Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1997-02-18• RUD MOWN OF ITHACA bete Clerk FEBRUARY 18, 1997 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, February 18, 1997, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Fred Wilcox, James Ainslie, Herbert Finch, Robert Kenerson, Gregory Bell, Randy Marcus (Representing the Attorney for the Town), Daniel Walker (Director of Engineering), JoAnn Cornish (Planner). ALSO PRESENT: Ed Franquemont, Jagat Sharma, Anton Egner, Warren Allmon. Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:34 p.m., and accepted, for the record, the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on February 10, 1997, and February 12, 1997, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the City of Ithaca, Town of Danby, and the Town of Ithaca, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on February 14, 1997. (Affidavit of Posting and Publication is hereto attached as Exhibit #1.) Chairperson Wilcox 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 being no one present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:35 p.m., and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Planner JoAnn Cornish stated that a SEQR was done January 21, 1997, which was given a negative determination. Since that time, the Planning Staff discovered that the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI) building was determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. In the SEAR regulations, Section 617.4 includes the following as a "Type I" action, "if an unlisted action is substantially contiguous to, any historic building, structure, facility, site, or historic district listed on the National Register of Historic Places, or if it has been proposed by the New York State •Board on Historic Preservation for recommendation to the State Historic Preservation Officer for nomination for inclusion in the "National Register ". Planner Cornish stated that, in essence, this is not an unlisted action, but a Type I action that requires a Long Environmental Assessment Form. This Planning Board 2 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • makes the original SEAR determination null and void, and thus needs to be reviewed again in light of the new information. The action before the Board tonight for Site Plan Approval cannot be taken until the SEAR is corrected. The applicant did not have time to prepare the Long Environmental Assessment Form for the meeting, so the new form will be prepared for the next meeting with the Planning Board. The Planning Staff needs to get the comments from the State Historic Preservation Office in Albany where these plans have been forwarded to. The State Historic comments could be considered when determining the SEQR. The Planning Board could still have a discussion and hold the Public Hearing for this proposal, but no formal action can be taken until after the new SEQR has been completed. Warren Allmon, Director of the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI), stated that there was a letter from Lynn Cunningham of Historic Ithaca. Attached to the letter was a 1986 opinion by the State Historic Preservation Office. This letter is a public document that was received by PRI as Appendix 1 to a nine volume set of Route 96/Trumansburg Road relocation. Everyone had sets of this, but no one looked at Appendix 1. PRI found this late Friday afternoon when Candace Cornell called. The information provided to this Board is the best that PRI has at the moment. Mr. Allmon stated that he has only lived in Ithaca for four years, and he did not know about this. If PRI knew about this earlier, this issue could have been addressed in a timely fashion. PRI would like to discuss with the Planning Board what options are available given what they know now. PRI has approximately $220,000.00 to build this addition of, which $140,000.00 are Federal Funds. If this was supported by • private funds, PRI would not be in this situation. $140,000.00 of the $220,000.00 is Federal money from the National Science Foundation, so PRI has to get Historic Preservation approval. The proposal this Board heard in late January was that this project has a very tight budget. PRI needs to figure out what amount of money will satisfy the Institutes needs and requirements for Historic Preservation. PRI has four suggested options for the Planning Board to consider. The first option would be to make an immediate modification to be consistent with the existing building. The roof pitch of the addition could be made steeper to match the roof pitch of the existing building. Mr. Allmon showed preliminary plans of what a steeper roof pitch would look like on the addition to be consistent with the existing building. The 50 -foot wide addition would be the difference between the existing PRI building that is only 30 feet wide. The old preliminary site plan showed the addition to be one story with a basement that was originally designed with the shallow pitch roof. If the pitch of the roof was steeper, it would give the Institute more room. It was suggested to reconfigure the shape of the building into a three - story building. If PRI did this there would be three floors that included the basement. The. addition is designed for collection space and possible storage. All the collections are stored in the basement. There would be a stairwell to have access to the second floor. There is no reason to store collections on the second floor, but PRI could use the second floor for storage. The cost estimates of a steeper pitched roof would be approximately $125,000.00 to $150,000.00. PRI could take the present design the Board has seen and push the roof space up for a second floor. That option would not be attractive for PRI unless there is another $150,000.00 added to the $220,000.00. Option number 2 and 3 are basically the same with just a little variation. PRI could add a smaller building of 3,000 to 4,000 square feet with a pitched roof line down the center. That would work for a smaller building. The •other option would be to build a much smaller building with a smaller footprint away from the existing building of approximately 3,000 to 4,000 square feet with a high - pitched roof. The space under the high - pitched roof would not be used because of the size. Either option provides PRI with the bare minimum space that was to be built with Federal money. It would not allow PRI room for expansion Planning Board 3 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • or growth in the future, but it might meet the minimal acceptable plans Office. There might be a compromise plan. PRI might be able to split f the difference rsomeholw. Concerns of the Board at January's meeting was the outer appearance of the wall. The present building is stone and stucco. The addition is being proposed to be done with concrete blocks and a shingled roof. An intermediate roof pitch would not be as expensive as a higher roof pitch. PRI would face the side wall with stucco and timbers to match the facade of the present building. PRI mentioned last time that eventually they would reface the addition to be consistent with a long -term plan. If people are at the stop light for the hospital, they could look down the driveway to see the lower part of the elevation from the road. The Board should think about how much roof would be visible from the road, not just the pitch of the roof. PRI would like to get preliminary feedback from this Board. PRI contacted the State Historic Preservation Office, and will be sending an informational package to them. Anton Egner, Egner & Associates Architects, stated that at the last Planning Board meeting it was mentioned that PRI's intention, as funds become available, to add stucco to the outside of the addition to match the existing building. Mr. Egner passed around photographs of the existing building, storage trailers, and the property for the Planning Board to review. Mr. Egner stated that if the steeper roof pitch is required it would be more expensive. It will need intermediate supports for this type of roof. If PRI is allowed to have the three story building, they would need an elevator with two enclosed stairwells for fire exiting. This started out to be a temporary building, but the more it was looked at, • the more permanent it became. There is no intent to do anything to the existing building, except to connect to it. One window will be removed for the connection. If the roof pitch is raised the stairwell would need to be moved because the roof pitch would be cutting this area off. The stairwell could be moved into the broiler room, but the facade would have to be pushed out further to accommodate. Chairperson Wilcox asked Mr. Egner what he meant by pushing the new addition further away from the existing structure. Mr. Egner stated that if the stairwell comes from the basement there would be head room needed to get out at the intermediate level. The steeper the roof pitch the more the stairwell will be cut off. There would be complications if the steeper pitch roof is required. The low roof will not block windows for people to use. There would be problems to do any relocation of 6,000 square feet to somewhere else. Mr. Egner stated that PRI has an up to date survey of the whole property. Board Member James Ainslie stated that he has known this property since 1929. This was the Odd Fellows Orphanage. Ceracces bought the old peoples home for the State. The building to the right was the infirmary. A number of years ago, the main building was added onto. A low building was constructed that did not met the roof line of the older building. It was a flat roof. Mr. Ainslie stated that the little low building in the back is an old garage. He could not understand how someone could call that historical. As people travel Route 96/Trumansburg Road, the main PRI building would be blocking most of the addition unless people look down the driveway. He would go along with the lower • pitch roof. Board Member Gregory Bell stated that the flat roof on the building next door looks horrible. Planning Board 4 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • Chairperson Wilcox opened p the Public Hearing. Ed Franquemont, Executive Director of Historic Ithaca, stated that Historic Ithaca does not have a lot of problems with the design being proposed. It should pass the State Historic Preservation Organization. What the Planning Board approves would be up to the Board to decide. This addition would not have a great impact on the historic building, and would barely touch the existing building. The addition would be removable in the future without doing great violence to the existing building. These would be the principles the Historic Preservation Office would use to determine whether something may have a great impact on the building or not. All the buildings on this campus were declared eligible because Historic Ithaca knows it is an unusual property in the Town of Ithaca. It is quite remarkable in the Finger Lakes and rare in the United States. This was an unusual group of buildings, both in purpose and in design. The Environmental Assessment Form process was invented for this purpose. The Environmental Assessment Form was not designed to say PRI could not do something like this. He believes PRI has done a good job with what they need to do. It was mentioned that the addition would not be visible from the road. There are a lot of issues to play with that the Planning Board would need to decide. The Historic Preservation Office's point of view would not be opposed to these designs. The problem is, the State Historic Preservation Office needs to know what is going on with the historic building. The Town is required to file a form that acknowledges there is a value to this building to the common heritage. Steps are being taken to make sure common heritage is not destroyed, and this is what the long form requires to be done. The long form is not • difficult to fill out, but it does mean acknowledgment of impact. There would be steps taken to minimize any impact to explore options. This would be required even if PRI was using private money because the building is declared eligible. It is not a matter of using Federal money. However, using Federal money requires a Section 106 Review. A real problem is Historic Ithaca came to know of these plans very late in the game. This is not the right way to do historic preservation, and this is the third time it has been done in the Town of Ithaca. A method needs to be advised for Historic Ithaca to be notified of these things. Historic Ithaca has a tremendous amount of files of all the properties in Tompkins County, and know what is on the list. Historic Ithaca would suggest that the Town of Ithaca do a survey, like the Town of Caroline has done, so the Town Planners have documentation of each property status in the Town of Ithaca. This could be done for no money. There are grant funds available to help. This process would not happen if well intended and well- meaning citizens who have managed to score a bunch of Federal money to be put to use. Historic Ithaca supports PRI. He would like to plea for Historic Ithaca to find out about these types of properties in advance. In this case, Historic Ithaca was the one who contacted the Historic Preservation Office in Albany. They realized time was important and wanted to get the ball rolling. Historic Ithaca has a lot of expertise with this, and would like to help PRI through this process. Historic Ithaca deals with these people weekly, and know what they think. They also know a lot about Section 106 Review to help PRI with. Federal Income Tax Credit would also be available to PRI. These would be equal to 20 percent of their work as long as the work is done equally to the basis they have in the building. Mr. Egner stated that PRI is a tax -free outfit. • Mr. Franquemont stated that there is a strong preservation organization in Town and people should take advantage of it. He would like to follow this process to make sure the necessary reviews are conducted. Historic properties are part of everyone's cultural heritage and Historic Ithaca wants Planning Board 5 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • to protect them. The goal is to find a way the Planning oard 9 could decide on the project to be approved to pass through this process. Historic Ithaca does not have any complaints as to what has been done so far. Mr. Franquemont stated that he would like Historic Ithaca to be put on a mailing list to receive an agenda whenever there are upcoming meetings. Chairperson Wilcox stated that it would take the State approximately 30 days to review the application. Chairperson Wilcox asked Mr. Franquemont if he could clarify that. Mr. Franquemont stated that it could take that long. The State Historic Preservation Office is very under staffed after the cuts through New York State Park and Recreation. Historic Ithaca initiated this rather than waiting for PRI or the Board because Historic Ithaca knows these people personally. They could call and plea for them to help speed this process. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the reason he asked is because a date would need to be set up for this project to come back to the Planning Board. Mr. Franquemont stated that the State could look at this information and agree with the assessments of minimal impact on this building. It would not be visible from the road. The addition can be easily removed in the future without destroying the existing building. The addition would be connected in a way no one will have a hard time distinguishing this from the existing building. Nobody will know if the State says there is a problem. There would need to be discussions on a way through or around whatever problem they find. This would slow the process up. The Planning Board could probably review this in approximately four to six weeks. Board Member Herbert Finch asked if ten years from now, PRI wants to build an addition onto the proposed addition, would there be the same historic problem. Mr. Franquemont stated that the building could be torn down. They would need to fill out the Long Environmental Assessment Form no matter what is done on this property. There could not be an addition added to it without going through the same level of review because the question does not dramatically alter the appearance of the historic character of the building. Personally, the compromised option is the best. The low pitch roof or flat roof would not be very attractive. The steep roof pitch would be like a tail wagging a dog. The Planning Board could decide what type of roof pitch to have because it is only an eligible building. Board Member Finch asked who would notify the Town of Ithaca that a building has become a historic designation. Mr. Franquemont stated that when a building is listed or declared eligible for listing, there is a letter sent from the State Historic Preservation Office. These letters are in nine volumes of some sort. iHistoric Ithaca also receives the same letter, and records are kept of each property. When something comes up, they look through the files to see if there is anything on that property. Board Member Finch stated that the Town is developing a GIS System which has the capacity Planning Board • to handle this type of information. 6 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 February 18, 1997 Planner Cornish stated that the Town's GIS System has recorded tax parcels, and will be associated with that information in the future, bu the information needs to be received to use this. Mr. Franquemont stated that the Town should do a survey. There is no systematic way. Historic Ithaca has buildings that are listed, but do not know what is in the Town. There is no information on how to conduct an orderly program. Planning Federation Organizations and other granting agencies have valuable tools for this. Grants are given to hire consultants to conduct the surveys. They would develop digests of all the properties in the Town that have possible historic consequences and list their status. When a letter is received from the State Historic Preservation Office, the listings could be updated. This could be added to the GIS System. Chairperson Wilcox stated that each parcel would be tagged as being historically significant or not. Board Member Finch stated that is something the Town should be looking into when setting up the GIS System. Director of Engineering Daniel Walker stated that the GIS System would be relating historic • information and ecological information to each tax parcel. Mr. Franquemont stated that it does not matter how the Town keeps track of this information, but that the Town needs to get the survey done. Every Town needs a survey for Historical resources and natural resources. Board Member Bell asked what is the follow up to the survey, if the Town does the survey. Mr. Bell further asked what are the thoughts on the design review process that would follow the survey. Mr. Franquemont stated that the City has passed a Landmarks Preservation Ordinance, and has become a certified local government to monitor what happens to properties that are in historic districts. The Town does not have that law in place. The Town would need to pass the law in order to use the money that comes along with certified local government, and start reviewing historic properties according to law. The only law protecting or effecting historic properties is State and Federal. There is no local Town law. Historic Ithaca would like to see such a law. However, that is a long way down the line. They would like to see the survey done, so the Town could have the information compiled in a useful form. There should be a meeting to discuss what there is, and what needs to be done after that. There are advantages to a Landmark Law. One is tax credits are available if there are landmark properties in the Town of Ithaca. Chairperson Wilcox stated that after the second Public Hearing, the Planning Board would • discuss the offer of sending an agenda to Historic Ithaca for each meeting. Director of Engineering Walker stated that he does not think it needs to be discussed because it could be done automatically. Planning Board 7 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • Mr. Fran uemont stated that q there are two institutions in New York State who put pressure on Historic Ithaca to encourage local Towns to do these surveys. These institutions would give money to an applicant to do the survey. Board Member Bell stated that he understands there are groups of neighborhood associations on the mailing lists. Mr. Bell asked how big is the mailing list. Planner Cornish stated that there are approximately 20 to 30 neighborhood associations and interested parties. Board Member Bell asked if agendas are mailed to these people for every meeting. Director of Engineering Walker stated that notification is mailed to adjoining parcel owners according to the Tax Roll, the applicants and agents for each project scheduled for a Public Hearing. Board Member Bell asked if there are people on the list who get every agenda. Planner Cornish responded, yes. Historic Ithaca would be added to the mailing list for persons to receive agendas. • Board Member Bell stated that he suggested to Supervisor Valentino that the Town might consider setting up a fee for mailings of the agendas. Then it would not be a burden to the Town for postage. If someone wanted to subscribe, they could pay the Town so much. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Planning Board cannot take a formal action tonight on this proposal. The Board has indications that the State could take two to four weeks to hear back. There is some indication that the original plans presented to the Board are reasonable and could be acceptable to the parties. Chairperson Wilcox asked, based on that information, does this Board feel that they could impart additional information upon representatives of PRI or Historic Ithaca. Planner Cornish stated that the Board needs to wait for State comments. The conditions of preliminary site plan approval have been met along with the changes that were requested. For the record, PRI went before the Zoning Board of Appeals for special approval. Unfortunately, the Attorney for the Town John Barney recognized this addition would have an inadequate side yard setback. PRI would need to go back before the Zoning Board of Appeals for two variances: inadequate side yard setback, and this will also put the existing garage into the side yard where an accessory building needs to be in the rear yard. Mr. Egner stated that when PRI initially talked about this addition, they were looking at this as an accessory use. In discussions with the Zoning Board of Appeals, PRI agreed this is not an •accessory use, and offered to take five feet off from the corner. The Zoning Board of Appeals agreed to go on record, by not cutting five feet off and not to call it an accessory building, but to use it the way it was. PRI will be returning to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the variances. Mr. Egner stated that he has estimates from contractors who are wondering when they could start. Planning Board 8 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 Chairperson Wilcox asked Planner Cornish if there is a valid SEAR at this point. Planner Cornish responded, no, therefore, PRI cannot go back to the Zoning Board of Appeals until there is a valid SEQR. Attorney Marcus stated that would not be an issue because the two variances in question are Type II actions. A side yard setback is a Type II action. The variance to allow what used to be the garage to be in the side is also a Type II action. The action being taken is the creation of an addition. The Zoning Board of Appeals could complete their own SEQR review. The Planning Board does not have to complete a SEQR for the Zoning Board of Appeals to take action on The Zoning Board of Appeals could defer to the Planning Board's SEQR. Board Member Bell stated that under SEQR, Part 617, there is a clear process for determining lead agency. There cannot be split lead agencies, so there cannot be split Type I and Type II actions on the same project. Attorney Marcus stated that is not what is happening. In a case like this it could go either way. The easiest thing for the Board to do is conduct the SEQR because it is an overview of the whole project. The Planning Board would be taking into account all the impacts resulting from whatever variances might be necessary from whatever Historic Preservation issues involve. Since the variance action is a separate action, it is possible for them to take a look at the SEQR themselves. It seems like a waste of resources because the Planning Board would have already done the SEQR review. The variance being requested is an action separate from the action the Planning Board is taking to approve this project. There is no problem with the Zoning Board of Appeals coming to a decision recognizing that it is subject to the Planning Board's SEQR. The Zoning Board of Appeals variance would not affect the end result if the Planning Board does not approve the project. The decision would be conditional upon the Planning Board's decision in any event. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Planning Board was thinking about making its appeal conditional tonight based upon variances to be granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Planner Cornish stated that the next Zoning Board of Appeals meeting is the second week in March, and the Planning Board meeting is soon after. Mr. Egner stated that as long as the Town does not have a law on the books, the State would be the prime answer on the SEQR review. The Town could review it according to Zoning and Planning issues, but the State would be the final determination for SEQR for the Historic Preservation. PRI's effort is to get the information to the State as soon as possible. After hearing from the State, PRI will be back for final approval. Chairperson Wilcox stated that without a valid SEQR, he does not want people to go to the Zoning Board of Appeals to have it conditioned upon the Planning Board's review and approval of SEQR. He wants to keep this clean, and have the Full Environmental Assessment Form to review for the Planning Board to approve this project. Then the Zoning Board of Appeals would need to review. Planning Board 9 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • Mr. Egner stated that in support of the Historic Ithaca issue, everyone cannot know rY eve thing 9 about these issues. This proposal started as a temporary building which kept growing into a permanent building. PRI's purpose is not to ruin a building that does have merit. This building does have merit even without knowing it was on the list. It would be a benefit to PRI, the Town, and to everyone to know if properties were on the list for Historic value. Chairperson Wilcox stated that based upon the discussion of this proposal, he would like to adjourn the Public Hearing until March 18, 1997. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he encourages PRI to work with the State to speed the process through, and he encourages the Town Planning Staff to continue working with PRI through the process. Director of Engineering Walker stated that PRI stated the impact on the SEQR, and there is no problems discussing the SEQR issues and concerns. Whether the Town received the long form or the short form, he believes the information the Planning Board looked at, other than historic, such as the drainage and sanitary, are not concerns of the environment for this project. This Board granted the original SEQR with a negative declaration. Other than the historic impact, there is nothing that has changed. When the long form is received, it will have information the Town has already looked at and discussed. Attorney Marcus stated that the Town is precluded about reevaluating other issues unless there is some information that comes to light, such as information from Historic Ithaca, that may have bearing on other issues. If nothing from Historic Ithaca has any bearing on drainage or air quality that has been determined already cannot be reopened for consideration of those unrelated issues. Board Member Bell stated that he has been advised by the staff, indirectly from the Attorney for the Town, that should there be a vote on this issue he should recuse himself from this particular issue. Given the facts, between the time of the previous hearing and this hearing, his wife has been offered a job by PRI. When this issue comes to a vote, he will not vote. Chairperson Wilcox duly adjourned the matter of Final Site Plan Approval for Paleontological Research Institution until March 18, 1997 Planning Board Meeting. AGENDA ITEM: SEQR DETERMINATION, PROPOSED TEMPORARY OFFICE TRAILER AND PARKING AREA, SOUTH HILL COMPLEX, LOCATED AT 930 DANBY ROAD. Chairperson Wilcox duly opened the above - mentioned matter at 8:36 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. Jagat Sharma, Architect for South Hill Complex, supplied the Board with revised site plans for South Hill Complex. Mr. Sharma stated that this application is for the installation of a temporary office trailer for DIGICOMP Research. DIGICOMP has tried to put the project together according to the approved site plan for the building within the last year. The leasing and financing have not been completed. They have three signed leases for the building. They are looking for more tenants to sign. DIGICOMP has become very busy, and more people are needed. DIGICOMP would like to have a temporary office trailer next to their present building. Drawing #3 of the proposed site plan, and Planning Board 10 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 Drawing #4 of the approved subdivision, show the location of the trailer with additional arkin s p 9 p aces. DIGICOMP's proposal is for the placement of a 24 feet by 60 feet temporary office trailer next to the existing building. The reason for placing the trailer in this location is because the trailer will need hookups for water, sewer, and electric. They are located at the corner of the existing building, and would be easy to hook into. Mr. Sharma stated that he visited the site, and realized that there might be some cutting and filling in the present location. Discussions with the trailer people resulted as they can balance the pads to some degree so there would not be much cutting. The front of the trailer will be higher than the rear. (South Hill Complex Partial Plan: Approved Site Plan dated 12/19/95, Drawing #1, South Hill Complex Partial Plan: Approved Sub - Division Plan dated 12/19/95, Drawing #2, South Hill Complex Partial Plan: Approved Site plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location, Drawing #3, and South Hill Complex Partial Plan: Approved Sub - Division Plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location, Drawing #4, is hereto attached as Exhibit #2.) Planner Cornish asked if this would take place in the location shown on the site plans provided. Mr. Sharma responded, yes. Mr. Sharma supplied the Board with a photograph of what the temporary office trailer would like. Mr. Sharma stated that DIGICOMP's temporary trailer will not actually look like the trailer in the photograph, but close to it. DIGICOMP is proposing the temporary office trailer for a limited time of 24 months with little alteration to the site. The parking provided will be extended off of the entrance drive. Mr. Sharma stated that the plantings will not be touched. • (Photograph of temporary trailer is hereto attached as Exhibit #3.) Planner Cornish stated that when she looked at the site plan, and visited the site, there was some concern regarding cutting and filling for the placement of the trailer. Since this had received site plan approval and subdivision approval previously, there is language in those approvals that affect the placement of this trailer, which should be taken care of in the new resolution. The environmental concern was the placement of the trailer so the site would be altered as little as possible. The trailer may be moved down the slope from where it is shown on the site plan. Parking seemed to a problem when she visited the site. There were cars parked in the driveway as well as in non - designated areas. Additional parking is needed with six more parking spaces for six new employees. There are no other environmental concerns because it is a temporary situation for 24 months. Chairperson Wilcox asked if there is insufficient parking on the site now. Mr. Sharma stated that they meet the requirements for Zoning in the Town. There are days when there is not enough parking. Planner Cornish stated that when she visited the site all the designed parking spaces were filled, plus cars were parked along the side of the entrance drive. This did not appear to be a problem. There seemed to be adequate sight distance, but there definitely needs to be more parking spaces shown. • Chairperson Wilcox stated that there is not enough parking now. The trailer has a capacity of four to six additional employees, which increases the parking problem. Chairperson Wilcox asked if six additional parking spaces would be enough. Planning Board 11 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • Planner Cornish responded, no. She thinks there is enough parking spaces if the cars remain P 9 p on the side of the entrance drive. The question would be, does the Board want to designate these as additional parking spaces or not. Where the proposed new parking spaces are shown on the plans, would be room for more spaces because it is level enough. Chairperson Wilcox asked if there would be a safety problem with these cars parking along the entrance drive. Planner Cornish stated that she did not perceive any safety problems. This is a large open level area. It is simply parallel parking along the edge of the entrance drive. Board Member Ainslie asked if the temporary office trailer was removed, what would happen to the site. Mr. Sharma stated that it will be restored back to the original condition. Board Member Ainslie asked if there could be more parking there after the temporary office trailer is removed. Mr. Sharma stated that it was designated for more parking next to the building. Board Member Bell stated that question number 5 of the Short Environmental Assessment Form does not give a real description of this project. It asks for a description of the project, that says the project received approvals before. It does not say what this project is. Mr. Bell stated that he thinks there should be a few sentences added to what is being done. The other item is question number 8. It asks whether the proposed action complies with the existing zoning or other land use restrictions. The answer is checked "yes, but he thinks the answer should be "no ". Director of Engineering Walker stated that any changes to the site requires site plan approval by the Planning Board based on the previous site plan approval. It is compliant with the use in the zoning. The large building would be built first as Phase I, and the construction of the driveway to the Axiohm site would be part of this phase. Mr. Sharma stated that the condition in the resolution is if any new building is constructed the road needs to be built. Director of Engineering Walker asked if the location of the temporary office trailer and temporary parking would not conflict with the construction zone for that building. Mr. Sharma stated that was correct. Chairperson Wilcox stated that Board Member Bell's comment on question number 5 should is be modified in someway to say temporary office trailer for up to six employees. Attorney Marcus stated that question number 8 was appropriately answered. It does comply • Planning Board 12 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 with zoning issues. If the project was in a need of a variance, the answer would be no. Board Member Bell asked what are they coming to this Board for. Attorney Marcus stated that it is not that they do not comply, it is a requirement to come to this Board. There is a distinction between requesting something in the lines of a variance and asking for an exception from the requirements of the law that places them before the Planning Board for approval. Planner Cornish stated that the South Hill Complex has an approved site plan. to the approved site plan requires them to come to the Planning Board for approval of a plan Any changes modified site Board Member Bell stated that he believes a modified site plan is an action which does not comply with the existing restriction, so the answer would be no. Director of Engineering Walker stated that the zone requires site plan approval for any modifications to the site. By this action they are complying with the restrictions by coming to this Board. If this was a residential district where they wanted to put a commercial project, it would not be consistent with zoning. Therefore, they would be required to get a variance, and the answer would be no. • MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Greg Bell: 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, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote. AYES - Wilcox, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. (NOTE: The adopted resolution is hereto attached as Exhibit #4.) Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the SEQR determination for Modified Site Plan Approval for the South Hill Complex at 8:55 p.m. • PUBLIC HEARING: APPROVAL FnP I • Planning Board 13 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 ii SHARMA, AGENT. r Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:56 p.m., and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Board Member Bell stated that he thinks it is great that DIGICOMP Research is getting more work and bringing in more employees. It is good hi -tech stuff, and great for economic development. Mr. Bell stated that he thinks the way the driveway is being proposed has some problems. The way the Planning Board went through the procedure of dividing these into four separate lots, there was a lot of concern about making each lot independently accessible by the roads. The Planning Board decided to split the road down the middle, to divide Lot #1 and Lot #2. If Lot #1 was built and Lot #2 was not, there would still be access. The design for the new driveway is curvy which is located on all four lots. There are pieces on each lot. It seems that it makes more sense to use what the Planning Board approved previously for the actual shape. Mr. Sharma stated that whatever is shown on site plan is already existing on the site. He is just extending the width of the driveway that already exists. The concern of locating the temporary office trailer was to stay within Lot #1 to comply with one of the conditions of the previous approval. Board Member Bell asked if the first building would be constructed on Lot #3. Mr. Sharma stated that was correct. At that point, all the site plans will change to the approved site plan. Planner Cornish stated that would trigger the road improvement and the additional parking. Chairperson Wilcox asked Planner Cornish to briefly address the purpose of the revised proposed resolution in terms of cut and fill, and the other issues. Planner Cornish stated that after visiting the site and looking at the site plan for the proposed location of the trailer, it appeared they would have to do a substantial amount of cutting into the slope in order to fit the trailer on Lot #1. However, if they were to move the trailer down the hill to avoid cutting, it may cross over the lot line between Lots #1 and #2. A condition of the subdivision approval was that if anything was done on any lot other than Lot #1 it would trigger the new access road • improvement. However, to avoid having to grade, it makes sense to put the trailer where it would fit most conveniently with a minimal amount of grading. Planner Cornish stated that she, and Attorney for the Town, John Barney discussed some wording, which in essence said this trailer can be placed Planning Board 14 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • in the most appropriate place on the site even if it crosses the lot line, solely and exclusively for the purpose of placing this trailer on the site. That condition would be waived for the subdivision approval. Should anything happen on any of the other lots, or should the trailer be removed before the 24 -month time period, everything would revert back to the original condition. If the Board reads the proposed resolution, condition b., it addresses this, based on advice from Attorney Barney to waive that condition. Another condition would be to modify the plan showing the exact installed location of the trailer for the Town's records. Board Member Bell asked what about the number of months for the temporary office trailer. The proposed resolution says 24 months, but the Board heard 18 months. Planner Cornish stated that Attorney Barney suggested taking whatever they gave and adding six months. In Attorney Barney's experience, it may go a little bit longer, and rather than having DIGICOMP come back before the Planning Board for an extension, it was wise to give them a limited time of 24 months. Attorney Marcus stated that he would like to add an amendment to the proposed resolution. In condition b., the following words should be added "in a location that would minimize regrading or cutting and filling", at the end of the sentence that reads "and associated parking." Chairperson Wilcox opened the Public Hearing. No one spoke. Chairperson Wilcox closed • the Public Hearing, and asked if anyone was prepared to offer a motion. MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie: NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for 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 "South Hill Complex, Partial Plan: Approved Site Plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location ", dated January 16, 1997, prepared by Jagat P. Sharma, Architect, subject to the following conditions: a. That approval be given for the construction of a temporary office trailer and associated parking, for a period of 24 months from the date of this approval (by February 18, 1997), and that all conditions of the Final Site Plan Approval dated • February 7, 1995 and Final Subdivision Approval granted December 19, 19951 granted by the Planning Board for South Hill Complex, still pertain to the modified South Hill Complex Site Plan dated January 16, 1997. Planning Board 15 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • b. Should placement of the temporary office trailer require crossing the line between Lot #1 and Lot #4, Condition 2b. of the adopted resolution dated December 19, 1995, (Condition 2b. of the original resolution states: "Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any buildings on any of the lots other than Lot #1, the entrance road from NYS Route 96B to the proposed development, the parking areas between Lot #1 and Lot #2, and the 24 foot wide entrance and exit road from Axiohm to Lot #1 rear parking area, shall be substantially completed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.) shall be waived in regard to the temporary office trailer, for a period of 24 months, solely and exclusively, to allow for the construction of the temporary office trailer and associated parking in a location that would minimize regrading. Should the trailer be removed before the 24- month time limit has expired, (by February 18, 1999), this partial wavier of condition 2b. shall expire. Condition 2b. of the final subdivision resolution remains in effect with regard to any and all other projects on this site. C. Revision of the modified site plan to show the final installed location of the temporary office trailer. d. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plan shall be revised to show a new (temporary) parking configuration that will maintain the existing number of • parking spaces (14 + / -) and allow for six or more additional parking spaces, subject to approval by the Director of Planning for the Town of Ithaca. e. Revision of the modified site plan to show the existing shed. f. Compliance with all conditions as noted on the Final Site Plan Checklist, attached, dated 2/18/97. g. Submission of the original or mylar copy of the Final Site Plan, as modified, to include a north arrow and bar scale, to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. Board Member Bell stated that paragraph 2, condition a, talks about the dates of approval. Mr. Bell asked if anyone knew when the dates of latest approval expired. Planner Cornish stated that the subdivision approval expires 36 months after approval. Director of Engineering Walker stated that the subdivision approval would not expire because one of the lots has been occupied and construction has begun. The subdivision is active now because they have had a building permit for one of the properties and have done some work. Planner Cornish stated that they did renovations in the existing building as Phase I. • Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Board had documents dated January 16, 1997 that the current resolution and SEQR resolution referred to. The Board was supplied with new documentation dated January 16, 1997 and revised February 18, 1997. Chairperson Wilcox asked what date should • • Planning Board 16 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 the resolution refer to. Planner Cornish stated that the new documents provided should be reflected in the resolutions. Chairperson Wilcox stated that there are numerous places in the proposed resolution and SEQR resolution talking about these documents dated January 16, 1997, which should say "January 16, 1997 revised February 18, 1997." The Planning Board was in agreement to add the revised date to the resolutions. Chairperson Wilcox stated that condition "e" should be deleted from the resolution because the existing shed is now shown on the revised site plans. Then condition "f' and "g" should be changed to "e" and "f'. Board Member Bell asked what are the differences between the two sets of plans besides the existing shed issue. Planner Cornish stated that the parking configuration is the only difference. Board Member Finch asked if construction is under way on the other parts, or is the construction going to be under way in the spring. Mr. Sharma responded, no. The understanding is that there are only a few tenants that have already signed up, and they are waiting for more to sign up. The construction would not start until the leases are filled. There being no further discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote AYES - Wilcox, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. (NOTE: The adopted resolution is hereto attached as Exhibit #5.) Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the matter of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the South Hill Complex at 9:15 p.m. MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by James Ainslie: RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board amends the SEQR resolution to reflect the date January 16, 1997 to read "January 16, 1997 revised February 18, 1997 ", per revised • drawings supplied by Mr. Sharma at the meeting. There being no further discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote. Planning Board 17 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • AYES - Wilcox, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 21. 1997. MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Herbert Finch: February 18, 1997 RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the January 21, 1997 Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board be and hereby are approved with the following corrections: Page 5, last sentence of the first paragraph, which reads "Mr. Egner stated that the Institution is trying to get 60.000 square feet for $210,000.00. ", shall read "Mr. Egner stated that the Institution is trying to get 6.000 square feet for $210,000." Page 5, paragraph 6, which reads "Mr. Egner stated that the Institution has 60,000 square feet to do a building of 3,000 square foot, which they have a grant to allow them to do that.", shall read "Mr. Egner stated that the Institution has agrant to allow them to put up a 6,000 square feet two storx building.' • There being no further.discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote. AYES - Wilcox, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. ABSTAIN -Ainslie. The MOTION was declared to be carried. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS, Chairperson Wilcox stated that there is nothing scheduled for the March 4, 1997 Planning Board Meeting, and asked if the Planning Board would like to cancel that meeting date. MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by James Ainslie: RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby cancels the March 4, 1997 Planning Board Meeting, and that the Town Clerk should be notified to inform the media of the canceled meeting. , Board Member Kenerson suggested that the Planning Board should meet for planning procedures and discussions. • Chairperson Wilcox stated that since there are only two weeks before March 4, 1997, there is not enough time to put together an agenda for informational purposes. The Planning Staff could Planning Board 18 February 18, 1997 APPROVED - March 18, 1997 • gather information to discuss at other meetings There being no further discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote. AYES - Wilcox, Ainslie, Finch, Bell. NAYS - Kenerson. The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Town Planning Staff would forward all agendas to Historic Ithaca. There was discussion about the Board making a recommendation to the Town Board to conduct a survey. Chairperson Wilcox asked if the Planning Board would like to address this. Board Member Bell stated that he agrees, and it has been discussed several times. The time the Old One Hundred proposal was in, it was discussed in some detail, but it did not go anywhere. He would recommend that the Town undertake a historic inventory of the Town. According to Candace Cornell, in the basement of the County Court House there are inventory forms, photographs, and other stuff. Some of the work might already be done. Planner Cornish stated that is true. Historic Ithaca does not send a list of properties that the Town should be aware of. If she gets a chance, she would visit the 1976 inventory at the Court House • to see what information is available. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he would recommend to the staff to investigate what it would cost and how long it would take to conduct a survey of historical buildings and areas in the Town of Ithaca. Planner Cornish stated that, from that information, a recommendation could be made to the Town Board to invest funds. Attorney Marcus stated that his impression of what Mr. Franquemont mentioned was that Historic Ithaca would preform and produce a survey in terms of investigating the cost. Staff could call Historic Ithaca to gather the necessary information for the Planning Board to consider. A resolution to the Town Board at this time is not necessary. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT. Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the February 18, 1997, Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:33 p.m. Prepared by: Deborah Kelley, Keyboard Specialist/Minutes Recorder • Mary Bryant, Administrative Secretary, Town of Ithaca. • • �_J TOWN OF ITHACA PLAN1iING BOARD 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca, tie%v Fork 14850 Tuesday. February 18. 1997 AGENDA 7:30 P.M. Persons to be heard. 7:35 PAL PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of +/- sq. ft. addition to the Paleontological Trumansburg Road/NYS Rte. 96 on Tov District R -30. Paleontological Research FINAL Final Site Plan Approval for a proposed 6.000 Research Institution, located at 1259 rn of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 3 -3.1. Residence Institution. Owner, Warren Allmon. Agent. 7:55 P.Nl. SEQR Determination, proposed temporary office trailer and parking area, South Hill Complex, located at 930 Danbv Road. as further described below. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed placement of a 24 ft. by 60 ft. temporary office trailer and construction of a temporary parking area adjacent to the existing building at 930 Danbv Road. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -3 -9, said placement and construction to be a temporary modification of the site plan for the proposed South Hill Complex for which Final Site Plan Approval was granted. with conditions, on December 12, 1995. Said property is located in an "I" Industrial District. ICS Development Partners, Owner; Jagat P. Sharma, Agent. 5. Approval of Minutes: January 21. 1997 (in packet). 6. Other Business. 7. Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY NIE>IBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY STARR HAYS AT 273-17471 . (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) • TOWN OF ITHACA 126 EAST SENECA STREET, ITHACA, N.Y. 14850 TOWN CLERK 273 -1721 HIGHWAY 273 -1656 PARKS 273 --8035 ENGINEERING 273 -1747 PLANNING 273 -1747 ZONING 273 -1783 FAX (607) 273 -1704 TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION • is I, Starr Hays, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Secretary for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in Town of Ithaca Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York. on Tuesday, February 18, 1997, commencing at 7:30 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Bulletin Board, Front & Entrance of Town Hall. Date of Posting Date of Publication: Starr Hays, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. February 10, 1997 February 12, 1997 STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS.: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 10th day of February 1997. A Public. /3c =/�, Filename-= Cent1ZR endas \PPAFF \97- 02- 18.PPA i lii NEW IORK 9 4046 427 • • • Legals 7711 24- 3 -3.1, Residence District. R -30. Paleontological Re= search Institution, Owner;' Warren Allmon, Agent. B:OOp.m. - Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the pro- ppoosed placement of a 24 h. by 60 h. temporary office trailer and construction of a temporary parking area ad- jacent to the existing building at 930 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40-3-90, said placement and construc= tion to be a temporary modi�- , fication of the site Plan for the proposed South Hill Complex for which Final Site Plan Ap- proval was granted, with con - ditions, on December 19; 1995. Said property is ly: cated in an "I Industrial Dis- trict, ICS Development Part- ners, Owner; _Jagat P_' Sharma, Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of- such matters or objections. thereto. Persons may appear - by aggent or in person. Indi= viduals with visual impair -' ments, hearing impairments' or other special needs, will' be provided with assistancgg' as necessary, upon requesf�; TOWN OF ITHACA Persons desiring assistance PLANNING BOARD must make such a request ndt" NOTICE OF less than 48 hours prior to the - PUBLIC HEARINGS time of the public hearings..' Tuesday, February 18, 1997 Jonathan Kanter, AICP, B d i r e c t i o n of' the Director of Planning Chairperson of the Planning 273- 1747,- Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY Februory 12, 1997 GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held 6 the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca N on Tuesday, February 18, 19971 at 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, NY, at the fol- lowing times and on the fol- lowing matters: 7:35p.m. - Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for a proposed 6,000± sq. ft. addition to the Paleontologi- cal Research Institution lo- cated at 1259 Trumans6urg Road /NYS Rte. 96 on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 0 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANT MNI G BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday. February 18. 1997 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday. February 18, 1997. at 126 East Seneca Street. Ithaca. N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:35 P.M. Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for a proposed 6.000 �i- sq: ft. addition to the Paleontological Research Institution. located at 1259 Trumansburg Road[L YS Rte. 96 on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 3 -3.1. Residence District R -30. Paleontological Research Institution. Owner; Warren Allmon. Agent. 8:00 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed placement of a.24 ft. by 60 ft. temporary office trailer and construction of a temporary parking area adjacent to the existing building at 930 Danby Road. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -) said placement and construction to be a temporary modification of the site plan for the proposed South Hill Complex for which Final Site Plan Approval was granted, with conditions, on December 12. 1995. Said property is located in an "I" Industrial District, ICS Development Partners, Owner; Jagat P. Sharma, Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections hereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, February 10. 1997 Publish: W ednesday. February 12. 1997 U • • ADOPTED RESOLUTION: SEQR Modified Site Plan Approval South Hill Complex 930 Danby Road Planning Board, February 18, 1997 MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: [sue 1. This action is the consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed placement of a 24 ft. by 60 ft. temporary office trailer, to house six offices for Digicomp Research and the construction of a temporary parking area adjacent to the existing building at 9' )0 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -3 -9. Said placement and construction to be a temporary modification of the site plan for the proposed South Hill Complex for which Final Site Plan Approval was granted, with conditions, on February 7, 1995. Said property is located in an "I" Industrial District, ICS Development Partners, Owner; Jagat P. Sharma, Applicant, 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, on February 18, 1997, 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 site plan entitled "South Hill Complex, Partial Plan: Approved Site Plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location ", dated January 16, 1997, revised February 18, 1997, prepared by Jagat P. Sharma, Architect, 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. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Starr Hays, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. 2/21 /97.srh Mary Bryant, • • • ADOPTED RESOLUTION: South Hill Complex 930 Danby Road Modified Site Plan Approval Planning Board, February 18, 1997 MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: 1. This action is the consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed placement of a 24 ft. by 60 ft. temporary office trailer, to house six offices for Digicomp Research and the construction of a temporary parking area adjacent to the existing building at 930 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -3 -9, said placement and construction to be a temporary modification of the site plan for the proposed South Hill Complex for which Final Site Plan Approval was granted, with conditions, on February 7, 1995. Said property is located in an "I" Industrial District, ICS Development Partners, Owner; Jagat P. Sharma, Applicant. 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, has, on February 18, 1997, made a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to Final Site Plan Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on February 18, 1997, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1 submitted by the applicant and a Part II prepared by the Town Planning Department, a site plan entitled "South Hill Complex, Partial Plan: Approved Site Plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location ", dated January 16, 1997, revised February 18, 1997, prepared by Jagat P. Sharma, Architect, and additional application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for 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 "South Hill Complex, Partial Plan: Approved Site Plan dated 12/19/95, Proposed Temporary Office Trailer Location ", dated January 16, 1997, revised February 18, 1997, prepared by Jagat P. Sharma, Architect, subject to the following conditions: a. That approval be given for the construction of a temporary office trailer and associated parking, for a period of 24 months from the date of this approval (by February 18, 1999), and that all conditions of the Final Site Plan Approval dated February 7, 1995 and Final Subdivision Approval granted December 19, 1995, granted by the Planning Board for South Hill Complex, still pertain to the modified South Hill Complex Site Plan dated January 16, 1997, revised February 18, 1997. South Hill Complex Page 2 930 Danby Road •Modified Site Plan Approval Planning Board, February 18, 1997 b. Should placement of the temporary office trailer require crossing the line between Lot #1 and Lot #4, condition 2b. of the adopted subdivision resolution, dated December 19, 1995, (Condition 2b. of the original resolution states: "Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any buildings on any of the lots other than Lot #1, the entrance road from NYS Route 96B to the proposed development, the parking areas between Lot #1 and Lot #2, and the 24 foot wide entrance and exit road from Axiohm to Lot #1 rear parking area, shall be substantially completed to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer.) shall be waived in regard to the temporary office trailer, for a period of 24 months, solely and exclusively, to allow for the construction of the temporary office trailer and associated parking in a location that would minimize regrading. Should the trailer be removed before the 24 month time limit has expired, (by February 18, 1999), this partial waiver of condition 2b. shall expire. Condition 2b. of the final subdivision resolution remains in effect with regard to any and all other projects on this site. • • C, Revision of the modified site plan to show the final installed location of the temporary office trailer. d. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the site plan shall be revised to show a new (temporary) parking configuration that will maintain the existing number of parking spaces (14 ±) and allow for 6 or more additional parking spaces, subject to approval by the Director of Planning for the Town of Ithaca. e. Compliance with all conditions as noted on the Final Site Plan Checklist, attached, dated 2/18/97. f. Submission of the original or mylar copy of the Final Site Plan, as modified, to include a north arrow and bar scale, to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Finch, Kenerson, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Starr Hays, Secretary, T 2/21/97.srh of Ithaca.