detail on the pond was adequate for preliminary approval. Ms. Weisburd stated that if the condition were that more detail is needed and the analysis for a smaller pond for their runoff just for this project only, there's no problem with that. There would be a significant problem with, well in order to evaluate which pond it is going to be we need more drainage analysis, that we can not do in the time frame you're talking about. Ms. Weisburd stated that she thought that it was really not reasonable or fair to ask for it after what happened at the last meeting. Town Engineer Daniel Walker asked what the time frame was for wanting the final approval. Jerold Weisburd responded that they would like to have everything submitted to the Town by early May. Mr. Walker asked if they would have, by May, a permit from DEC to build the pond. Claudia Weisburd responded, yes we will, or an exemption. Jerold Weisburd stated, or it would not be necessary. Mr. Walker asked if they would have that permit. Mr. Walker continued by stating that if they had not submitted an application by DEC by today, they would not have the permit by May and that he guarantees that. Jerold Weisburd stated that, as with their engineer today and had c Mr. Weisburd continued and stated calendar that the work under, not a 2 had mentioned in a previous meeting, was not saying that they were going a matter of fact, they had met jone over the DEC guidelines. that the DEC has a 45 day -year calendar that Mr. Walker Mr. Weisburd stated that he to go that route. Planning Board Minutes 29 April 4, 1995 Mr. Walker stated to the Weisburd's to have their engineer meet with him and that he would discuss the schedule with him. Mr. Walker stated that he wanted an engineer's cost estimate, which had not been provided. Mr. Weisburd stated that there was no requirement for an engineer's cost estimate. Mr. Walker responded that there was. Mr. Weisburd stated that "it says that a cost estimate, preferably an engineer, and I would say that having built several roads for the Town and built several sewer lines in the Town with my own hands, I am as qualified as an engineer. And I would take great issue with somebody saying somebody that merely has an engineer's stamp as opposed to an architect's stamp and specific experience is more qualified. The regulations don't say it, I stand on that. And I would like from this Board, at least the understanding that we're not going to submit more information. That we're willing to accept a conditional preliminary approval but that we don't have to go back to the drawing board again and then wait another 30 days and another 30 days cause it just kills the project. And yes, you can do that and it's in your power, but there's an enormous amount of energy that's been invested here and ` I think it's really unfair to these people to do that." Board Member Gregory Bell asked if it was correct that Mr. Weisburd was saying that he did not want do these steps at this stage, for preliminary. Mr. Bell stated that Mr. Weisburd was not saying that he did not want to do those steps for a final. Jerold Weisburd responded that was correct and that they want to have preliminary site plan approval and preliminary subdivision approval that they can go to the Attorney General with because they are going to require at least 6 or 8 weeks before we get that back as well. Mr. Weisburd stated that all of these things tumble one after another. • We can go to them with conditional preliminary approval, we can't go to them with what we've got now. Mr. Bell stated that Mr. Weisburd was talking about getting the cooperative approval, and asked if that could be done with preliminary approval. Mr. Weisburd responded, that's correct. Attorney Barney stated that he thought that "everyone understood each other's position. It is going to be up the staff to make the decisions. Attorney Barney suggested setting up a meeting with Mr. Kanter, Mr. Walker, House Craft Builders, and himself as soon as possible. • Ms. Cornell asked if it was clarified as to who was going to do what. I ' ' i t 0 Planning Board Minutes 30 April 4, 1995 is Mr. Weisburd stated that the meeting should include their engineer. Mr. Walker stated that they were not going to receive final approval by May. Attorney Barney stated that everyone try to deal with preliminary approvals first. Mr. Walker stated that final approval would not be given based on the information he has been given. Chairperson Smith asked Mr. Weisburd if there was anything else that was needed by the Board at this meeting. Mr. Weisburd responded that they were asking that the Board agree to the understanding that they not be required to work out new information. That they are going to be required to accept conditions that we will provide new information. Mr. Weisburd stated that there was a huge difference. Mr. Weisburd stated that they have nothing if they have to go back now and first go to the engineers and start again and do more submissions. Town Planner Jonathan this matter for continued period, and do it. Board Member Gregory what they were asking for. Mr. Walker stated th tonight if they wanted. Kanter recommended discussion on the Bell asked why the at the Board could that the Board place April 18th meeting, Board could not do approve the project Board Member Fred Wilcox stated that he thought it would be a mistake to sit here and say that we (the Board) guarantee you that we do not want anything from you for the next two weeks. Mr. Wilcox stated that he thought that the intent was not to want anything that is substantive over the next two weeks. Board Member Candace Cornell made a motion that the Board take Mr. Kanter's suggestion and put Eco Village on the next meeting, as is, and it's been discussed already what the Town is asking House Craft Builders to do and talk to the Town engineer about. Chairperson Smith stated that it had been said several times that the Board is not against the idea of preliminary approval with conditions. Claudia Weisburd asked, "And what are we going home with, I don't get it. Planning Board Minutes 31 Chairperson Smith responded that they were with the SEQR for preliminary subdivision resolution for preliminary subdivision approval, have when they came in tonight. April 4, 1995 leaving the meeting approval and the which they did not Ms. Cornell stated that they also have an urgency to make an appointment with the Town staff first thing in the morning to figure out what needs to be done. Claudia Weisburd asked, "And if he says I want a drainage analysis, and I want this, and I want that, and I want the other thing before preliminary, that's within his.." Ms. Cornell stated that Mr. Walker will be reasonable. Ms. Weisburd responded, "so he makes a shorter list, and he wants all that before preliminary, and it's going take us a month to get it." Attorney Barney asked Ms. Weisburd not to push the Board. Attorney Barney then stated, "We'll see if we can work it out, okay." Ms. Weisburd responded, "I will." Motion by Candace Cornell to adjourn the decision until the April 18, 1995 Planning Board Meeting. The Motion was seconded by Herbert Finch. The Board concurred with the adjournment by a unanimous vote. Chairperson Smith closed tonight's discussion regarding the Preliminary Site Plan and Preliminary Subdivision Approvals at 11:59 p.m.. Discussion continued at the April of Preliminary Site 18, 1995 Planning Plan Approval will be Board Meeting, AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 21, 1995. There was no action on the Minutes of March 21, 1995, because the Board had not had an appropriate amount of time to review the draft provided to them prior to the meeting. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS. There being no other business for the Board to discuss at this time, Chairperson Smith closed this segment of the meeting. • • Planning Board Minutes ADJOURNMENT 32 April 4, 1995 Upon MOTION, Chairperson Smith declared the April 4, 1995 Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 12:09 p.m. 4/10/95. Respectfully submitted, Starr Hays, Recording Secretary, Town of Ithaca Planning Board.