HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1995-06-27FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Clerk
JUNE 27, 1995
C�
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in special session on
Tuesday, June 27, 1995, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street,
Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairperson Stephen Smith, Eva Hoffmann, Herbert Finch,
James Ainslie, Fred Wilcox, Gregory Bell, Jonathan Kanter
(Town Planner), George Frantz (Assistant Town Planner),
JoAnn Cornish (Planner II), Daniel Walker (Town
Engineer), John Barney (Town Attorney).
ALSO PRESENT: C. Hale, Bob Chiang, Scott Whitham, J. Schimmenti,
Pat Classen, Eliz Classen, Dick Classen, Doria
Higgins, Larry Hoffman, Claudia & Jerry Weisburd,
Nancy Brown, Mary Webber, Sara Pines, Jaredn Jones,
Jay S. Jacobson, ? Smith (Illegible), Steven
Gaarder, David Herrick, Joan Bokaer, Sandy Wold,
Karen Knudson, Bill Webber.
Chairperson Smith
declared the
meeting duly
opened at 7:30
CONSIDERATION
p.m. and accepted for
the record
the Secretary's
Affidavit
of
Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in Town
Hall and the Ithaca Journal on June 19, 1995 and June 21, 1995,
respectively, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by
Mail of said Notice 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, and upon the
appl- icants and /or agents, as appropriate,. on June 21, 1995.
(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 were no persons present to be heard. Chairperson Smith
closed this segment of the meeting.
PUBLIC
HEARING:
CONSIDERATION
OF PRELIMINARY AND
FINAL SITE
PLAN APPROVAL AND
RECOMMENDATION TO
THE ZONING BOARD OF
APPEALS
FOR
SPECIAL APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED MAPLE AVENUE PARKING AND SITE
IMPROVEMENTS ON TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 63 -1 -5, LOCATED AT
120 MAPLE AVENUE, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30, THE MAPLE. AVENUE
PROJECT IS INTENDED TO IMPROVE AND EXPAND THE EXISTING PARKING LOT
WHICH SERVED THE MAPLE AVENUE FACILITY. MOST OF THE PROJECT SITE
IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY OF ITHACA ON CITY TAX PARCEL NOS. 65 -2 -2
AND 65 -3 -2.1 THROUGH 2.4. CORNELL UNIVERSITY, OWNER /APPLICANT;
SCOTT WHITHAM, AGENT.
Planning Board Minutes
2
June 27, 1995
Chairperson Smith declared the above -noted Public Hearing duly
opened at 7:35 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public
Hearings and posted and published and as noted above.
Scott Whitham of Cornell
University addressed the
Board and
stated that he
was requesting preliminary and final
site plan
approval for the
Maple Avenue
Parking Area improvements.
(A copy
of the proposed
Maple Avenue
Site Plan is attached
hereto as
Exhibit
#2)
Mr. Whitham, stated that there is a NYSEG substation located on
the property. Mr. Whitham stated that the basic intent of the
project is to expand the parking lot and give some separation
between the lot and Maple Avenue by planting some trees to act as
a buffer. Mr. Whitham stated that as part of the site plan
improvements, the intent was to move the existing bus shelter to a
dedicated pull -off for the purpose of picking up and dropping off
riders. Mr. Whitham stated that the current system for the buses
is somewhat awkwardly placed on the site. Mr. Whitham stated that
there would be improved drainage, new paving, new lighting, a new
asphalt sidewalk along the side of the building and there would be
a new sidewalk along the edge of the parking lot to the edge of the
bus pull -off. Mr. Whitham stated that at some time in the future,
the Town was planning a sidewalk along the North side of Maple
Avenue and this walk would be the beginning of some future system.
Board Member Eva Hoffmann asked Mr. Whitham where the Town
boundary was on the site plan.
Mr. Whitham showed the line to the Board.
Assistant Town Planner George Frantz stated that the parking
lot itself is in the City of Ithaca.
Mr. Whitham stated that on the portion of the property in the
Town, there would be some plantings and grading being done. Mr.
Whitham stated that there was provided to the Board a plantings
list, which included some plantings on the slope.
Chairperson Smith noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if there was anyone present who wished to speak. No one
spoke. Chairperson Smith closed the Public Hearing and brought the
matter back to the Board for further discussion.
Board Member Fred Wilcox stated that there was a six -foot rise
between the City and the Town and asked how the applicant would
mitigate the sudden change in elevation.
Mr. Whitham stated that they would excavate, and with what is
on the site make the grade more even.
Board Member Wilcox stated that he wanted to visit the portion
Planning Board Minutes
3
June 27, 1995
of the site that is within the Town of Ithaca and was unable to
because it had a locked gate which prevents any entrance.
Mr. Whitham stated that
Avenue and using that area as
is why it is locked.
the City has been working on Maple
their equipment storage area, which
Board Member Gregory Bell asked to see where the coal trucks
will be going into the site. Mr. Whitham showed the Board the
route the trucks would be taking. Mr. Bell asked if there was any
extra width in the parking lot so that trucks can get through.
Mr. Whitham stated that the width was 24 feet which is a
little more than the standard width.
Chairperson Smith asked how often the trucks came into the
site.
Mr.
Whitham
stated
that
they
were most
busy in the
Fall,
primarily
in the
morning,
but
also
off and on
throughout the
day.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if there would be a retaining
wall.
Mr. Whitham stated that there would be only a slope and that
the lot would not need any retaining at all.
Board Member Bell stated that it seemed as though the handicap
spaces were not appropriately located for bus users.
Mr. Whitham stated that there would be dual locations of
handicapped spaces so that they would be more convenient to the bus
shelter.
Chairperson Smith asked if there would be parking
restrictions.
Mr. Whitham stated that the issue of restrictions is currently
being discussed at the Cornell Transportation Department and that
he was unsure of how the lot was going to be labeled or tagged.
Mr. Whitham stated that Cornell Information Technologies (CIT) was
going to be working on building reconstruction at 120 Maple Avenue.
Whatever CIT has for parking restrictions and /or limitations at
their current location will probably determine the parking
designation on this lot.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if additional parking for people
other than those that work in this building was considered when
determining the number of parking spaces.
Mr.
Whitham stated
that
it
was intended
primarily for
people
that are
working in
the
building,
but
other services
were
Planning Board Minutes 4 June 27, 1995
considered as well.
Town Planner Jonathan Kanter asked Mr. Whitham to talk more
about what the plans were for the Maple Avenue Building other
than CIT.
Mr. Whitham
stated
that they were considering
an
increase of
46 parking spaces
with
the consideration of
the known
changes.
Chairperson Smith stated that this will be considered
primarily an employee parking lot.
Mr. Whitham concurred.
Chairperson Smith asked if the number of plantings indicated
were voluntary or City of Ithaca requirements.
Mr. Whitham stated that the number of plantings are
approximately doubled from what was required to form a better
buffer.
Board Member Bell stated that on a couple of drawings there
are utility poles located and from those poles are radii which are
not labeled. Mr. Bell asked what those radii were.
Mr. Whitham responded that those were guide wires.
Board Member Hoffmann stated, referring to Page 1 of the Short
Environmental Assessment Form, that question number 8 was not
filled out. Ms. Hoffmann stated that regarding questions number
10, she felt that there should be more land uses listed.
Board Member Wilcox stated that he had a concern that question
number 11 indicates that the proposed action does NOT involve
permit, approval, or funding, now or ultimately from any other
governmental agency. Mr. Wilcox stated that he had read that an
additional approval was needed from the Town.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that question number 11
of the EAF should be changed to YES, for Special Approval by the
Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Frantz stated that all of the
surrounding land uses and features are considered educational to
Cornell University,
The Board agreed to amend the EAF to reflect an answer to
Question 8 to read: "YES ". That Question 10 should indicate:
"Residential, Commercial and Industrial Land Uses ". That Question
11 should indicate: "YES, Special Approval - ZBA".
There appearing to be no further discussion, Chairperson Smith
asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion.
Planning Board Minutes 5 June 27, 1995
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Eva Hoffmann:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval and recommendation to the Zoning Board of
Appeals for Special Approval for the proposed Maple Avenue
Parking and Site Improvements on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
63 -1 -5, located at 120 Maple Avenue, Residence District R -30.
The Maple Avenue project is intended to improve and expand the
existing parking lot which serves the Maple Avenue facility.
Most of the project site is located within the City of Ithaca
on City -Tax Parcel Nos. 65 -3 -3 and 65 -3 -2.1 through 2.4.
Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Scott Whitham, Agent, and
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 Site Plan
Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on June 27, 1995, has
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I submitted by the applicant and amended
at this meeting, and a Part II prepared by the Town Planning
Department, a site plan packet entitled "Maple Avenue Parking
& Site Improvements" consisting of 9 drawings, including
Drawing S -9 revised to show existing utility easements to
NYSEG Corp., prepared by Cornell University Planning, Design
and Construction and dated June 27, 1995, and other
application materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative
determination of environmental significance with respect to
the proposed site plan;
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,
Environmental Assessment Form, nor
Statement will be required.
therefore, neither
an Environmental
a Full
Impact
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Finch, Ainslie, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Planning Board Minutes 6 June 27, 1995
MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by James Ainslie:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval and recommendation to the Zoning Board of
Appeals for Special Approval for the proposed Maple Avenue
Parking and Site Improvements on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
63 -1 -5, located at 120 Maple Avenue, Residence District R -30.
The Maple Avenue project is intended to improve and expand the
existing parking lot which serves the Maple Avenue facility.
Most of the project site is located within the City of Ithaca
on City Tax Parcel Nos. 65 -3 -3 and 65 -3 -2.1 through 2.4.
Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Scott Whitham, Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted
Action
for
which the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board,
acting as
Lead Agency in environmental review,
has, on June 27,
1995,
made a
negative determination of
environmental significance
with
regard to Preliminary and
Final Site Plan
Approval,
and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on June 27, 1995, has
reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I submitted by the applicant and amended
at this meeting, and a Part II prepared by the Town Planning
Department, a site plan packet entitled "Maple Avenue Parking
& Site Improvements" consisting of 9 drawings, including
Drawing S -9 revised to show existing utility easements to
NYSEG Corp., prepared by Cornell University Planning, Design
and Construction and dated June 27, 1995, and other
application materials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain
requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as
shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists,
having determined from the materials presented that such
waivers will result in neither a significant alteration of the
purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or
implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final
Site Plan Approval to the proposed site plan entitled "Maple
Avenue Parking & Site Improvements" consisting of 9 drawings,
including Drawing S -9 revised to show existing utility
easements to NYSEG Corp., prepared by Cornell University
Planning, Design and Construction and dated June 27, 1995, and
other application materials, subject to the following
conditions:
a. submission for approval by the Town Engineer of detailed
Planning Board Minutes 7 June 27, 1995
sizing and final material specifications of all required
materials;
b. submission of an original or mylar copy of the final site
plan amended to show corrected Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
Number, as approved, to be retained by the Town of
Ithaca, said final site plan to be signed and sealed by
a registered engineer, landscape architect, or architect;
C, there being
provided to the Town Planner, prior
to final
signing of site
plan, the
resolution adopted by
the City
of Ithaca
Planning and
Development Board
granting
approval for that portion
of the project in the
City of
Ithaca, substantially as
presented to the Town
Planning
Board;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That the Planning Board, in making recommendation to the
Zoning Board of Appeals, determines the following:
a. there is a need for the proposed use in the
proposed location, as demonstrated by the
applicant;
b. the existing and probable future character of
the neighborhood will not be adversely
affected as a result of the proposed project;
C, the specific proposed change in land use as a
result of the proposed project is in
accordance with a comprehensive plan of
development for the Town of Ithaca.
2. That the Planning Board reports to the Zoning Board of Appeals
its recommendation that the aforementioned request for Special
Approval be approved.
Board Member Bell asked if there should be language added to
the resolution that states that the majority of this project is
within the City of Ithaca so that if there are any conflicts, there
would be a way to resolve them.
Town Attorney John Barney stated that
dealing with the part of the parcel that is
Attorney Barney stated that the Board could
if there is any significant changes to the
City, then the applicant would have to re -a
for further review.
the resolution would be
in the Town of Ithaca.
add something that says
portion of land in the
ppear before this Board
Planning Board Minutes 8 June 27, 1995
Town Engineer Daniel Walker asked how many yards of earth
would be removed from the site.
Mr. Whitham stated that approximately 4,000 cubic yards of
earth would be moved.
Town
and if a
purpose.
Mr.
orchards
Engineer
Walker asked where
the fill
would be
going to
fill plan
had been prepared
and /or
submitted
for that
Whitham stated that the fill would be moved to the
area.
Town Engineer Walker stated that they may need a fill permit
for the Orchards. Mr. Walker stated that if the applicant had
presented a disposal site at this meeting, it would not be a
problem.
Mr. Whitham stated that the contractor will be removing only
soil and gravel. A specific location of where the earth will be
put in the orchards has not been worked out at this time.
Town Engineer Walker asked that a condition be added to the
approval that a sedimentation plan be provided to the Town Engineer
for review and approval prior to disposal of any fill material
within the Town of Ithaca.
The following condition was added to the resolution:
d, prior to disposal of any fill material in the Town, a
site plan for such disposal, together with an appropriate
erosion and sediment control plan, be presented to and
approved by the Town Engineer.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith declared
the matter of the Maple Avenue Parking and Site Improvement duly
closed at 9:45 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 61 1995.
MOTION by James Ainslie, seconded by Eva Hoffmann:
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board Meeting of June 6, 1995, be and hereby are approved with the
following correction:
Planning
Board
Minutes 9
June 27, 1995
That,
Hoffmann
on
that
Page 14, Paragraph
it would be better
3, which reads:
if the DEIS and
"Board Member
the newspaper
articles
This
would be
said the "panoramic view
was changed to read:
better if the DEIS and
of South Hill" while driving."
"Board Member Hoffmann that it
the newspaper articles said the
"panoramic
view
from South Hill" while driving."
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION' OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL SITE
PLAN APPROVAL AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FOR
SIGN VARIANCES FOR THE PROPOSED BRIDGES OF ITHACA, AN ADULT
RESIDENTIAL CARE AND ADULT DAY CARE FACILITY, IN AN R -30 RESIDENCE
DISTRICT, TAX 'PARCEL NO, 31 -4 -2, LOCATED AT 704 FIVE MILE DRIVE.
A USE VARIANCE FOR THE PROPOSED USE WAS GRANTED BY THE ZONING BOARD
OF APPEALS ON MAY 10, 1995. THE PROPOSAL CONSISTS OF CONVERSION OF
AN EXISTING 2,212± SQUARE FOOT SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENCE AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,956+ SQUARE FOOT ADDITION ON A 2.74± ACRE
PARCEL, RALPH'.BACON, OWNER; DENMARK DEVELOPMENT, INC., APPLICANT;
PATRICIA AND ELIZABETH CLASSEN, AGENT,
Chairperson Smith declared the above -noted Public Hearing duly
opened at 9:48 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public
Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
Patricia Classen of Bridges of Ithaca, addressed the Board and
stated that Bridges of Ithaca is a residential adult home for
approximately 12 to 15 adults. Ms. Classen stated that the reason
the "Old 100" house was chosen was because of the old charm and
character, which they do not wish to change, but to add on to. Ms.
Classen stated that the addition would be on the south side of the
building. Ms. Classen stated that they were in hopes of creating
a smaller atmosphere in the house as opposed to most adult homes
which are usually larger in size without the home -like feeling.
Town Attorney John Barney asked if Patricia and Elizabeth
Classen currently owned the property.
Ms. Classen responded that they have a purchase offer with a
closing date.
Attorney Barney asked who the present owner is.
Ms. Classen stated that the current owner is Ralph Bacon, and
that she had spoken with him on the telephone and he did not feel
that he needed to be present at this meeting. Ms. Classen stated
Planning Board Minutes 10 June 27, 1995
that
he was unable to sell the property for a long time due
to the
. location
ramp designed to
and the proximity of the bus garage and the Town of
Ithaca
vehicles,
that
which made it very undesirable for most people
for a
residential
water supply.
dwelling. Ms. Classen stated that the cost for
upkeep
on a
building
like this would be too costly for most residential
homes.
herself
while
Chairperson Smith asked what the function of the house itself
would be.
Ms. Classen stated -that the existing house would be for the
kitchen, dining room, leisure area, and maybe a library -type quiet
area.
Chairperson Smith asked if the interior of the house as it
currently exists would be altered.
Ms. Classen stated that there was only one wall that would be
changed, and it is not an original wall. Ms. Classen stated that
the existing house would stay almost exactly the same with the
exception of levels of floors and lighting improvements.
Board Member Gregory Bell asked what was meant by changing the
level of the floors.
Ms, Classen
stated that there would
be
a two to three inch
ramp designed to
make going from one room
to
another easier.
Board
Member James
Ainslie
stated
that there is
an artesian
well on the
property and
that
there was
an excellent
Bacon and
water supply.
Ms. Classen stated that the well would not be disturbed
either.
Chairperson Smith asked if there would be any drainage into
the culvert.
Ms. Classen stated that drainage related issues would need to
be answered by Dick Classen,
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 further discussion.
Board
Member Eva
Hoffmann, referring
to the
difference in
floor heights,
stated
that while she was visiting
the site today
she met Mr.
Bacon and
he had invited her in
to see
the house, and
she did see
the difference in floor heights
and misstepped
on it
herself
while
looking
at the
house.
Ms. Classen stated that the ramp between floors is a
Planning Board Minutes 11 June 27, 1995
regulation of Social Services,
Larry Hoffman, an architect familiar with the project,
addressed the Board and stated that they knew they were changing
the use of the property. In siting the new building, it was done
in a way that does not interfere with the most beneficial and
critical and lovely views of the building that exists. Mr. Hoffman
stated that they did not attempt to match the new building addition
to the existing building, but they have something that is going to
be very compatible to the existing building. Mr. Hoffman stated
that it is a very nice old building, that it had been for sale for
quite some time, and he sees this project as a way to revitalize
the building and have it taken care of for a long time. Mr.
Hoffman stated that all of the nice features of the site; the well,
the good views of the property and the site problems are solved by
this particular project. Mr. Hoffman stated that he was here to
speak in favor of the project.
Dick Classen addressed the Board and stated that there was a
question about drainage earlier in the meeting. Mr. Classen stated
that the drainage goes southerly across the lawn. Mr. Classen
stated that the Town did not put in a culvert because there is no
road there, however, they did put a line under the driveway back in
the peoples yard. Mr. Classen stated that they probably will not
run much water under there, they will run the water straight south
to a ditch that is on the southern end of the property.
Town Planner Jonathan Kanter asked Mr. Classen to discuss the
new driveway that was added just off Bostwick Road.
Mr, Classen stated that the driveway that the County added was
located on Bostwick Road, and the owner had to say where he wanted
that driveway located and the location on Bostwick Road is what was
decided. Mr. Classen stated that the grade where the building
leaves the pavement is the same grade as the finished floor of the
house. Mr. Classen stated that the grade of the new addition will
be the same as the existing structure. Mr. Classen stated that
there would be a level approach from Bostwick Road into and out of
the lot for easy access.
Town Planner Kanter stated that
the County is
redoing
the
intersection of
Bostwick Road
and Five
Mile Drive, which will
be
completed soon.
Mr. Kanter
stated
that because
of that
the
driveway needed
to be changed
and the
Bostwick Road
intersection
will become a
straight "T"
intersection which
will be
an
improvement.
Board
Member Ainslie asked if
the applicant
would be removing
the small
building located to the
south of
the building.
Planning Board Minutes 12 June 27, 1995
Mr. Classen stated that the small building would be used for
storage.
Board Member Ainslie stated that there would be a Town park
located below the church which makes this an excellent use and
location for this purpose.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she had seen an area which
looked as though it was an old driveway that had been reseeded
while she was on the site.
Mr. Classen stated that Mr. Bacon had just reseeded the whole
driveway.
Board Member Ainslie asked where the name "Bridges of Ithaca"
came from.
Elizabeth Classen addressed the Board and stated that they
were shooting names around and decided they liked the sound of
Bridges.
Board Member Herbert Finch asked if the applicants anticipated
any other changes to the existing building other than to remove one
wall and the change in the floor levels. Mr. Finch asked if they
were planning to change the historic character of the building.
Patricia Classen stated that there would be some upgrading in
the lighting system.
Mr. Classen stated that they would also need to make three
exits, 44 inches wide, so they will be enlarging 2 existing exits
and replacing a window to make into one of those exits. Mr.
Classen stated that they will also be. adding a slab on the
northwest corridor to accommodate two of those exit doors to
satisfy Department of Social Services (DSS) requirements.
Board
Member Bell
asked
what
the material of the door would be
and would
they
match
the
existing
doors
and
house.
Mr. Classen stated that. the doors would be something with
windows in them, but have not actually picked out the doors yet..
Board Member Bell asked if the door needed to be steel.
MrI�Classen responded that the doors do not need to be steel,
although they prefer that they be steel so that they do not warp
because a door that large would be a problem door if it were
wooden.
Patricia
Classen stated
that they
would be painted white so
that it would
match the look
of the building.
Planning Board Minutes 13 June 27, 1995
Mr. Classen stated that they are governed by an Energy Code
and would have to make sure they seal and stay that way. Mr.
Classen stated that there is also ,a requirement for railing along
the front of the smaller porch along Five Mile Drive to keep people
from falling off the porch. Mr. Classen stated that they will have
to upgrade the heating system in the existing building as well.
Board
Member
Hoffmann
asked if
they would
be
adding one or
both of the
doors
indicated
by the
new stoop on
the
Site Plan,
Mr. Classen stated that they would be adding both doors.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she did not remember there
being a door to the small porch.
Mr. Classen stated that
the
door
shown in the site
plan is the
door that will be replacing
the
existing
window on the
porch.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that the window was beside the
porch if she remembered correctly.
Mr.
Classen
stated that
half
of
the window was beside the
porch and
half of
the window
is on
the
porch.
Board
door that is
Member Hoffmann
directly
asked
in back of
if,
the
of the other
main entrance
two doors, the
is going to be
enlarged.
Is there an additional
existing
door as
well.
Mr. Classen stated that the doors will need to be enlarged to
44 inches, and the additional door is an existing door to the
dining room which will have to be replaced also.
Board Member Hoffmann asked what the upstairs rooms would be
used for.
Patricia Classen stated that the upstairs rooms would not be
used for residents.
Mr. Classen stated that the rooms upstairs would be for a
locker room and a restroom for employees. Mr. Classen stated that
they would like to keep the stairway intact because it is an
authentic part of the building. Mr. Classen stated that the
building would be fully sprinklered.
Board Member Bell stated that the applicant has expressed a
lot of concern for the building, but the changes being described
are rather significant changes. Mr. Bell stated that he was
concerned about this whole project. Mr. Bell stated that he was
concerned about the Town's procedural lack of ability to be able to
Planning Board Minutes 14 June 27, 1995
control impacts like this. Mr. Bell stated that he had not been
aware of this project prior to receiving the Planning Board packet
in the mail. Mr. Bell stated that the City of Ithaca has a full
landmarks commission that reviews things like this, there is a
whole ordinance, a whole procedure to follow. The Town has an
unbelievably significant historic structure and it is being treated
like the parking lots at Cornell University. Mr. Bell stated that
the level of tools that the Board is given, legally, to review this
are not much different than the tools given to review parking lots,
Attorney Barney stated that there are actually less tools in
this circumstance because the project is on referral to the
Planning Board from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning Board
of Appeals (ZBA) has the authority to determine if there should be
a use variance granted, which it did, and then it was referred to
this Board because the ZBA did not want to get into things like
traffic flow because they felt that the Planning Board had the
expertise to deal with those types of issues of site plan.
Attorney Barney stated that Mr. Bell was correct that in this
particular circumstance there is even less authority than normal,
which is normally full site plan approval but here it is really as
an adjunct to the ZBA determination, which has already been made,
that the use is an acceptable use of this building. Attorney
Barney stated that he wanted to point out that at the ZBA hearing
there was a lot of discussion as to why there ought to be a change
in use. Attorney Barney stated that at that meeting Mr. Bacon did
attend and discussed, at considerable length, about his efforts to;
A) Preserve the building, and B) He can no longer afford to keep
the building, and he is trying to allow this building to be
preserved in some fashion and yet retain some economic viability.
Board Member Ainslie stated that Mr. Bell needed to be
realistic because if something like this does not go in there, he
did not think that a family could go in there under existing
conditions and the place would probably go to ruin. Mr. Ainslie
stated, if one has ever been on the Dryden Road, and saw what
happened to Hap Sad' s house, which had a furniture store put on the
back of the house. That spoiled the whole house. Mr. Ainslie
stated that building was a very beautiful home that no one took
care of. Mr. Ainslie stated that he thought that the Classen' s
were taking care to preserve the building. Here, the Classens are
going to come into the building, the additions are going to match
the existing building, and Mr. Ainslie stated that he did not see
how one could feel that this proposal is bad.
Mr.
Bell stated that there
are choces other than letting the
building
go to ruin or
using it
for anything somebody comes along
with. Mr.
Bell stated
that there
is a middle ground that says that
one could do both.
Mr. Bell
stated that he thought that the
Planning
Board should
demand a
higher standard than just saying
that it automatically
matches the building without the Board ever
having discussed
that
issue or
without the Board ever having had
Planning Board Minutes
15
June 27, 1995
any materials lists, without discussing any elements of the
architecture, although Mr. Bell thought that there are a lot of
very positive things that are being done in this site plan. Mr.
Bell stated that he is aware that HOLT is an architectural firm
that has done good preservation and has received preservation
awards, so there is a basic trust of their work. Mr. Bell stated,
however, the Board has not had the opportunity to really review
this project. Mr. Bell stated that the standard preservation way
of putting an addition, is to put it away from the main body of the
building, and the applicant has done that. Mr. Bell stated that
the standard thing is to have minimal attachment, they have done
that. The standard thing is to reflect some of the architectural
detail and, in fact, they have created some somewhat mirrored
pediments, and they have reflected some of the intablature. Mr.
Bell stated, but beyond that there are a lot of things they have
not done, and he thinks that the Board should have a full
architectural review of this because there are virtually no other
buildings in this Town which are of this level of historic value.
Mr. Bell stated that he is worried about some of the details and he
is very worried about the process where the Board have not included
the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan which was adopted two
years ago, where it recommends that the Town set up procedures like
this and those procedures still have not come along. Mr. Bell
stated that the Board does reviews via recommendations from the
ZBA, and the Board is not looking at it in a procedural way like
Mr. Bell thinks it should be done.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she agrees with Mr. Bell and
would like to say that she feels it is a good idea to try to re -use
this building and save the historically important part of the
property and add to it in a good way. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she
also feels that both the applicant and the architect seem to be
willing and able to do it in a good way. Ms. Hoffmann stated that
there are a number of things that need to be done in this building
which, if they are to be done properly in an important historic
building, it would need to be done in a certain way. Ms. Hoffmann
stated that she would like to have some advise from an expert on
historic architecture to guide the Planning Board in making this
decision. Ms. Hoffmann stated that the Board received two letters
regarding this project, one from Historic Ithaca and the other from
Candace Cornell,
Ms. Hoffmann read Ms. Cornell's Memo dated June 27, 1995 for
those assembled:
"Comments on the proposed Denmark Development"
"I deeply regret that I am unable to attend tonight's Planning
Board meeting due to an illness. I am strongly opposed to granting
permission for the proposed addition and change of use to the "Old
100" without thorough investigations into the project's potential
impacts to the house's historic character and significance. The
Planning Board Minutes 16 June 27, 1995
"Old Hundred" may be one of the Town's few historic and
architectural treasures -- I had the pleasure of driving past it
daily when my family lived nearby. I was surprised to find out
that it had yet to be listed on the National Register of Historic
Places.
It
is imperative
that this
project is carefully examined by
historic
preservation
specialists
before any action is taken by our
planning
board. Once
a report on
the house is completed, we can
evaluate
registered historic place,
it
had not even been nominated as
the
significance
of
the
proposed
project.
I urge the Board to pause before reaching any conclusions and
require a study by a qualified historic preservation specialist.
I am also in favor of recommending to the Town Board that we
initiate a basic historic landmark preservation ordinance. I live
in a house built around 1836 -40 and would welcome such an ordinance
to help protect the heritage and integrity of historic landmarks in
our town."
Ms. Hoffmann stated that the letter from Historic Ithaca also
refers to the fact that this building is not listed on either the
National or State Register of Historic Places, but it really ought
to be there. Ms. Hoffmann stated that when she visited Mr. Bacon
today, he very proudly showed her a framed article from the Ithaca
Journal from 1979, describing a tour of the building. Ms. Hoffmann
stated that this indicated to her the significance of this house.
Ms. Hoffmann stated that she would like to see and hear the advise
of someone like Historic Ithaca's staff member Lynn Cunningham on
what is special about this house and what could be done to preserve
as much of the building as possible while still allowing it to be
used for the proposed use.
Patricia Classen stated that prior to looking at the house
they had asked if it were a registered landmark.
Elizabeth Classen stated that it would have been almost not
feasible to do what they want to do in that particular existing
house if it were a historic landmark.
Board Member Bell stated that he thought that the Classens
were getting some bad legal advise there. Mr. Bell stated that if
something is eligible, it is equally protected.
Elizabeth Classen stated
that
today at about 2:30 p.m.
she
received an incomplete fax
from
Historic Ithaca (which
was
approximately 6 hours ago) which
was a unspecific letter stating
that though the "Old 100" is
not a
registered historic place,
it
had not even been nominated as
such,
the site plan approval should
be adjourned because a woman
in 1993
wrote a letter suggesting
Planning Board Minutes 17 June 27, 1995
that, along with several other places in the Town of Ithaca, that
the "Old 100" should be nominated as a historic place. Ms. Classen
stated that they had no knowledge of this, and they got all of
their information together so that they would be as prepared as
possible for these meetings and to move forward with the project.
Ms. Classen stated that this project had been presented before the
Town of Ithaca for approximately three months for review. Ms.
Classen stated that she felt that Historic Ithaca sending her an
incomplete fax just hours before our site plan review hearing in an
effort to delay our project is unfair to herself and the project.
Patricia Classen stated, especially because they chose that
house because they like the character and do not want to change it
other than the necessary changes to operate.
Elizabeth Classen stated that Historic Ithaca has had two
years since the letter was written to either nominate the house or
deem it a historic place, and that has not been done. Ms. Classen
stated that they have put so much time, energy and dollars into
this building for such a good project. Ms. Classen stated that to
`pull the rug out from underneath us' at this late hour with the
suggestion that the project be delayed is really unfair. Ms.
Classen stated that a delay would be very detrimental to this
project because so many other factors are contingent upon this.
Ms. Classen stated that delaying this project would put their
financing in jeopardy, the time frame to respond to DSS is limited.
Ms. Classen stated that they have done everything that they have
been asked to do in a timely manner. Ms. Classen asked that the
Board members keep that in mind when rendering their decision.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that it is unfortunate that the
Classen's received only a partial copy of the fax, and stated that
she would like to read it to those assembled. Ms. Hoffmann stated
that she wanted to clarify to everyone that Historic Ithaca did not
know about this project until just recently either.
Elizabeth Classen stated that they have a copy of the letter.
Ms, Classen stated that the fax they received at 2:30 was a partial
fax, but since they have been at this meeting, they were able to
read the letter in its entirety as provided by Town staff. Ms.
Classen stated that they love the `Old 100 House' because of its
character and they will preserve that character. Ms .Classen
stated that they have gone door to door and discussed the project
with the neighbors and received much support for this project.
Bruce Wilson, attorney for the Classen's, addressed
the Board
and .stated that the
applicants came before the Zoning
Board of
Appeals and it was a
condition
of the ZBA that this project
appear
before the Planning
Board.
Attorney Wilson stated
that the
scenario here is that
this project
was to appear before this
Board
for site plan review,
but there
was no understanding for
historic
Planning Board Minutes 18 June 27, 1995
® preservation review. Attorney Wilson stated that he did not
believe that a historical protection ordinance is in place, and he
does not believe this has been a designated area. Attorney Wilson
stated that the Classen's came into this whole project, as he
understands it, because of the attempt to preserve this, and that
was clearly demonstrated to the Zoning Board of Appeals, that was
their motivating factor. Attorney Wilson stated, confessing the
fact that no one was here from Historic Ithaca, confessing the fact
that we just got a fax this afternoon, kind of put the applicants
at a loss to respond to what he sees as a letter generically saying
that there should be a process for historic review. Attorney
Wilson stated that maybe there should be a process, however it does
seem detrimental to his clients at this point to raise this issue
because it was not a requirement when the ZBA sent the project to
the Planning Board for site plan review. Attorney Wilson stated
that his clients have a closing date, a commitment date for
financing, a ZBA date for an additional meeting. Attorney Wilson
stated that Elizabeth Classen had correctly pointed out, it verges
on being, extremely delinquent and with major consequences to raise
this kind of issue at this late date in the process. Attorney
Wilson stated that he was concerned that there is not standard to
be set for it, the Town does not have criteria in place for
historic preservation. Attorney Wilson stated that if the Board
opens this, it is getting into Pandora's Box which may be very
detrimental to his clients. Attorney Wilson stated that he
believed that the site plan is correctly designated in terms of
what the Classen's are doing. Attorney Wilson stated that this is
not a Historic review process, it is a site plan review only.
Attorney Wilson stated that he understands the concerns his clients
have had in trying to preserve the building, he thinks they have
done a wonderful job on that, but it is difficult to now come at
this from day one and try to second guess whether it meets
someone's criteria that has not been spelled out in an ordinance
and there is no review process for it.
Board Member Wilcox asked Town Attorney John Barney what the
Board's legal responsibility was.
Attorney Barney responded, to
review the site
plan. Attorney
Barney stated that the decision to
whether or not
this site can be
used in
this fashion has already
been made by the Zoning Board.
Attorney
Barney stated that the
ZBA referred
it back to the
Planning
Board for review of the Site
Plan. Attorney
Barney stated
that he
would want to go into Executive Session
if the Board is
going to
start trying to turn down
the application
at this Board's
level.
Board Member Wilcox stated that the use decision has been made
and the Planning Board has Site Plan review and that is it.
Attorney Barney responded, yes.
Planning Board Minutes 19 June 27, 1995
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she does not have any
interest in turning down this plan.
Attorney Barney stated that the Planning Board can not
schedule anything now until August because the July meeting agenda
is already very full. Attorney Barney stated that if the Planning
Board delays this project, they will be delayed by essentially two
months which takes them out of this year's building season.
Attorney Barney stated that whether the Planning Board can delay
the project is an issue that should be discussed in Executive
Session,
Board Member Bell stated that the Board could set up another
meeting. Mr. Bell stated that Elizabeth 's plea was eloquent and
impassioned and appreciated, but that she must understand the
position of this Board as well. Mr. Bell stated that they had not
heard of this project officially until whenever their packets were
opened in the mail, and although Ms. Classen may be upset about
receiving the fax at 2:30, he was more upset than that to be
opening up his packet and finding out there was a major impact on
probably the most wonderful historic building in the Town and that
the proposal was for final site plan approval with no process to
review what the applicants want to do.
Elizabeth Classen responded that they had all of the
submission information on time with the deadline given her by Town
staff, which was 20 working days prior to the meeting. Everything
was complete and they provided all of the appropriate copies. Ms.
Classen stated that she was sorry that the Board members did not
get their packets soon enough. Ms. Classen stated that they should
not be penalized because of a process that has not yet been worked
out, it has nothing to do with her or this project. Ms. Classen
stated that she felt as though delaying this project is penalizing
them unjustly.
Chairperson Smith stated that it is a little annoying that
over two years after a letter like that is written no one has taken
the time or effort to nominate the building.
Board Member Bell stated that it is the Town's job to nominate
the buildings.
Attorney Barney stated that it may have been the Town's
failings, if indeed the policy makers of the Town decided that
there should be activity taken and it was not taken. Attorney
Barney stated that he was not sure that the policy makers have
decided that they want to have a historic review process regardless
of the wishes of the individual members of this Board may wish to
have happen. Attorney Barney stated, a point of fact, the Town has
no such review and the limitations of review are what this Board
has with normal site plan, which to a degree included design, but
he does not think that it is to a point where the Board can say
Planning Board Minutes
20
June 27, 1995
that this design is wrong and throw out the proposal. Attorney
Barney stated that he did not want to discuss too much more without
going into Executive Session,
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she wanted to read a couple
of segments from the Comprehensive Plan,
Board Member Ainslie stated that the "Old 100" has been on the
market for years, and Historic Ithaca or no Historic Ithaca, unless
someone buys the building, nobody is going to keep it up. The
Classens are willing to buy it and take care of it.
Chairperson Smith stated that if the Board wanted to pursue
the Historic preservation instead of simply looking at the site
plan approval, then the Planning Board should go into Executive
Session and come to a conclusion or move onto the site plan.
Town Planner Kanter stated that had researched whether the
building was on the state or national register of historic places
and it was not. Mr. Kanter stated that there is no formal process
for this type of situation in the Town. Mr. Kanter stated that he
looked through existing resources in the limited time to see if
there was any information on the building and there was nothing.
Mr. Kanter stated that he found it a little bit disconcerting that
the Town received a letter from Historic Ithaca indicating concern
but without giving any information about the building. Mr. Kanter
stated that it is difficult to get a letter as a Board and act
accordingly without the appropriate information. Mr. Kanter stated
that there was a statement in a letter from Lynn Cunningham dated
November 8, 1993 that says that they would like to see a
"windshield" survey of the Town to locate concentrations of
potentially important historic resources. And then it states, "Off
the top of my head, the Forest Home area, the Mayor School complex,
the Ellis Hollow Community Church, the Hayt's Schoolhouse, Old 100
on Route 13A, " and several others, "would all appear to be eligible
for the National Register ", Mr. Kanter stated that the letter goes
on and asked that the Town pursue that.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that it is clear from the
Comprehensive Plan that one of the actions recommended is to
consider establishing a Town Register of historic structures. Ms.
Hoffmann stated that it is also clear that one of the objectives is
to maintain and improve the built environment including the
protection of historic structures and sites. Ms. Hoffmann stated
that one of the actions to do is to explore mechanisms for the
protection of historic structures and sites from intrusion by
incompatible use and appropriate architectural solutions and proper
site development. Ms. Hoffmann stated that this is something that
the Town Board has considered and finds is important and valuable
to do.
Attorney Barney stated that the Comprehensive Plan was
Planning Board Minutes 21 June 27, 1995
approved by the Planning Board and the process for implementing
those recommendations is the Town Board, Attorney Barney stated
that the Town Board to date have not developed_ a process to do
those things mentioned by Ms. Hoffmann.
Board Member Bell stated that the Town Board has a list of
outstanding items like this that they hope to deal with some day.
Attorney Barney stated that the Board has to operate with the
regulations that are in place at the moment, and that is what the
applicants for this project have done, and for this Board to take
a position contrary to that is basically unfair, as well as the
question of legality. Attorney Barney stated that the Board should
go into Executive Session if they wish to discuss this further.
Board Member Bell stated that his concern about the process is
a legislative one, but as applied to this applicant, he is not
suggesting that the Board have a historic review district process.
Mr. Bell stated that he knows that the Town does not have one. Mr.
Bell stated that he is not suggesting that they have a bad use,
because he thinks that the use is relatively compatible use. Mr.
Bell stated that Mr. Ainslie was correct, someone has to come up
with a use that is going to pay the bills. Mr. Bell stated that
his questions are the details of how this project gets implemented
to make sure that it really does what the applicants say they want
it to do. Mr. Bell stated that he thinks that the failure of most
historic preservation projects is in the details. Mr. Bell stated
that it is steel doors that are 44 inches wide, the commercial
codes destroy historic preservation constantly.
Elizabeth Classen stated that the metal doors can have all
kinds of beautiful molding on them that would look wonderful. Ms.
Classen stated that you would not be able to tell the difference
unless you knocked on the doors. Ms. Classen stated that there are
all types of things that can be done to the doors to make them
aesthetically pleasing. Ms. Classen stated that they would not .let
anything go on that house that was not aesthetically pleasing.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she wanted to respond to Ms.
Classen's comment about it being unfair that this project be
delayed. Ms. Hoffmann stated that it is most common for most
projects unless they are really minor, that there are two separate
meetings, one for the preliminary approval and one for final
approval of the site plan, so to do them both together in one
meeting like this is already quicker than most projects.
Town Attorney John Barney stated that this is not a
traditional site plan, this is a referral from the Zoning Board of
Appeals, not for preliminary and final, but for site plan approval.
The Zoning Board has already approved the site plan subject to the
approval of this Board. Attorney Barney stated that this is not
the process that the Board normally reviews. Attorney Barney
Planning Board Minutes 1 22 June 27, 1995
stated that this project was sent to the Planning Board at his
recommendation because the Zoning Board did not want to get into
the number of parking spaces and other site plan issues that the
Planning Board has the expertise in .dealing with.
Elizabeth Classen stated that they understood the Board's
concerns for the historic preservation of the building. Ms.
Classen stated, "Wait until it is all up and you will be proud you
had a part in all of this."
Chairperson Smith asked if there were any site plan issues
that the Board wanted to discuss.
Town Planner Kanter stated that he had outlined, in his
memorandum to the Planning Board dated 6/21/95, what he thought
were primary issues that were raised at the Zoning Board meeting.
Mr. Kanter stated that the draft resolution addresses some of those
issues as well. Mr. Kanter stated that there needed to be
consideration for handicap parking spaces which would be more
appropriate to have some pavement on and around those parking
spaces so that wheelchairs could get onto the walkway. Mr. Kanter
stated that was the type of detail that the Board needs to look at.
Mr. Kanter stated that the number of parking spaces shown on the
site plan appeared to be appropriate for the. proposed use. Mr.
Kanter stated that the Board needs to consider the traffic and
circulation aspects of the site, and the location of the driveway.
Mr. Kanter stated that regarding the landscaping, the trees on the
property are very important and after a site visit, he was very
impressed with the mature trees on the property. Mr. Kanter stated
that there will be several maple trees in the path of the addition
which will have to come out, which is unavoidable with that
location. Mr. Kanter stated that there is a large Catalpa tree and
if it is possible to preserve that, it would be very nice.
Patricia Classen stated that David Hernandez of Cayuga
Landscaping looked at the site and stated that he would make a
detailed landscaping plan after the site plan issues were decided
upon.
Town Planner Kanter
stated that
he
felt that
evergreen
trees
as screening around the
perimeter of
the
property
is a good
idea.
Patricia Classen stated that they would be adding over 40 new
trees to the property, which means we are putting back 4 times more
plants than we are taking out.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that on the planting plan, which
has indicated in red the trees that will be taken out, the trees to
be added are not indicated.
Ms. Classen stated that Mr. Hernandez of Cayuga Landscape
stated he would make a detailed landscape plan after the site plan
Planning Board Minutes 23 June 27, 1995
issues were decided upon.
Town Planner Kanter stated that the areas for the plantings
have been shown on the plan. Mr. Kanter stated that on the site
plan there is an area where short term parking is indicated, which
he thinks is fine, but would like to see the edge of the pavement
widened by 3 or 4 feet to be sure there is ample space for cars to
go by those that are parked.
Board Member Bell asked what. type of evergreen screen was
proposed.
Patricia Classen stated that they were considering Norwegian
Pines.
Board Member Bell stated that those trees are full sized,
large trees.
Dick Classen stated that they were probably 8 foot trees, that
they were also considering Blue Spruce and Norwegian, everything
but White Pines,
Board Member Hoffmann stated that they get to be pretty tall
trees eventually.
Board Member Wilcox stated that given the lovely trees that
are located on this site now, it would be nice to see more nice,
big trees.
Patricia Classen stated that in the winter, pine trees would
screen the bus garage.
Board Member Bell stated that lower denser trees would screen
that as well.
Patricia Classen
stated that
the pines
are dense from the
ground up, which is an
additional
reason they
were chosen.
Board Member Bell stated that he was concerned about the lilac
hedge also. Mr. Bell stated that Mr. Kanter had discussed saving
the Catalpa tree earlier.
Patricia Classen stated that they wanted to save the Catalpa
tree, but Mr. Hernandez stated that there was 38 inches or more of
hollowness in the tree, and there are branches that are cracking,
and their insurance company would not allow that to be kept.
Board Member Bell asked why they were not proposing to keep
the lilac hedge.
Patricia
Classen
stated
that they
would be
planting new
hedges. Ms.
Classen
stated
that the lilac
hedge
is old enough
Planning Board Minutes 24 June 27, 1995
where it did not blossom very much this year.
Planner
II, JoAnn
Cornish
stated
that the lilacs are very old
and probably
would not
last
that much
longer.
Board Member Bell, stated that lilacs are a very traditional
historical landscape element.
Patricia Classen stated that they would be planting lilacs as
well, but that the current lilacs are old and show very little
blossoms.
Board
Member Hoffmann stated
that
the
lilacs that are there
not are not
a hedges anymore, they
are
huge
shrubs.
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by James Ainslie:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval for the proposed Bridges of Ithaca, an adult
residential care and adult day care facility, located at 704
Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31 -4 -2,
Residence District R -30. Ralph Bacon, Owner; Denmark
Development, Inc., Applicant; Patricia and Elizabeth Classen,
Agents, and
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 Site Plan
Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, at a public hearing held on June 27, 1995,
has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II
prepared by the Planning staff, and a site plan entitled
"Bridges, 704 Five Mile Drive," dated 3/14/95, prepared by
Manzari & Reagan Surveyors, and additional application
materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff have recommended a negative
determination of environmental significance with respect to
the proposed site plan, 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 Full
Environmental Assessment Form nor an Environmental Impact Statement
will be required.
Planning Board Minutes 25 June 27, 1995
There being no further discussion,
vote.
Aye - Smith, Finch, Ainslie, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
Abstain - Hoffmann.
the Chair called for a
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by James Ainslie:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval for the proposed Bridges of Ithaca, an adult
residential care and adult day care facility, located at 704
Five Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31 -4 -2,
Residence District R -30. Ralph Bacon, Owner; Denmark
Development, Inc., Applicant; Patricia and Elizabeth Classen,
Agents, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review,
has, on June 27, 1995, made a negative determination of
environmental significance, and
3. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted a use variance for the
proposed Bridges of Ithaca facility on May 10, 1995,
conditioned upon the applicant obtaining site plan approval
from the Planning Board, and
4. The Planning Board, at a public hearing held on June 27, 1995,
has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II
prepared by the Planning staff, and a site plan entitled
"Bridges, 704 Five Mile Drive," dated 3/14/95, prepared by
Manzari & Reagan Surveyors, and additional application
materials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain
requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as
shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklist, having
determined from the materials presented that such waiver will
result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of
site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by
the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final
Site Plan Approval to the proposed site plan entitled
"Bridges, 704 Five Mile Drive," dated 3/14/95, prepared by
Planning Board Minutes 26 June 27, 1995
Manzari & Reagan Surveyors, subject to the following
conditions:
a. That the final site plan be revised to show those items listed
as conditions of approval on the attached Preliminary and
Final Site Plan Checklists, including, but not limited to,
profile of the driveway and parking area, showing the base and
materials proposed; location, design and construction
materials of proposed water and sewage facilities; and
detailed sizing and final material specifications of all
required improvements, to be approved by the Town Engineer
prior to the issuance of any building permits, and
b. That details of the species and sizes of evergreen screen
to be planted along Five Mile Drive and Bostwick Road be
provided, to be approved by the Town Planner, and
C. That the final site plan-be revised to show a driveway 23
feet in width along that portion of the gravel driveway
where "short -term incidental parking" is shown to more
safely allow for two or three cars to temporarily park
along the side of the drive while providing ample room
for the passage of other vehicles, and
d. That the final site plan be revised to change the two
handicapped parking spaces from a gravel surface to a
paved asphalt surface, along with a sufficient perimeter
around those parking spaces to allow safe and easy access
to the blacktop sidewalk for those people with
disabilities or in wheel chairs, and
e. That the final site plan be revised to show the location
of fire and other emergency zones, to be approved by the
Town of Ithaca Building and Zoning Officer and the City
of Ithaca Fire Chief prior to the issuance of any
building permits, and
f. That variances for the proposed signs shall be obtained
from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, and that
the sign proposed along Five Mile Drive be relocated so
as not to encroach upon the road right -of -way, and
g. Submission of an original or mylar copy and two copies of
the final site plan, as revised above, and
h. The design, details and materials of the proposed project
be in keeping insofar as reasonably possible with the
historic character of the existing building.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if both residential and day care
uses were included in this proposal.
Planning Board Minutes 27 June 27, 1995
. Elizabeth Classen responded, yes, a mixture of both clients
would be using this facility.
Patricia Classen stated that there are two large leisure rooms
which will probably be used for the day program.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if that would be for 10 people in
addition to staff members.
Patricia Classen stated that they would be told how many
people they can have by the Department of Social Services,
Board Member Hoffmann asked if the parking spaces provided
would be for both of those programs.
Elizabeth
Classen
responded,
yes, everything that has been
submitted was
designed
as not to
with
the
both
services
involved.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
Abstain - Hoffmann.
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Gregory Bell:
RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the
Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, recommends and hereby does
recommend to the Board of Zoning Appeals that the request for sign
variances for two free standing signs for the above - referenced
proposal be granted, conditioned upon the following:
10 That the sign
proposed
along
Five
Mile
Drive be relocated so
as not to
encroach upon
the
road
right
-of -way.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Smith declared the Public Hearing for the Bridges
of Ithaca project duly closed 9:45 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR
THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NOS. 28 -1-
Planning Board Minutes 28 June 27, 1995
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, 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 Public Hearing duly
opened at 9:47 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public
Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
Doria Higgins of 2 Hillcrest Drive, addressed the Board and
stated that the idea of Eco Village and the site plan is
commendable. Ms. Higgins then read her statement to the Planning
Board:
"I'd like to make a suggestions about the overall plan for Eco
Village, which may not be directly relevant to the decision you
make tonight on the smaller site plan for the First Resident Group,
but it is a suggestion I would like you and the developers and the
members of Eco Village to keep in mind.
According to the overall "Envisioning Plan" for Eco Village I
saw this afternoon, the area to the north of the site plan for the
First Resident Group under consideration tonight, the area at the
corner of the Mecklenburg and West Haven Roads, has been drawn with
lines of trees representing either some kind of orchard or
evergreen plantation. But according to a document kindly shown to
me a few minutes ago by the Weisburds (developers for the plan)
that field will be planted with "flowering shrubs to diversify the
appearance of the field."
As it now stands that area is a lovely meadow, Serene and
clear, I walk there fairly often. There are not tastefully
landscaped trees, thank God, to obstruct the extraordinarily
beautiful view. But the overall site plan show rows of some kind
of tree, and I want to convince all of you present tonight, to
leave the meadow as it is and it not be planted to trees or
tastefully landscaped, it does not need the appearance diversified.
As a member of the Cayuga Trails Club I know the delight of walking
along the trail and coming onto an open meadow uncluttered with
landscaping. I am also an old Vermonter and remember the open farm
land, which is disappearing very quickly. In the old days, the hay
mower or the cows kept the meadows and the pastures cropped and
depth the beautiful vistas open for the delight of eye and spirit.
But now, the farms are disappearing and there is scrub growth, or
you have developers coming in a landscaping tastefully.
For unobstructed vistas are important not only to the eye but
to the spirit. The idioms of our language show this "get a
Planning Board Minutes 29 June 27, 1995
perspective on things," "take the long view ", etc. Emerson has
written "the health of the eye seems to demand a horizon. We are
never tired so long as we can see far enough." And his pal Thoreau
in Walden quoted someone called Domodara "There are non happy in
the world but beings who enjoy freely a vast horizon." So please,
please persuade the Eco Village developers and the people who will
live there to keep that lovely meadow or hayfield a hayfield, and
do not let them pussy it up with landscaping or tastefully planted
trees which will destroy the serenity and clarity of the clear open
meadow. Thank you.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if Ms. Higgins was referring to
the area along Mecklenburg when she was speaking about the
plantings. Ms. Hoffmann stated that she had requested that there
be no tall trees planted along the road to block the view.
Chairperson Smith noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if there was anyone else that wished to speak. No one spoke.
Chairperson Smith closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter
back to the Board.
Board Member Wilcox stated that he did not understand the
difference between gross and net acres as used to describe this
project.
Town Attorney John Barney stated that net acres excludes
highways, and gross acres include the highways. Attorney Barney
stated that some times your property lines go to the center line of
the road, but for actual available land, one could not include the
portion that is part of the public highway.
Board Member Wilcox stated that the whole property includes
part of Mecklenburg Road.
Town Engineer Daniel Walker stated that the deed descriptions
are written sometimes by the center line of the road, our new deeds
and new subdivisions are generally set to the right of way line at
the road.
Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that the Board would be
addressing all of the details of the site plan at the July 18, 1995
Planning Board meeting.
There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith asked if
anyone were prepared to offer a motion.
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Fred Wilcox:
WHEREAS:
Planning Board Minutes 30 June 27, 1995
1. This action is the Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No's. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8 totalling 176.098 +/- acres
gross (174.255 +/- acres net) , into three lots - "Parcel A"
consisting of 56.007 +/- acres net, "Parcel B" consisting of
33.929 +/- acres net (to be conveyed to the First Resident's
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. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 4, 1995,
granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval with conditions for
the proposed Eco Village CoHousing Cooperative Subdivision,
and
3. 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
4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on
June 27, 1995, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a
subdivision plat showing parcels "A ", 11B11,q and "C" entitled
"Final Plat - ECOVILLAGE COHOUSING COOPERATIVE, Mecklenburg
Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York ", dated
5/19/95, prepared by T.G. Miller P.C. Engineers and Surveyors
and signed by Allen T. Fulkerson, Licensed Land Surveyor, and
other application materials.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the
Town of
Ithaca
Planning
Board hereby grants
Final
Subdivision Approval
for the
proposed
subdivision of Town of
Ithaca
Tax Parcel
No's. 28
-1 -26.2
and 28 -1
-26.8 totalling 176.098
+/-
acres gross (174.255 +/- acres net), into three lots - "Parcel A"
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 EcoVillage Cohousing Cooperative, to be located
on Parcel B referenced above as shown on the Final Plat, dated
5/19/95, labeled "ECOVILLAGE 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 by the Planning Board 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
Planning Board Minutes 31 June 27, 1995
on the acreage remaining after subdividing out the 33.929 +/-
acres being conveyed to the First Residents' Group to be known
as "Parcel B ", and
2. Before construction of any improvements anywhere in the
Special Land Use District is commenced, requirements of the
Final Site Plan Checklist shall be met and Final Site Plan
Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, and
3. Approval
by the Attorney
for the Town
of provisions to
guarantee
future access to
the entrance road
for parcels "A"
and "B" and of letters of
intent from all
owners of adjacent
properties from which easements will have
to be obtained for
utilities
and /or emergency
access to the 33.929
acre parcel.
There being no further discussion, Chairperson Smith called
for a vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Smith declared the Public Hearing in the matter of
Final Subdivision for the proposed Eco Village project duly closed
at 9:59 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF- PRELIMINARY AND FINAL SITE
PLAN APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO THE EAST HILL PLAZA
SITE PLAN FOR PROPOSED PARKING LOT AND DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS
LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF JUDD FALLS ROAD AND ELLIS HOLLOW
ROAD ON TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NOS, 62- 2- 1.121, 62 -2 -13.2 AND
62 -2 -13.7, BUSINESS DISTRICT "C ". PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDE
MODIFICATION AND PAVING OF AN EXISTING STONE SURFACE PARKING LOT
AND REPLACEMENT OF AN OPEN DITCH DRAINAGE SYSTEM WITH A STORM
SEWER, THIS MATTER WAS HEARD AT THE JUNE 20, 1995 PLANNING BOARD
MEETING, AND WAS ADJOURNED TO THE JUNE 27, 1995 MEETING. CORNELL
UNIVERSITY, OWNER /APPLICANT; DAVID HERRICK, T.G. MILLER, P.C.,
ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS, AGENT,
David Herrick of T.G. Miller Engineers and Surveyors,
representing Cornell University for the East Hill Plaza
Improvements to the rear parking lot. Mr. Herrick addressed the
Board and stated that at the June 20, 1995 meeting, the drainage
was discussed and resolved that Mr. Walker reviewed and will handle
the technical aspects of the drainage. Mr. Herrick stated that
they had focused their efforts to prepare a new site plan that
would clarify for the Board was is happening in the parking lot.
Mr. Herrick stated that the location of handicapped parking spaces
had been changed to respond to the location of the principal
Planning Board Minutes 32 June 27, 1995
entrance to the back of this building which is now going to be the
Cornell University Purchasing Department, Mr. Herrick stated that
there is an additional entrance for emergency exits and also an
entrance for storage. Mr. Herrick stated that the visitor parking
spaces are centrally located, and that a planting plan for the
parking lot was also submitted for the Board to review.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if it was different from what was
seen at the June 20th meeting.
Planner II JoAnn Cornish stated that there had been some
changes to the planting plan from what the Board reviewed on June
20th,
Mr. Herrick stated that with the plantings, he had attempted
to provide some buffer between the parking lot and to the west, the
car wash and to the east, the Best Western University Inn. Mr.
Herrick stated that the west end of the motel does not have any
windows. Mr. Herrick stated that there are two proposed fixtures,
one on the east edge of the parking and one on the west edge of the
parking. It would be a three fixture luminar, approximately a 35-
foot mounting height and comparable to the units that are in the
front of the plaza. Mr. Herrick stated that there are also three
existing cobrahead lights which hang over the 38 foot wide lane
between the building and the curbed islands, and these lights will
remain in place.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that staff had proposed providing
some planting along the northern edge of the parking area, and it
is not on the plan.
Mr. Herrick asked if there was a need for screening there
because the field just to the north is a corn field, there is also
a natural grade change, and that will remain agricultural use. Mr.
Herrick stated that he did not see the need for landscaping unless
there was a change in the use of the property to the north.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that staff had also suggested
that the lights be lowered to 30 feet.
Planner
II stated
that
the lights in
the front of the lot are
35 feet high
and these
are
in conformance
with that.
Town Attorney Barney stated that zoning regulations has a
height limitation of 30 feet of any structure other than a
building.
Mr. Herrick stated that they could lower the height and raise
the wattage because there is flexibility in the selection of the
luminars.
Board Member Hoffmann asked how high the building was.
Planning Board Minutes 33 June 27, 1995
Mr. Herrick stated that he would guess about 18 feet.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that the lights would then be
visible above the building from the south.
Mr. Herrick stated, that is correct, as they are coming from
the north for the fixtures in the front.
Board Member Wilcox asked if Mr. Herrick knew how tall the
three existing poles are.
Mr. Herrick stated that they are at least 20 feet.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if moving the light fixtures
further to the north to allow them to light up that part of the
parking area more.
Mr. Herrick stated what they are trying to achieve with the
parking is what they call a half a foot candle illumination and
that half a foot candle is provided throughout the parking lot now
with this plan, and this is a standard that Cornell has set with
real estate developments for parking lot areas. Mr. Herrick stated
that since there is not parking at the north end, there is a 20-
foot strip there that is reserved strictly for ingress and egress,
the lighting requirements for that are not going to be as critical.
Board Member Hoffmann asked who was responsible for keeping
the fire zone clear of dumpsters and vehicles.
Mr. Herrick stated that the dumpsters will be located in an
area specifically provided for them to be kept.
Attorney Barney asked if the location shown on the drawing is
the most recent location for the fire zone, because it is shown
here as adjacent to the building.
Mr. Herrick stated that the northern line of the fire zone is
20 feet from the face of the building.
Planner II stated that the striped zone is not the fire zone,
the fire zone is from the edge of the striped zone to the line
which is 20 feet from the face of the building which is in
accordance with the requirements.
Chairperson Smith noted that this was a Public Hearing and
asked if anyone wished to speak. No one spoke. Chairperson Smith
closed the Public Hearing and brought the matter back to the Board
for further discussion.
Chairperson Smith stated that the Board had just reviewed the
plans for the parking lot on Maple Avenue and with the number of
trees landscaped out, is it because it is in the City instead of
Planning Board Minutes 34
the Town.
June 27, 1995
Board Member Hoffmann stated that she was concerned about the
traffic that goes through the gas station into the parking lot of
the shopping plaza, which creates hazardous traffic there.
Town Attorney Barney stated, temporary or otherwise, the fire
zone is supposed to be clear at all times.
Town Engineer Daniel Walker stated that the dumpsters should
not be in the fire zone.
Board Member Hoffmann stated that there were cars parked in
the fire zone as well.
Chairperson Smith asked if the lot was open parking or
restricted parking.
Mr. Herrick responded that this lot would be for open parking.
Board Member Wilcox stated, for the record, that the previous
draft
resolution (provided at the
6/20/95
meeting) had 12
conditions
3 conditions.
having
listed on it, the current
Mr. Wilcox stated that
adjourned this at the meeting
proposed
a lot was
of June
resolution has only
accomplished after
20th,
Planner II, JoAnn Cornish stated, for the record, that on
Sheet S4, the pavement boundaries that were on the previous sheet
submission have now been eliminated so that the pavement details
are still there, but the actual limits of pavement have been taken
off for clarity on the sheet provided to the Planning Board.
There appearing to be no further discussion, Chairperson Smith
asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion.
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Gregory Bell
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval for the proposed improvements of an existing
gravel parking lot and the replacement of an open ditch
drainage system with a storm sewer system at East Hill Plaza,
corner of Judd Falls Road and Ellis Hollow Road, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 62 -2 -13.21 62- 2- 1.121, and 62 -2 -13.7,
Business District C, Cornell University, Owner; Bonnie J.
VanAmburg, Agent, and
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 Site Plan
Planning Board Minutes 35
Approval, and
June 27, 1995
3, The Planning Board, at a public hearing on June 27, 1995, has
reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II
prepared by the Planning Staff, a set of five drawings
entitled: S -1 "Location Map ", S -2 "Storm Sewer Plan ", S -3
"Storm Sewer Plan ", S -4 "Parking Lot and Planting Plan" dated
5/5/95 and S -5 "Parking Lot Layout Plan" dated 6/21/95,
prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C. and additional application
materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff have recommended a negative
determination of environmental significance with respect to
the site plan, 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
Full Environmental Assessment Form nor an Environmental Impact
Statement will be required.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
MOTION by Gregory Bell, seconded by James Ainslie:
WHEREAS:
1. This action is the Cons
Plan Approval for the
gravel parking lot ai
drainage system with a
corner of Judd Falls
Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
Business District C,
VanAmburg, Agent, and
ideration of Preliminary and Final Site
proposed improvements of an existing
Zd the replacement of an open ditch
storm sewer system at East Hill Plaza,
Road and Ellis .Hollow Road, Town of
62 -2 -13.2, 62- 2- 1.121, and 62 -2 -13.7,
Cornell University, Owner; Bonnie J.
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board acting as Lead Agency in environmental review,
has, on June 27, 1995, made a negative determination of
environmental significance, and
3. The Planning
Board, at
a public hearing
on June
27, 1995, has
reviewed and
accepted
as adequate the
Short
Environmental
Planning Board Minutes 36 June 27, 1995
Assessment Form Part I prepared
by the applicant,
a Part II
prepared by
the Planning Staff, a set of five drawings
entitled: S -1
"Location Map ", S -2 "Storm Sewer
Plan ", S -3
"Storm Sewer
Plan ", S -4 "Parking
Lot and Planting
Plan" dated
5/5/95, and
S -5 "Parking Lot
Layout Plan" dated 6/21/95
prepared by
T.G. Miller, P.C.
and additional
application
materials.
Miller, P.C., subject
to
the
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain
requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as
shown on the attached Preliminary and Final Site Plan
Checklist, having determined from the materials presented that
such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of
the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated
by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final
Site Plan
Approval for
the proposed plans entitled:
S -1
"Location
Map ", S -2 "Storm
Sewer Plan ", S -3 "Storm
Plan
Sewer
Plan ", S -4
"Parking Lot
and Planting Plan" dated
5/5/95,
and
revised 6/23/95,
and S -5
"Parking Lot Layout
Plan"
dated
6/21/95 prepared by T.G.
Miller, P.C., subject
to
the
following
conditions:
a. Dumpsters to be located in designated area only, (with
the exception of dumpsters being used on a temporary
basis for construction and /or emergency debris, which may
be located elsewhere, but in any event outside the fire
safety zone) as indicated on the Parking Lot and Planting
Plan dated 5/5/95.
b. Submission of final construction drawings for approval by
the Town Engineer prior to the start of construction.
C, Submission
fixture height
the applicant
of the original
or
mylar
copy of the Final
Site
Plan
to be retained by
the
Town
of Ithaca.
d. The lighting
feet unless
fixture height
the applicant
be reduced
obtains a
to no more than 30
variance from the
Zoning Board
of Appeals for
height in
excess of 30 feet.
e. The site plan be modified to require the fire lane to be
marked by language such as "Fire Lane" or "No Parking" as
approved by the Zoning and Building Code Enforcement
Officer.
There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a
vote.
Planning Board Minutes 37 1 June 27, 1995
Aye - Smith, Hoffmann, Finch, Ainslie, Wilcox, Bell.
Nay - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Smith declared the matter of Preliminary and Final
Site Plan Approval for the modification to the East Hill Plaza
Parking lot and drainage improvements to be duly closed at 10:34
p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: CONTINUATION OF CONSIDERATION OF SKETCH PLAN FOR THE
PROPOSED "WESTWOOD HILLS II" SUBDIVISION, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL
NO, 32- 1- 11.112,- 12.92± ACRES, PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF 20± LOTS WITH
1,650± LINEAR FEET OF NEW ROAD AND EXTENSION OF EXISTING WATER AND
SEWER, LOCATED ON WOOLF LANE, RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -151 TIMOTHY
CIASCHI, OWNER AND APPLICANT.
Chairperson
Smith
declare the
above -noted
matter duly opened
at 10:36 p.m. and
read
aloud from
the Planning
Board
Agenda.
Timothy Ciaschi of 123 Woolf Lane, addressed the Board and
stated that the owners of the lots numbered 14, 17, 18, and 20 of
phase I want to purchase the spaces behind their properties in
order to make a larger back yard to preserve that space as open
space. Mr. Ciaschi asked if the large space which will be
consolidated to the owners properties of the lots discussed above
could be used as his 10% open space requirement for the whole
subdivision. Mr. Ciaschi stated that those interested in
purchasing the space do not intend to develop that space, they also
want it left as open space. Mr. Ciaschi stated that the open space
would be a little over five acres of open space for this
subdivision.
Attorney Barney asked if Mr. Ciaschi understood that he would
still need subdivision approval for those lower lots to be broken
into those pieces for the perspective buyers.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that Mr. Walker or someone said that they
could probably do that in house being the simple fact that nothing
is happening to those lots.
Town Planner Kanter
Ciaschi and stated that
regulations that says
modifications the Town En
this is not a lot line
easily,
stated
there
for c
gineer
modif
that he had discus
was something in
srtain types of
does have authorit
ication that can
sed this with Mr.
the subdivision
basic lot line
y to approve, but
be handled that
Town Engineer
Walker stated that
this project was
presented
before the Planning
five to eight lots.
Board and showed
Mr. Walker stated
a through road, a
that is what makes
trail and
this more
Planning Board Minutes 38 June 27, 1995
than a simple two lot subdivision.
Town Planner Kanter stated that Mr. Ciaschi needed to come
before the Planning Board with a plat that will show how that land
will be split up and consolidated with the existing lots. Mr.
Kanter stated would be the appropriate plat to show the Board at
the next stage of this development procedure.
Attorney Barney stated that it would require a survey to
convey it anyway, so a survey plat could be brought in for
preliminary approval.
Board Member Wilcox stated that the lots would have to be
consolidated with Lots 14, 17, 18 and 20, otherwise there would be
no road frontage for those lots.
Attorney Barney stated, that is correct, and that would be a
condition of the approval.
Board Member Herbert Finch stated that those lots were going
to be surrounded on two sides by Town property, is the Town
interested in trail linkage to Evergreen Lane,
Attorney Barney stated that Mr. Ciaschi had asked a legitimate
question; does the Board want to require additional open space for
this subdivision..
Board Member Wilcox asked what the acreage of the entire
parcel was with the original proposal.
Mr. Ciaschi responded approximately 24 acres.
Board Member Wilcox
Member Wilcox
asked
how many
acres had been given to the
Town as part of the
acres.
the 10%
open
space
dedication
money
or facilities
thus
far.
Attorney Barney responded that 1.7 acres were dedicated to the
Town in Phase I.
Mr. 'Ciaschi stated, plus the addition of the southern section
and the 25 -foot trail right of way.
Board
Member Wilcox
stated
that would make the total space
dedication
set aside
at 1.8 or 1.9
pretty close to
acres.
the 10%
Mr. Wilcox stated that makes the
required.
Mr.
Ciaschi
stated
that if
he dedicates
more land,
the Town
does not
seem to
have the
money
or facilities
to tend to
it anyway.
Town Planner Kanter stated that the Board had talked about lot
numbers 6 and 7 have wetlands go into them.
Planning Board Minutes 39 June 27, 1995
Mr. Ciaschi stated that the wetland was minute, and that was
agreed to by those that viewed the site. Mr. Ciaschi stated that
some of the wetland was included in what was already donated to the
Town.
Attorney Barney stated that the real issue is that there would
be an additional 15 lots, and the Board needs to determine if those
15 lots warrant requiring additional open space.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that this property is currently zoned R -15,
which means he is providing much larger lot sizes that what is
required.
Town Planner Kanter asked what the average size of the
proposed lots would be.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that the smallest lot is 100 feet by 175
feet.
Board Member Wilcox stated that part of the land deeded to the
Town along the west side of the property has a 25 -foot wedge, that
then goes to 15 feet, then into the large piece of parkland, then
into 25 feet then back to 15 feet. Mr. Wilcox asked why the change
in width.
Assistant Town Planner George Frantz stated) that in the
overall planning for this area between DuBois Road and Route 96
Town of Ulysses and Route 96 on the opposite side of the
properties, the plan was to have a street connect Woolf Lane to
Canandagua Circle, with the possibility of Evergreen Lane extending
in to a 10 acre tract of land and an additional 10 acre tract of
land adjacent to this property. Mr. Frantz asked if the Board
wanted to give up that future road reservation: In the context of
the overall use of land in that area, Mr. Frantz stated that he was
not sure that would be a good idea.
Board Member Bell stated that he was not comfortable making a
decision based on the maps that were received, he would like to see
some more detailed maps. Mr. Bell stated that this may be a
prelude to "screwing up" the traffic flow in the future by giving
up this whole link.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that the southern section of his property
has its own Tax Parcel Number, if he left it as it and sold it as
a whole piece, then he would not have to go through subdivision.
Attorney Barney responded, that is correct.
Board Member Bell stated that who ever buys it would have to
go through the subdivision process.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that if someone wanted to buy it and leave
Planning Board Minutes
MEG
June 27, 1995
it as open green space and did not want to do any development, one
could do that.
Attorney Barney stated that the subdivision could be
restructured to show that the possibility of a road through the
southern section is there.
Town Engineer Walker recommended that this Board suggest to
the Town Board that they create an official highway and
transportation plan for better land use decisions in the future.
Town Planner Kanter stated that a transportation plan is on
the Town Board's priority work plan.
Chairperson
Smith
stated
that
the question of the required
addition of park
space
has not
been
answered yet.
Mr. Ciaschi asked if it was agreed that the road on the
northern property could go through to Woolf Lane,
Board Member Wilcox stated that those that visited the site
were unanimous of the opinion that the wetland was insignificant,
and that the road could go through. Mr. Wilcox stated that he had
a problem with the proposal for a cul -de -sac that dead ends
nowhere.
Mr. Ciaschi stated that was now shown because he owns the
property in the Town of Ulysses which could include a hammerhead
turnaround.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that one way to handle
this would be to get a temporary easement granted to the Town by
Mr. Ciaschi to allow for a hammerhead turnaround until a permanent
end to that road is determined.
Board Member Wilcox stated that the hammerhead would be in the
Town of Ulysses then.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, yes.
Attorney Barney stated that he was not comfortable with that,
but that he did not see any reason why it could not be done like
that. Attorney Barney stated that we could do it if we took it
with an easement, before that is committed to the surveyor, he
wants to check into it further.
Board Member Finch stated that he does not have a problem with
that much park space for that area. Mr. Finch stated that he was
concerned about the roadway plan that Mr. Frantz discussed.
Attorney Barney stated that it is not only a plan, but it is
Planning Board
a comprehensive
may not want to
Mr. Ciaschi is
whether or not
have a subdivis
Minutes
planning
overlook.
looking
he should
ion plat
June 27, 1995
I
n an area for traf f is f low that the Board
Attorney Barney stated that he felt that
for an aye or nay general approval of
go ahead and start spending the money to
of the northern part of his land.
Board Member Wilcox stated that he was comfortable with the
proposal for the northern part of the proposal.
Board Member Finch concurred.
Chairperson Smith concurred also.
Attorney Barney stated, to summarize the discussion, that the
northern lots are okay with the Board as discussed and presented,
they will try to make a decision about a turnaround, they will also
look into the future road.
Chairperson Smith asked if there was any further discussion.
There being none, Chairperson Smith declared the discussion of the
Westwood Hills II duly closed at 11:00 p.m.
OTHER BUSINESS.
Town Planner Jonathan Kanter stated that the Board had
received a few items regarding the Ithacare proposal. One was a
letter from Mark Macera dated 6/23/95 regarding the height at which
each of the Ithacare photos were taken from as clarification to
concerns about the height difference. (A copy of said letter is
attached hereto as Exhibit #2)
Mr. Kanter stated that the notice of completion of the draft
EIS and the Notice of Public Hearing was distributed, and should
appear in the paper either 6/28 or 6/29/95 which will more than
meet the minimum 14 day advance notice that is required for a SEQR
hearing.
Mr.
Kanter stated
that
there was a memo from Assistant Town
Planner
George Frantz on setting up the photograph displays at the
site on
Tuesday, July 11,
1995
from 4:30 to 6:00 p.m. Mr. Kanter
stated
that there would
be a
press release sent out. There would
also be
a rain date of
July
12, 1995 same time same place.
Mr. Kanter stated that the Public Hearing for public comments
would be held on July 18, 1995,
Mr. Kanter stated that there was also included in the Planning
Board information packets
a letter from
Mr. Yntema, which was
submitted before
the June 20,
1995 meeting.
Mr. Kanter stated that
it should be on
the record
that the Board
received Mr. Yntema's
suggestion that
the Board
consider hiring
a consultant to help
review the DEIS.
Planning Board Minutes 42' June 27, 1995
Board Member Finch stated that he did not see a need to hire
one and that he is willing to tell Mr. Yntema that.
Board Member Wilcox asked if the Planning staff is comfortable
with their knowledge of the rules and regulations of the SEQR.
Town Planner Kanter and Town Attorney Barney stated that they
were comfortable with their knowledge of the SEQR.
Board Member Wilcox responded that he did not think that the
Town needs to hire a consultant since the Planning staff has the
necessary knowledge for this process.
Town Planner
that need to be
engineering consid
Kanter stated that
review the project
Kanter stated that the primary technical issues
looked at, are related to views and some
erations relating to drainage and sewers. Mr.
the Town has the professional staff necessary to
thoroughly and adequately.
Board Member Wilcox
stated
that
he
is
concerned that the Board
follow correct procedure
and not
end
up
in
court again. Mr. Wilcox
stated that the issue of views is subjective and will be reviewed
and given due consideration and at that point the Board will come
to a decision. Mr. Wilcox stated that Mr. Yntema somehow found out
• that he and Mr. Macera were somehow related. Mr. Wilcox stated
that he and Mr. Macera are third cousins, but that he knows Mark
more because they grew up together rather than because they are
related.
Chairperson Smith asked if any of the Board members felt that
a consultant should be hired.
The Board agreed that it was not necessary to hire a
consultant to help review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
for the proposed Ithacare project.
Attorney Barney stated that Mr. Yntema cited a very
politically sensitive project in his comparison with the City's
review of the WalMart DEIS. Attorney Barney stated that the City
probably, for political reasons, wanted a consultant to act as a
little bit of a buffer. Attorney Barney stated that he was more
concerned from a technical standpoint, not about the time frame,
but about the thoroughness in which the Town reviews the matter and
the way in which the Planning Board reacts to the comments that the
public submits. Attorney Barney stated that this concern is why it
is worthwhile having a discussion over the issue of a consultant.
Then the Board will respond to Mr. Yntema that the Board has
discussed it and does not feel it is necessary to hire a
consultant.
• Board Member Wilcox asked if the letter should be from
Jonathan Kanter or Stephen Smith.
Planning Board Minutes 43 June 27, 1995
Attorney Barney stated that the letter being from Mr. Kanter
would suffice.
Board Member Hoffmann asked if the Town usually acknowledges
receipt of letters like this.
Attorney Barney responded, yes. Attorney Barney stated that
Mr. Yntema did not make an unreasonable suggestion. It is
appropriate for the Board to respond
to
Mr.
Yntema, indicating that
the Board thought about it and
made
a
decision.
Town Planner Kanter asked if it was alright with the Board if
he draft the letter based on the discussion tonight, and have
Chairperson Smith sign it in response to Mr. Yntema's letter. The
Board agreed.
ADJOURNMENT
Upon MOTION Chairperson Smith declared the June 27, 1995,
Special Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned
at 11:18 p.m.
7/17/95.
•
Respectfully submitted,
4r
Starr Hays,
Recording Secretary,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board.
c �
Mary Bryant,
Administrative Secretary.
•
•
FINAL _-
!I JUN 2 3 lcE
THACARE
s
a home. a community ... a way of life
•q�_ p Jm
June 23, 1995
To: Jonathan Kanter, owR Manner
Fr: Mark A. Macera
j
Re: Computer simulated building and panoramic views in dEIS
Section IV.
As you know, following the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
public hearing on Ithacare Tuesday evening, June 20th, the planning
board engaged in a lengthy discussion of the view and the pictures
of the building in the dEIS.
At one point, board member Eva Hoffman inquired about the
height from which the picture in exhibit IV.H.2.c was taken from at
parking area, facing north/ northwest.
the picture was taken from a camera
the south end of the overlook
I reported that I believed
height of 60 inches.
It occurred to me that this was a rather important piece of
information, given the attention to "scenic views." Therefore, I
examined our records to determine the precise height measurements
for all of the views. The camera height from each viewing location
is as follows.
Exhibit
IV.
H.2.a.
to
know more
IV.
H.2.b
techniques we
used
IV9H.2.c.
the
IV.H.2.d.
IV.H.2.e.
IV.H.2.f.
also be useful
to
know more
IV.H.2.g.
photographic equipment and
techniques we
used
Camera Viewing Height
4511
45"
65"
65"
(see addendum: corrected from 45"
V.H.2.e.)
45"
45"
Furthermore, it may
also be useful
to
know more
about
photographic equipment and
techniques we
used
to create
the
115 South Quarry St. • Ithaca, New York 14850 • 607 - 273 -4080
the
,wR
panoramic views;. The choice of lens was an important consideration
in making the images as natural and realistic as possible. A long
focal length would have compressed the perspective and details. A
wide angle lens would give the impression that the lake and west
hill are much farther away. Neither lens produces an image that
corresponds with human vision. We used an 80 mm lens, on a 2 1/4"
square (AKA 6x6 cm) medium format Hasselblad camera; thereby
producing an image that closely corresponds with human vision.
•
panoramic views;. The choice of lens was an important consideration
in making the images as natural and realistic as possible. A long
focal length would have compressed the perspective and details. A
wide angle lens would give the impression that the lake and west
hill are much farther away. Neither lens produces an image that
corresponds with human vision. We used an 80 mm lens, on a 2 1/4"
square (AKA 6x6 cm) medium format Hasselblad camera; thereby
producing an image that closely corresponds with human vision.
•