No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1998-05-05U TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MAY 59 1998 FILED TOWN Of ITHCA Date Clerk_.. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, May 5, 1998, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Chairperson Fred Wilcox, Eva Hoffman, Greg Bell, Robert Kenerson, Jim Ainsle, Lawrence Thayer, Joan Lent Noteboom (Town Clerk), Jonathan Kanter (Director of Planning), John Barney (Attorney for the Town), Daniel Walker (Director of Engineering), George Frantz (Assistant Town Planner), Christine Balestra (Planner), Susan Ritter (Environmental Planner). ALSO PRESENT: Elena Flash, Ed Harwood, Michael Milmoe, J. Van de Poel, Andrea Coby, Joe Westbrook, Anne Shumate, Anton J. Egner, Warren Allmon, Nancy Goody, Carl Sgrecci, Josephine Rich, David Herrick, Phil Runkel, Linda Bums, Peter Trowbridge, Dick Perry, Bob Weide, Elsie Dentes. Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:33 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 April 27, 1998, and April 29, 1998, together with the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the .Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of Danby, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on May 1, 1998. (Affidavit of Posting and Publication is hereto attached as Exhibit #1.) Chairperson Wilcox read all 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: There were no persons present to be heard. Chairperson Wilcox introduced Susan Ritter, the new Environmental Planner, and Came L. Coates, the new Keyboard Specialist/Minutes Secretary. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding an amendment to Local Law No. 1 of the year 1998 Providing For a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety Days, said amendment proposed to extend the moratorium for an additional seventy -five days. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:35 p.m. There were no persons present to be heard. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:36 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox stated that those on the Codes and Ordinances Committee had been working on some amendments and have some draft plans. Board Member Bell asked if they were to judge what is involved. Chairperson Wilcox stated the Board was asked to give the process the time it needs to go through all the Boards and give recommendations. Board Member Bell stated the study on Adult Entertainment Uses was completed and circulated to Codes and Ordinances Committee and was talked about at the last meeting. The Committee asked for a few revisions and they are in the process of putting those changes together. The interesting thing about the Adult Planning Board Page 2 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Entertainment Uses Study, it appears the way the study and the proposals are going, the light industrial zone is where the "most appropriate places are for those kind of uses." There are several light industrial zones being looked at. One is the Inlet Valley Area. These uses would be allowed with some specific and restrictive guidelines. It will be coming before the Planning Board on May 19,1998 for a recommendation. Board Member Kenerson asked if the time extension would be adequate time to do the work. Board Member Bell responded it would be. The time extention would give the proposal another seventy -five days to appear in front of the Town Board for enactment of the local law by June meeting. Another Town Board meeting was factored in after that just in case. MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. The Town Board enacted Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1998 "Providing for a Moratorium for the establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety (90) Days," on February 9, 1998, and 2. Said proposed local law establishes interim regulations prohibiting the establishment of adult entertainment businesses for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of enactment of the local law in order to provide a reasonable period of time for the Town of Ithaca Planning Department to conduct a study regarding the potential secondary effects of such uses on the surrounding community, and to provide a reasonable period of time for the Town Board to draft and consider regulations regarding the establishment of such uses within the Town of Ithaca, and 3. The Town Board has been diligently pursuing the preparation of a draft local law which would regulate adult entertainment businesses, and has also prepared a draft study regarding the secondary affects of such uses (April 61 1998), and 4. The above - referenced moratorium is set to expire on or about May 9, 1998, and the Town Board has proposed extending the current moratorium for an additional seventy -five (75) days in order to provide sufficient time to complete the above - referenced study and revise the draft proposed local law, and 5. The Town Board has referred said proposed amendment to Local Law No. 1, 1998, to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for their recommendation. and 6. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on May 5, 1998, has reviewed the above - referenced local law amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 78 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, hereby finds that: a. There is a need for the proposed seventy -five (75) day extension of the moratorium for the establishment of adult entertainment businesses, and Planning Board Page 3 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED. APPROVED b. The existing and probable future character of the Town will not be adversely affected; and C. The proposed amendment to the local law is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town, and will allow the Planning Department to complete a study of the potential secondary effects of adult entertainment businesses and will allow the proper consideration of a draft local law regarding the regulation of such uses; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of enact the proposed amendment to Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1998 "Providing the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety (90) the moratorium for an additional seventy -five (75) days. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Thayer, Ainslie, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Ithaca Town Board for a Moratorium for Days", by extending AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination, St. Catherine of Siena Church Subdivision, Blackstone Avenue. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:40 p.m. Elena Flash, Attorney at True Walsh and Miller representing St. Catherine's Church, stated they came before the Board a couple of years ago for an application for a variance to build a residence for the priests of St. Catherine's Church. She explained the residence had been completed and the Priests were happily living there. In the Church's financial plan, it called for selling one lot of the Church property. This would provide the Church with the resources it needed in order to pay for the residence. She stated the Church was fortunate to have a purchase offer. The purchase was contingent on the approval to subdivide the lot. The Church plans to pay down the mortgage on the residence with the proceeds. Chairperson Wilcox asked Ms. Flash to address any environmental concerns she might be aware of. Ms. Flash responded she was unaware of any environmental concerns with respect to the subdivision of this house to a single family residence. Chairperson Wilcox stated there were a couple SEQRs in the packet where the Town Project Number was not shown at the top, and to fill it in at the top for easier filing. He asked about number nine which stated "Will the proposed action lead to request to new public water and public sewer", the response was "no." He presumed that it will, but realized it presumed something would be built. Number ten "Present land use in the vicinity." Chairperson Wilcox stated they needed to somehow indicate there was a religious use in the vicinity. The Board decided to check other and add in church. Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the above -noted matter at 7:44 p.m. MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie: Planning Board APPROVED - APPROVED - WHEREAS: Page 4 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED May 5, 1998 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10 into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre parcel, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel. The property is located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence District R -15. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., 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 Subdivision Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot No. 10, Map of Lots 6- 7- 10- 11 -12, on Arthur A. Prince development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5, 1960, and most recently amended by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., on April 2, 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of Lot 10, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to Subdivision Approval, as proposed; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed; and therefore, neither a Long Environmental Assessment Form nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Ainslie, Thayer, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1-10 into two lots, consisting of a new 0.8 +/- acre lot and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel, located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence District R -15. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., Agent, Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly open at 7:45 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. J. Van de Poel, 1106 Hanshaw Road, stated his property bordered on the property in question. The reason he had some interest in this development was he had lived in his current house for about twenty -five years. He had seen a few things taken place in this residential area. For instance, next to the lot in question, currently contains a duplex. He does not know all the details, but does remember when the duplex was built, there were a few problems. Next to this duplex, there is currently another duplex. The building was erected as a one story, single family house, then later converted into a duplex. He stated obviously it must have come before the Planning Board, and approved. Attorney Barney asked what Mr. Van de Poel's definition of a duplex was. Planning Board Page 5 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Van de Poel responded he thought a duplex was a building in which two elevated families could live without connection between the two parts of the building. Attomey Barney stated that it was permitted in the Town of Ithaca. A duplex in his view, what he understood Mr. Van de Poel meant, is where two apartments, equal in size, side by side. Attomey Barney stated the Town of Ithaca allowed a house to have another apartment within it. Mr. Van de Poel stated the second reason he was interested in this development. When the building next to the lot in question was erected, there were a lot of difficulties. He understands the difficulty was the building was erected too close to the line. This resulted in the driveway having to be moved because the driveway was on the lot in question. The building next to this, when constructed, also had some problems. The building was erected across the line. This resulted in the purchase of another ten or twenty feet of land in order to prevent the building from being moved. In other words, he hopes in this situation history will not repeat itself. As the neighbor, all he was interested in, is the building be constructed within the regulations of the zoning. If there is a regulation a building must be built twenty -five feet from the line, that it be obeyed. Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the Public Hearing at 7:52 p.m. with no other members of the public to be heard. Director of Planning Kanter stated the lot in question was somewhat an over sized lot in the R -15 zone. It is shown as 0.8 acres, the R -15 zone requires fifteen thousand square feet. This is about one third of an acre. All of the lot dimensions of the proposed lot should be more than adequate to meet R -15 requirements. The set back aspects was something the building inspector was suppose to look at when a building permit is issued. The building inspector does it quite carefully. This lot should have no problems. MOTION by Gregory Bell, seconded by Eva Hoffmann: WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10 into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre parcel, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel. The property is located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence DistrictR -15. St. Cathedne of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has, on May 5, 1998, reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant,a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and has made a negative determination of environmental significance, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot No. 10, Map of Lots 6- 7- 10- 11 -12, on Arthur A. Prince Development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5, 1960, and most recently amended by AIIenT. Fulkerson, L.S., on April 21 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of Lot 10, and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: Planning Board Page 6 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED" APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Subdivision Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10, into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre parcel, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel, as shown on the survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot No. 10, Map of Lots 6- 7- 10- 11 -12, on Arthur A. Prince Development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5, 1960, and most recently amended by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., on April 2, 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of Lot 10, subject to the following conditions: a. Revision of the survey map to delete the subtitle "Map of Lots 6-7- 10- 11 -12;" and to delete the labeling of lots 6, 7, and 11, since those parcels have been consolidated back into Tax Parcel No.71 -1 -10. Instead, lots 6, 7, and 11 should be labeled as "part of Tax Map Parcel No. 71 -1- 10," and b. Submission of an original or mylar copy of the survey and four copies for signature by the Chairperson of the Planning Board prior to recording in the office of the County Clerk. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Bell, Thayer, Kenerson, Ainslie. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed addition to the Montessori School Annex, to consist of 2,175 +/- square feet of additional classroom space, located at 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel NO. 43 -2 -73 RA5 Residence District. Montessori School, Owner /Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly open at 7:57 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. Joseph Westbrook, Associate at Demjanec and Associates Architecture, was representing Peter Demjanec. He read through the memo from Christine Balestra. Mr. Westbrook stated the packages were up to date, including the latest sign, for which they are also seeking approval. Chairperson Wilcox stated the sign was a separate Public Hearing. Mr. Westbrook stated the landscaping plan, sheet A7, shows the parking area. He explained at this point the reduced speed zone was in place and working. The drainage plan, sheet A4, was the most current configuration. The parking variance and special approval were approved at the Zoning Board of Appeals. There are separate phases to the drawings, which is still the intention of the school, and is still part of their master plan. An easement from Evan Monkmeyer was correctly noted as no longer necessary. They are really looking at the same information that was presented at the Preliminary Site Plan review with the notations in the memorandum. Board Member Bell asked if he could explain why the Monkmeyer easement was no longer necessary. Planning Board Page 7 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Westbrook showed on the sketch why the easement was no longer necessary. He thinks some of the confusion was originally the natural drainage way that exists was in a hedge row. The drainage was showed as flowing all the way out, down into the existing swale, in the hedge row which is actually on the Monkmeyer property. Originally, swale was graded to connect to the existing drainage. Now what is being configured is a grading plan to actually pull the water onto the site into a drop basin. Then take it underground into the existing storm sewer. He noted there were four inch increments on the sketch, every third line was one foot. Board Member Hoffmann remembered Mr. Westbrook stating the speed limit was in place and working. The speed limit may be in place, but she was unsure if it was working. Board Member Hoffmann was up there around six p.m., a car came up behind her and passed her. She does not know if everyone is aware of the speed limit. During the day, people slow down when there are children around. Mr. Westbrook stated he had been up there at various times taking field measurements and feels there is respect for the new zone. The Board explained the sign it states the speed limit is in affect Monday through Friday six a.m. to six p.m. Board Member Hoffmann stated one of her concerns when seeing the plans, was the drawings did not show the two different stages of the additions. In drawing A5, the part marked phase four showed three dashed doors going from the phase two classroom into the three lessons rooms. She wanted to know if the doors were going to be there after phase two was finished. Mr. Westbrook explained when phase two was finished, a solid wall would be there. The dotted doors on the plan were actually moveable partitions. When the lesson room addition is added, there will be a series of two, left to right folding partitions. The one larger partition going from top to bottom on the drawing. In the folding partitions will be the three doors. Board Member Bell asked if the wall would be demolished in phase four. Mr. Westbrook stated Board Member Bell was correct. Currently, a foundation was being built for a wall that would no longer exist in phase four. Board Member Hoffmann stated she remembered there was going to be some time between phase two and phase four, and remembered it as being a matter of years. She wanted to know why there was not a drawing of what the building would look like during those years. Also a drawing how the builing look on the lot and east and west elevations. Mr. Westbrook stated the building would look different from all elevations except the south. In the south elevation there will be a left and right wing showing in the later plan, but not the earlier plan. The east elevation looked very similar to the west elevation. He said the east and west elevation needed to be imagined with the picture. Board Member Hoffmann stated the Board does not approve plans that need to be imagined. The Board approves buildings shown on plans. She stated she was unable to vote if it was the best they could do. Planning Board Page 8 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Westbrook stated the picture was exactly what the builing was going to look like. The back wall would be blank. Chairperson Wilcox stated the issue was when Montessori was before the Board the first time, they did ask for a diagram of what phase two would look like. At the Preliminary Site Plan, Board Member Bell mentioned Board Member Hoffmann request because she was not present. He stated there was a discussion between Board Member Bell and Peter Demjanec about showing a dark line indicating the outside wall. The darker line was made indicating an outside wall. Director of Planning Kanter stated he does not think the Board specifically asked the architects for an elevation showing that, however, there would be nothing wrong with doing that now. Board Member Hoffmann stated another thing the Board did not see was the final south elevation. Whenever the Board receives drawings, all elevations are shown. Mr. Westbrook stated all side elevations are not necessarily seen, especially if the addition is in the back of the building. Board Member Hoffmann stated she would really like io see it because the land slopes quite a bit there. It seems some soil might have to be removed to have the building at an extended level. She stated it looked to her from the lot in the back of the building, some grading would need to be done. Board Member Hoffmann explained she would like to see a grading plan and the elevation of the building. Mr. Westbrook stated he must apologize because when the Final Site Plan check list was received, item number five, detailed sizing and final material specifications of all required improvements, was checked off as being completed. It was his understanding that they had supplied all the materials that had been asked for. Chairperson Wilcox asked if a motion to postpone be proposed. Attorney Barney stated he had a problem with the legality. The Preliminary Site Plan Approval was the process, the Final Site Plan Approval basically approves the project. The Final Site Plan Approval was to make sure the conditions proposed as part of the Preliminary Site Plan Approval were indeed met. The question which needed to be focused on and limited to, was the condition imposed as a part of the Preliminary Site Plan Approval, if so, was it met. If not, the Board would have a fairly high level of demand to justify requesting it as part of the Final Site Plan Approval. Board Member Hoffmann stated she was aware of that and she realizes it might have been talked about and did not include it as a condition of the Preliminary Site Plan Approval. She thought sometimes when things were talked about and requested, even if not included in the Preliminary Site Plan, the applicants must bring the Board the information asked for. Director of Planning Kanter stated his assumption on the grading and drainage plan was exactly as shown. The site work, regardless of what the phase four building plan showns, will be completed by time phase two is complete. They would make sure that happens during the building permit process. The fact ther.on was an invisible phase four building, would not reflect anything differently. The grading and drainage wouiU c)e as shown on the plan. 3oard Member Hoffmann asked if the grading and drainage would be done before phase four was complete. Planning Board Page 9 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Director of Planning Kanter answered it would be, as shown on the plan, and that was what they were approving. Board Member Bell asked if it was required to put drainage around what would be a nonexistent foundation, referring to the wall in phase four. Director of Planning Kanter stated he was assuming all or the topography and the drainage ditches shown would be built for the phase two development. Attorney Barney stated to Board Member Hoffmann the revision of the annex floor plan, sheet A5, to show the southern exterior wall at phase two building addition, since it was constructed prior to the phase four addition, was adopted. The condition imposed at the Preliminary Site Plan Approval, was the plan be revised to show the solid line for the wall. .. Board Member Bell stated from what they now see as a solid line, was it correct to assume at the completion of phase two, the back wall would have no windows. Mr. Westbrook stated that there would not be any windows in the wall. Board Member Bell stated he thought it was still incomplete in that there was no notation the wall would be demolished in phase four. The plan shows a new building being built behind the main building with a solid wall through it. Attorney Barney asked Board Member Bell how he would like to see the wall shown. The solid line was added, and now you are objecting to the solid line. We have applicants here that try to respond to what we are asking of them, what would you like them to show. Board Member Bell stated he would just like to see a notation saying part of the wall would be demolished. From the plans now, there is no any indication the wall will not be there in phase four. Board Member Hoffmann stated she thinks it is unfortunate they did not express themselves clearly as to what they were asking for earlier on. She said she would try to express herself more clearly in the future, and she was still unhappy with accepting this as the final plan. Board Member Hoffmann explained the Board has a verbal description of what will be done, which is different from what the plan shows. Chairperson Wilcox asked if she would like a notation indicating the solid wall would be removed when phase four is constructed. The Board agreed the notation would be added in. Mr. Westbrook stated that it was their intent and they had no problem adding such a stipulation. Board Member Bell requested that the arrows between phase two and four be located in the correct location. He stated the way it was shown, phase two would be built with no back wall at all, and phase four would contain the back wall. Mr. Westbrook stated it was a good thing to have since the final configuration showed it as a thirty -six square feet building, and is a very fair thing to do. With no persons to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing at 5:22 p.m. Planning Board Page 10: ; May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED -.APPROVED - APPROVED MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Larry Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed addition to the Montessori School Annex building, consisting of approximately 2,175+/- square feet of additional classroom space. The building is located at 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-7, Residence District R-15: Montessori School, Owner/Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review, on March 17, 1998, made a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to Site Plan Approval, and 3. The request for Special Approval for the extension of a school use was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on April 8, 1998, and 4. The Planning board, at a Public Hearing on May 5, 1998, reviewed and accepted as adequate drawings labeled "Montessori School," Sheet No. Al entitled "Site Development Plan," amended March 27,1998; Sheet No. A4 entitled "Site Plan," amended March 30, 1998; Sheet No. A5, showing the separation of Phase 2 and Phase 4 of the Annex Floor Plan, dated March 27, 1998; and Sheet No. A7, showing existing and proposed new plantings, dated March 27, 1998, all prepared by Demjanec and Associates Architects, and additional application materials, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed 2,175+/- square foot addition to the Montessori School Annex, as shown on the drawings labeled "Montessori School," Sheet No. Al entitled "Site Development Plan," amended March 27, 1998; Sheet No. A4 entitled "Site Plan," amended March 30, 1998; Sheet No. A5, showing the separation of Phase 2 and Phase 4 of the Annex Floor Plan, dated March 27, 1998; and Sheet No. A7, showing existing and proposed new plantings, dated March 27, 1998, all prepared by Demjanec and Associates Architects, and additional application materials, subject to the following conditions: a. the revision of the site plan (Sheet A-4) to accurately reflect the most recently submitted design of the Montessori Annex sign, submitted to the Sign Review Board for review and recommendation on May 5, 1998, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and b. revision of annex floor plan (Sheet A5) to add a notation indicating that portions of the rear wall of the Phase II building addition will be removed when Phase IV is built and to correct the dimensions of Phases II and IV to demonstrate the wall at the south end of } Phase 11 will be constructed as part of Phase 11 Planning Board f Page 11 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED _'l APPROVED - APPROVED C. the granting of any sign variances for the Annex or Main Building from the Zoning Board of Appeals, and d. the submission of one original or mylar copy and two paper copies of the final site plan to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. AYES - Wilcox, Kenerson, Thayer, Ainslie. . NAYS - None. ABSTAIN - Bell, Hoffmann. The MOTION was declared to be carried. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding two sign variances proposed by Montessori School, one sign variance proposed at he Montessori School main building located at 120 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-1-3.5, R-30 Residence District, the other proposed at the Montessori School Annex located at 117 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-7, R-15 Residence District. Montessori School, Owner/Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter duly open at 8:25 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. Joseph Westbrook, Associate at Demjanec and Associates Architecture, stated the Montessori School vanted its presence known, and signage was the way to do it. They succeeded in receiving the reduced speed zone, and as Board Member Hoffmann pointed out, people are still unaware of the school. The school hopes one of the things that will make the public more aware of the school, is a sign that is both visible and readable. The school is very enthusiastic in designating Elizabeth Ann Clune as being the genesis of some of the programs at the school, which is why the name needs to permanently appear on the sign. The school wants the name to be visible to the public at large as being both inspiration and guidance in the program. The sign is a common type design of sandblasting wood and then painted. Board Member Bell asked who Elizabeth Ann Clune was. Andrea Covey, Administrator at the Montessori School, Elizabeth Ann Clune is a twenty-one year old young woman with Down Syndrome. Elizabeth Ann Clune attended the Montessori School from the time she was two until she was eighteen. Her family has given the school an unbelievable gift to launch our fund raising campaign and the school is going to be named in honor of Elizabeth Ann Clune. She in every way exemplifies everything the school stands for which is to reach for your personal best. Chairperson Wilcox asked if the signs would be in style with the existing signs and that the replacement sign on the main building would not be larger than the existing sign in terms of square footage. Mr. Westbrook responded the new sign would be the same sand blasted, painted wood and stated the old sign was fifty-eight inches and one half high inches by fortry-six inches wide. The new sign is forty- eight inches wide by sixty inches high. So they have approximately added two inches on each dimension. Board Member Hoffmann asked if you were suppose to include the post and the sign together. Planning Board Page 12 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox stated that the new sign just had to be near the same size as the old one, and the post size does not matter. Mr. Westbrook showed and explained to Board Member Hoffmann how to measure the sign. They do make sure that with the height of the sign with the post do not exceed the six feet allowed in residential zones. With no persons to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing at 8:32 p.m. MOTION by James Ainslie, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals has received an application for a free standing sign at the Montessori School Annex Building, located on 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-7, Residence District R-15. Montessori School, Owner/Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent, and 2. Said sign measures approximately 10 square feet in size, whereas the Town of Ithaca Sign Law permits a maximum size of 4 square feet for freestanding signs in residential districts, and 3. The Board of Appeals, pursuant to the Town's Sign Law, has referred the application for said sign to the Sign Review Board (Planning Board) for its review and recommendations, and ,--�4. The Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board, at a public hearing, held on May 5, 1998, reviewed a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, and Part 11, prepared by Planning staff for the Zoning Board of Appeals, who will act as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed sign; drawings labeled "Design D," dated April 1, 1998, prepared by Demjanec and Associates Architects, and additional application materials, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the proposed sign variance for the Montessori School Annex Building, for the sign as shown in "Design D," dated April 1, 1998, subject to the following condition: That permission be obtained from Tompkins County to install said sign within the county-owned road right- of-way, as shown on the site plan drawing A-1, revised March 27, 1998. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Thayer, Bell, Kenerson NAYS- None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING; Consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) regarding the proposed modification of a condition of the Special Approval, granted by the ZBA on April 19, 1989, which restricts occupancy in the Maplewood Park Apartments (formerly Cornell -PUarters) to graduate students and their families, located at 201 Maple Avenue between Maple Avenue id Michell Street, on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel NO. 63-2-10.2, Residence District R-9. The proposed Planning Board Page 13 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED modification of the condition is to change the occupancy restriction to include, in addition to graduate students, those persons of post graduate and graduate student age and above who are short term university affiliated visitors and participants. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Ann Shumate, Associate Director of Campus Life, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter duly open at 8:37 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. Ann Shumate, Associate Director of Campus Life, stated Cornell did not anticipate this request would make a significance difference in the quality of the Maplewood community. These people would look very much like the people living there, the current residence and their families. This is an opportunity for Cornell, in that they have a number of people who come to the University for a short period of time. These are not people who would go to a motel, their stays are a short period of time. They would need housing for several weeks, maybe a couple of months, or even a semester. They are at Cornell for a variety of purposes, affiliated with the University in some way, either working with a professor or taking a special course, but who need short term housing. There is space available at Maplewood, and Cornell would like to accommodate these people and is why Cornell is asking for modification of the special approval. Attorney Barney stated when Cornell initially came in with the project, it was represented as a graduate student facility. Then somewhere in the process, Cornell came back asked if they could change it to undergraduate. That did not sit well with the Town Officials at that time because the neighborhood and the Town of Ithaca had been told it was going to be one way. So the ZBA, to ensure that it was as represented, included a condition that it be limited to graduate students. Due to the theory that graduate students create less deleterious impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Chairperson Wilcox stated what was being proposed is the potential for other persons of similar age. Attorney Barney asked what a nonacademic appointment was, and who Cornell envisioned qualifying to live in Maplewood that would be a nonacademic appointment. Shirley Egan, attorney for Cornell University, gave the Board an example. Her office had a lawyer from the National Science Foundation come and work in her office for a period of a couple of months. She was not an academic appointment, but it was still a University related one. Cornell scrambled to find some furnished housing for her. There are all kinds of reasons why people come to consult with Cornell or to do other things. Attorney Barney asked if housing construction workers was a nonacademic appointment. Ms. Egan replied that in order for that to a rise, it would have to be an extreme specialty such that it was not available on the local labor market. She might see it more with a professional person who had a specialty which.could not be found locally. Attorney Barney asked if Cornell would be willing to limit it to people with a professional degree. Ms. Egan responded they would not. Ms. Shumate stated Cornell does get requests for people to come and work with faculty or do research. i Planning Board Page 14 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Attorney Barney asked if they would limit it to some;ohe with a post graduate degree, or professional degree or license. He is not saying generally, but to those that relate to the nonacademic appointment. Ms. Egan asked why someone who was working towards their masters and already had a bachelor's degree could not qualify. Director of Planning Kanter asked Attorney Barney if they could add similar academic or similar nonacademic appointment. The University Libraries have hosted a number of librarians, or historic preservationist from the far east who do not have professional degrees. None the less, they are the type of people that were at Cornell for two or three months. They are the type of people that he envisions using the facilities. Attorney Barney stated he hates to see a loop hole created which can be used in ways that are not as being represented. Cornell could get to a situation where one half or one third of the units are not open and available, anybody affiliated with the University in any way could stay there. Board Member Bell wanted to address Attorney Barney's concern by stating non-undergraduate. Ms. Shumate thought she had made it clear they were talking about graduate student age, or similar. There was no intention to put undergraduates in the facility. Board Member Hoffmann wondered if stating University affiliated visitors such as visiting faculty, researchers, academic fellows, and other academic persons would be enough. Ms. Shumate stated it would potentially cover a number of people that would need housing. She did iot want to come back again in front of the Board and ask again for this type of housing. It seems they were talking about responsible adults that fit into a graduate student community. They have a community to maintain, they are not interested in putting people who are going to be disruptive. Board Member Thayer stated that Cornell was going to monitor who they allowed in the apartments and it sounded like any one could move in. Chairperson Wilcox stated the concern is that one could create a loop hole which would allow them to fill it with construction employees or undergraduates, or something which was not intended. The question was if the Board could write it in such a way that a loop hole could not be created. Board Member Hoffmann stated she did not want to be included with the people who think construction.employees were less than someone with a Ph.D., she feels that is not true. These apartments were allowed to be built for a specific purpose and it was an academic purpose. Ms. Shumate stated Cornell was talking about people who were affiliated with the University. The people have legitimate affiliation, reason to be at the University. They are not casuals, they are not people off the street. Director of Planning Kanter asked if it would help to say professional appointments instead of saying nonacademic appointments. Attorney Barney stated he changed nonacademic to professional, and the person be twenty-one -cars of age and older. Planning Board Page 15 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Ms. Shumate stated that there were graduate students under twenty-one years of age. Attorney Barney stated in this circumstance, though, graduate students are still allowed, but a nongraduate student would have to be twenty-one years of age or older, and have a professional association to the University. The changes made were agreed upon. Board Member Hoffmann stated she did want the main use of the facility to stay the same, and still wanted it use mainly and first as graduate student housing. Ms. Shumate responded housing the graduate students would be the priority, and if a student wanted that space, they would have the priority. Board Member Bell asked how these types of people were housed presently. Ms. Shumate stated they did not have many options. Faculty sometimes took them into their homes, but it is a real dilemma. Board Member Bell asked if Maplewood would always have room. Ms. Shumate replied Maplewood had never been one hundred percent occupied. With no persons to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing at 8:55 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox stated he had questions about the SEQR form. Under land use in the vicinity, residential is checked. He suggested residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural be checked and the 3oard agreed. MOTION by Gregory Bell, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Modification of Special Approval with regard to the occupancy restrictions for the Cornell University Maplewood Park graduate student housing complex imposed by he Zoning Board of Appeals as part of its granting of Special Approval on April 19, 1989, said Maplewood Park being located on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63-2-1, -2, -3, -10.2 and -14, Residence District R-9. Cornell University, Owner; Ann Shumate, Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals is legislatively determined to act as lead agency in environmental review, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I submitted by the applicant and a Part II prepared by the Town Planning Department, and other application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: Planning Board ' Page 16 . May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED: - APPROVED - APPROVED 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 modification; 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 modification of its conditions of Special Approval granted April 19, 1989 be approved, subject to the following condition: that occupancy by persons other than registered Cornell University graduate students be limited to persons twenty-one years of age or older, temporarily affiliated with the University as visiting researchers, academic fellows, faculty, scholars or other similar academic or professional associations, and their families. AYES- Wilcox, Hoffman, Bell, Ainslie, Thayer, Kenerson NAYS- None. rhe MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination, PRI Site Plan Modifications, 1259 Trumansburg Road. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter duly open at 9:00 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. Anton J. Egner, with Egner and Associates representing Paleontological Research Institution (PRI). He stated they were present to request a couple of alterations in the building, an expansion to a parking lot, and installation of a handicap side walk from the handicap parking area they are trying to develop. Mr. Egner described the drawings he provided to the Board. The first drawing was a floor plan of the old building showing where a single station bathroom would be converted into one handicap single station bathroom. The fixtures are in about the same place, but moving the door and taking out a closet allows for the 5 foot radius for the handicap turn around. The next sheet displayed the old side walk and where the new handicap side walk would be. The third drawing displayed the proposed parking area. It also showed the low grade drainage pipe. 41_2 shows in great detail the pipe and drainage system in back of the curb, so the water is picked up as it comes down the hill. The water is then drained off to the left hand side of the site. On the bottom floor, two thirds of the floor would have compacted units which will take the things now in the trailer, and moving them out. Some things in the trailer will require some preparation. Mr. Egner explained to the Board the floor plans of the upper floor by showing diagrams. On one side there is a secure storage area which will have boxes. The other side there are racks for storage. That leaves an area for J Planning Board y Page 17 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED specimen preparation, cleaning and cataloging. This will prevent people from having to go up and down steps, and still enable them to come in and see the displays and presentations. Board Member Hoffmann stated that the building looked different from the back than what they approved. Mr. Egner stated they had gone to the State Historic Preservation and they insisted one gable on the end roof to match the other. It was more realistic to put three gables on, because having one gable and a flat roof does not make sense. The roof would not have been a historic condition as shown on the plans. Board Member Bell asked about drawing A02 labeling, it reads second floor addition and the other reads first floor plan. He wanted to know why they did not agree. Mr. Egner stated it was really the first floor. The first floor relates to the first floor of the main building and the basement relates to the basement of the other building. It is a two story structure, the changes to the drawing were made to correctly describe the floors. Board Member Hoffmann asked about the front page, it stated exterior elevation, but does not describe the elevation. She felt it should be added in, and it was agreed they would change it at the Preliminary Site Plan. Board Member Bell stated he would abstain due to a conflict of interest on that particular project. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter closed at 9:12 p.m. :NOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed alterations to the second story addition, modification of the north entrance for handicap accessibility, modification of an existing bathroom for handicap accessibility, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the entrance area, at the Paleontological Research Institute located at 1259 Trumansburg Road (Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-3-3.1, R-30 Residential District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner/Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon, PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner&Associates, 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, on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part II prepared by planning staff, drawings labeled "PRI Exist. Bldg Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev.", dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision", "First Floor Plan", and "Interior Elevations and Details" each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, and additional application materials, and, \ J Planning Board Page 18 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 4. The Town Planning staff have 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, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. AYES- Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Thayer, Ainslie. NAYS-None. ABSTENTION - Bell. The MOTION was declared to be carried. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for proposed modification to the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI) consisting of alterations to the second story of the recently completed addition, modification of the north entrance for accessibility for the handicapped, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the existing parking area, and grading and drainage improvements to the north entrance area, located at 1259 Trumansburg Road (Route 96) on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-3-3.1, R-30 Residence District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner/Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon, PRI Direct, and Anton J. Egner, Egner and Assoc., Agents. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter duly open at 9:13 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. With no persons to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter closed at 9:14 p.m. WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation regarding Special Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals for proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI) consisting of alterations to the second story addition, modification of the north entrance for handicap accessibility, modification of an existing bathroom for handicap accessibility, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the north entrance area. PRI is located at 1259 Trumansburg Road (Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-3-3.1, R-30 Residential District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner/Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon, PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, 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 May 5, 1998, reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant and a Short Environmental Planning Board Page 19 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Assessment Form Part II prepared by planning staff, and made a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to Site Plan Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, drawings ntitled "PRI Exist. Bldg. Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev." dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision", "First Floor Plan", and "Interior Elevations and Details", each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner&Associates, 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 for the proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution, as shown on the drawings entitled "PRI Exist. Bldg. Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev.", dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision", "First Floor Plan", and "Interior Elevations and Details" each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner&Associates, and additional application materials, subject to the following conditions: a. obtaining the required special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to issuance of any building permit, and fI b. revision of drawing No. 9742-1 labelling Exterior Elevation 2 as "North" Elevation, and �1 C. revision of drawing 9823-A02 to correct the title by changing it from "Second Floor Addition" to "Two -story addition", and d. revision of drawing 9742-1_2 by labelling the existing building as "Institution" instead of "Institute", and e. submission of an original or mylar copy and two paper copies of the final site plan to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board, in making its 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. Planning Aoard Page 20 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 2. That the Planning Board reports to the Zoning Board of Appeals its recommendation that the aforementioned request for Special Approval be approved. AYES- Wilcox, Hoffman, Ainslie, Kenerson, Thayer. NAYS- None. ABSTAIN-Bell. The MOTION was declared to be carried. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) for the proposed construction of two buildings, one a 46 unit - 53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800 +/- square feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer/memory-care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), to be known as Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage respectively, including parking, landscaping and other site improvements, to be located on 8.24 +/- acres at the intersection of NYS Rte. 96/Trumansburg Road and Bundy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2, Residence District R-15. Richard and Mary Perry, Owners; Pioneer Development Company, LLC, Applicant; Michael J. Villa, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox declared the above-noted matter duly open at 9:18 p.m., and read aloud from the Agenda. f� �I Michael Villa, Pioneer Development, explained the hand out was what the Planning Board requested at the April 21, 1998 meeting. Mr. Villa went through and briefly explained each page to the Board. He stated they were present to get a Preliminary approval on site plan, subdivision, and recommendation for Special Land Use District to the Town Board. Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge and Wolf, presented diagrams to the Board and explained each diagram. He stated the site was located on Trumansburg Road/Route 96 and the comer of Bundy Road. There are two buildings, Sterling House and Sterling Cottage. Sterling House being the larger of the two, and an assisted living facility. Sterling Cottage, the smaller unit, is the memory care unit. There is a relatively small amount of site development in terms of hard scape site development, and there is quite a bit of earth moving on the site. In order to access the site, people would travel west on Bundy Road and access through a proposed driveway. The driveway comes in relatively level off of Bundy Road. What is important to know about the grading plan, is that the two buildings, the parking and turn around area are on a relatively flat plateau. The current agricultural field had been escavating into a flat area which the buildings and other site improvements occur. At the last meeting, cut and fill calculations were talked about and sketches have been provided for the Board. What is seen is they are almost balanced. The difference is imported structural fill that would be necessary under the concrete slabs in the building and under the pavement in the parking lot. There is quite a bit of earth moving on the site, very little importation fill, and no material goes off site. In addition, there is some earth birming along Bundy Road. There are eighteen parking spaces, primarily staff and some visitor parking. Near Bundy Road a combination of earth birm and planting to help screen the parking. In addition, "here is ADA required parking and visitor parking, and a drop off in front of the building. There is another "ghteen car parking lot which is directly east of the Sterling Cottage Facility. In front, a tear drop turn around Planning Board Page 21 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED which is a large enough radius for service vehicles, garbage and fire trucks. They have talked to Tompkins County Transportation, and if there is enough ridership, there will be adequate turn around for the buses. It would stop on the site as it was coming back into town from the destination of Biggs building. There are walkways that circulate around both buildings and provide access to emergency and fire exit doors. Both buildings have interior court yards. On Sterling House, all of the rooms have access to large ventilation and daylight from the court yard. The same is true with Sterling Cottage but to a smaller degree. There are actually a series of small court yards rather than one large continuous court yard. In addition, specific to grading, there is a detention basin that is down slope at the southern most portion of the site on Trumansburg Road. It collects the vast majority of run off on the site and runs into a roadside ditch just above a storm drainage system. Board Member Kenerson asked if there was fencing on either lot. Mr. Trowbridge responded there was no fencing on the lot. The court yard had fencing, but it was an extension of the building, and there is no other site fencing. One of the issues that was brought up at the last meeting by the community, relative to view issues was the planting, to select species that would not interfere with the view overtime as plants matured. Species have been selected that will not be higher than the roof line at anytime. They have reconsidered plant species relative to the view shed and also relative to the county's review. The planting in several occasions, they tried to invest heavily in planting in the court yards where they will be appreciated by people living on the site. At the entrances of the buildings, there are woody bulbs and herbaceous plants to try to create a more domestic setting. They have also provided screen planting on Bundy Road between the parking and Bundy Road. As well as on the eastern side of parking near Sterling Cottage to screen any view from Trumansburg Road. For lighting, relatively low poles, sharp cut off fixtures, were chosen. The glare was a concern with i,,,�,this particular population and light pollution. This is because the site sits up topographically from a lot of ,,property downhill. They went out a couple of weeks of go with a cluster of helium balloons and chose an elevation of the highest point of the easterly most ridge line of the building. Mr. Trowbridge explained, from the photographs provided, the gray areas are worse than what the ridge line would be. A photograph was taken where the worst possible line would be standing on the ground along Perry Lane. Again, if someone were on the first floor or second floor of their house, the view would be much better. In fact, if the roof line was drawn correctly, there would be more blue shown than what is shown. They tried to give a conservative view shed analysis. Some people were concerned about the appearance of the project from Bundy Road. They did visual assessments from Bundy Road, but also provided at the last meeting a section elevation that shows the appearance of the two buildings from Bundy Road. What is seen is low evergreen planting, underbirm, screening and parking. The buildings are seen at one continuous grade from the elevation. It is a big platter on which the buildings set, lower than the current site conditions. The development of the section, is really the technical section to show, cut and fill. The site where the building are set, are carved out for the buildings to set down in the site, not on the site. The revised plan would not show trees above the roof line. What is seen are low, shrubby materials from the Perry Lane side, and as you get to Trumansburg Road, there would be thin canopied species. The intent is to have a view line that is no higher than the roof. Board Member Hoffmann asked if the evergreen planted along the birm will become higher than the roof line would be. Mr. Trowbridge stated the Bristone Pine, which has the Christmas Tree shape that stay very short, is than twenty-five feet. Planning Board ' Page 22 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Thayer asked if it was possible that evergreens do grow above roof lines. Mr. Trowbridge stated certain evergreen do, their intent is to make a species selection that will not grow above the roof line. David Herrick, T and G Miller, stated he would like to explain the information from the Site Plan. Board Member Hoffmann asked if the view study was being made part of their record. Mr. Trowbridge stated he could scan and reduce the images, and make them available for the Plan Record. Mr. Herrick stated he was looking at the grading plan, L-1, and would like to first speak to the issue of storm water drainage. There were many concerns about the drainage. He would like to emphasize the improvements and modifications in grading that they are making do not impact the water shed that has created some problems in the past. They are sensitive to the concern with the covert on Bundy Road. Since the previous meeting, they have had some discussions with the county and Mr. Walker about working with the county to improve some of the conditions of the twenty-four inch covert under Bundy Road. They have had some discussions with NYS DOT about the termination of the detention basin outlet pipe in their ditch at the southeast of the project. The balance of the project does have some detention provided to take care of the peek run off from the two hundred ten and hundred year rainfall events. They are providing some detention in the area behind the buildings, in the graded area, and the additional detention, and basin that Mr. Trowbridge .mentioned. Erosion control during construction is presented on the Drainage and Erosion Control Plan. It includes a lot of hay bale dikes as well as some silt fence constructed along the down hill _ perimeter of their disturbance. Once things are formally established, in sod or other landscaping, they will be removed. Attorney Barney asked about the specifics of the arrangements with the NYS DOT about the Bundy Road. Mr. Herrick answered that the DOT would like to see them provide a structure at the intersection of our pipe and their gutter. There is a gutter section at the bottom of the ditch. The structure would direct the water in a down hill fashion so that it did not tend to flush out through the gutter on top of Trumansburg Road. There would essentially by a catch basin, or storm man hole, at the intersection of our pipe and their gutter. A pipe would extend out from that aligned with the DOT gutter and also one at the outlet end. Essentially, the outlet and part of the pipe will not be seen from the detention basin. Board Member Thayer asked if on the Bundy Road end, if they were going to try to capture some of the existing water that is coming down the road. Mr. Herrick responded he thought the concern of the county was the short covert that was proposed under what would be the Perry's driveway. It could possibly be connected to the covert that passes underneath Bundy Road, with the hopes of eliminating, what has historically an overflow condition. There has been, for one reason or another, water surcharging the inlet of the covert under Bundy Road and running down into the state system. Board Member Thayer asked how this would affect having more water run over Mr. Lavris's property. Mr. Herrick replied that they were not altering the water shed. Planning 18oard Page 23 May 5, 1998 .APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Thayer stated the water shed overflows now, and runs down the south side of Bundy Road, it does not make it up to his property. Where if you are diverting it across the road, you are going to be guaranteeing that all the water that comes to that point and go over his property. Mr. Herrick responded they did not know what the reason was. There had been debris at the inlet which could affect the ability of the water to go through the covert. So it is not quite clear of why it overflows. It is also the orientation of the ditch to the inlet of the covert, it is not encouraging the water to make that transition. Board Member Thayer asked if it would work to Mr. Lavris's advantage because it would reduce the amount of water flowing over his property. Mr. Herrick stated that under certain conditions it could certainly be done. He was unsure what those conditions were. Board Member Thayer asked if they had actually come to a written agreement to do that. It was the Board's recommendation at the last meeting to eliminate his problem. Mr. Herrick replied that there were some other issues that were site specific that wanted to be resolved with the DOT engineer. Director of Engineering Walker stated that when he met with the state at Mr. Lavris's site, it was confirmed last month that the state is planning to do maintenance work. The state was planning to align a portion of the channel that is between Mr. Lavris's two properties. Some work will be done to protect the two house lots on that channel, and to what extent he does not know. Board Member Thayer stated it was his understanding that a lot of his problem was coming down Perry Lane. Director of Engineering Walker replied that over the years there had been an increase in run off , and the improvements the county had made with the covert, and also there had been some additional work on Route 96. It is hard to know which straw broke the camel's back. The state recognizes there is a problem, the county kind of recognizes there is a problem. The county and state feels that if too much water goes past the existing cross culvert on Bundy Road, and goes down to the state highway, it will cause more major problems. If it bi-passes the cross covert and goes straight through, it causes more problems on Rte. 96 and the state does not want to see any more water going down there from Bundy Road. Attorney Barney stated that his concern was the better the covert works, more water is going onto Mr. Lavris's property. Director of Engineering Walker stated unless it was diverted to the new drainage, which he thought they were going to do, to try to divert part of it to the new system. Attorney Barney stated his point was that what ever happened with the site, it should not aggravate Mr. Lavris's problem. He asked if there was some way, in their redesigning, to pick up some of the flow of water so that it does not increase the flow of water onto Mr. Lavris's property. Director of Engineering Walker stated there was a way to divert water out of the Bundy Road ditch id have it go around the site, but it is unreasonable. The ditch line from that point to the north, flows to the firth which is where it flows presently. They are removing some flow from the lower portion of Bundy Road, Planning Board ' Page 24 May 5, 1998 ;APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED so may be they could look at a bi-pass, and try to alleviate a problem. Director of Engineering Walker stated the site is not creating any additional run off that is going to affect that covert going across Bundy Road. Mr. Herrick stated that if they wanted to maintain the condition that was there now, he could make the argument to the county that they should maintain that condition. That would be the null alternative, is to not make the improve to improve the flow which would be his approach to solving what appears to be an overflow problem. If you wanted to maintain the condition that this inlet does not function as it should, there would be some spill over. They would just have to make proper size adjustments in the coverts below this. It would continue to flow down to Trumansburg Road. Director of Engineering Walker stated that in dealing with the county, a straight covert was put in, which would be the simplest thing, at the new driveway location. This would allow the water flow to go through it without impeding it and nothing is done with the county covert. This may trap all the water. He thinks it is not appropriate that this project be tied to that problem. Director of Engineering Walker stated they were not diverting any water into that water shed with this project. Mr. Herrick stated if they did not want to make any improvements to the existing covert, they would leave it the way it is. Then he will have to make some adjustments in the covert sizing underneath the entrance drive, and another covert for the sidewalk. He will have to size those to assume that there will continue to be some amount of water that passes by the covert it is suppose to go into. Board Member Hoffmann expressed she would like to have a situation with respect to drainage, be done in such a way that there are fewer problems originating with drainage problems than there were before if possible. Director of Engineering Walker stated as they looked at the final depth diversion above the new driveway, they can put in a fairly flat grade. Some natural retention would be built into that terrace and probably would slow the water down, and improve the situation at the Bundy Road intersection. They have already cut the size of the water shed down. So there is some drainage area that is going into detention, by this project. The space between the new and existing driveway, that space will be going into the retention area, either behind the buildings or at the bottom of the site. Some water that is now going to the intersection of Bundy and Rte 96 will no longer go directly there, but will go into the lower portion of the water shed after it has gone through storm water management structure. This project will be improving the intersection. Mr. Herrick stated to address the concern on the illustration, would be to move the covert altogether. That would then bring everything down to Trumansburg Road, and he feels would be reversing the process that was done years ago when the cross covert was put in. He believes this was put in because of the condition was creating a problem at the intersection. The other issue Mr. Herrick wished to address, was the traffic and the concerns expressed by the Board and public. Another issue that was covered with Gorton Reimels, Resident Engineer NYS DOT, was to talk about the intersection. It is his understanding that the state does not see the need to make any changes in the turning lanes, and the center line. Mr. Reimels and Janice Gross, from the Syracuse office and responds to the SEAR, feel that the left tum situation does not need to be corrected. Ms. Gross indicated in her letter that"it appears that site related traffic will not be an issue of concern." Board Member Ainslie stated he found it hard to believe because he lives on Hayts Road and if you want to tum left on Hayts Road, the traffic has to pull onto the shoulder to get by. He feels both places need r�,turning lane. On Hayts Road there is a ditch in front of the Professional Building, and there is a house ,J,ijacent to the right away. Planning Board Page 25 May 5, 1998 ;APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Herrick stated some of the other issues were striping, or creating a no passing a lane on the uphill portion of Trumansburg Road. This is going to be taken into advisement by Mr. Reimels. Mr. Reimels stated they would stripe it a no passing zone, with the request of the Town. Chairperson Wilcox stated they also presented the possibly of creating a Town Speed Limit. Mr. Villa stated they have been in contact with Attorney Barney in regards to Special Land Use District which will hopefully be referred to as Special Land Use District number 10. Phil Runkel, of Nixon, Hargrave, Devans and Doyle, stated they initially submitted a draft of the proposed Special Land Use District to Attorney Barney and he looked at it in accordance with Zoning Ordinance and Town Code and made some modifications of his own. Mr. Runkel and Attorney Barney discussed the modifications that night. Attorney Barney stated they made some changes in the opening couple of paragraphs references to "at least', to change to read "no more than" and have inserted some numbers they had taken off of the project. Now the program is for a 46-dwelling unit, which shall house no more than 53 bed. Those similar type changes were made in the second paragraph. There are some minor changes, but the next change of substance is a new subparagraph, D, on page two as part of four, which limits the property to no more than two parcels. A new subdivision, E, which limits the occupancy of the property to people with disabled conditions. A new subparagraph, F, which requires the operations to comply with all rules. Also to have all licenses in hand before they issue a certificate of occupancy. G is providing the minimum parking limitations and then authorizing the Board to reduce those minimums by up to twenty-five percent. The number is !basically the Ithacare numbers, two parking spaces for each three rooms which translates into fifty-two �,__�parking spaces. The site plan being reviewed had forty-two parking spaces. They added a new paragraph seven which requires the business of the construction to start within a reasonable period of time, if not, the rezoning itself dies. A complete description of the rezoned area based upon the survey map was added. The changes Mr. Runkel and Attorney Barney have discussed are in paragraph 2A, one and two, getting away from the term "dwelling unit' because "dwelling unit' implies complete facilities for a living accommodations, kitchen, bathroom. These units will not have a kitchen facilities. It has been substituted with "dwelling rooms" with associated bath facilities. These are the changes being made throughout where ever"dwelling unit" is used, and use "dwelling room" instead. In a couple of places it was clearly added the bathroom facilities are not part of the total forty-six limited numbers. The other changes were on the bottom of page two, "living accommodations" be changed to "assisted living services." On the top of page three, referencing people with "similar mentally, and physically disabling conditions." The applicants requested that "mentally and physically" be deleted, and simply say other "similar disabling conditions." In subparagraph F, again change the word in the forth line, accommodations to services and rather than talking about persons "disabled by dementia" change it to persons "afflicted with dementia." Mr. Runkel stated another suggested revision was on paragraph five where it starts off any "significant revisions", they had a question about defining the term "significant revisions." Attorney Barney stated in the existing code there are certain circumstances in which the Town Engineer can approve certain minor changes in the plan that would not require any further review by the Tanning Board. The one area they wanted to explore further with the Board was subsection G of section ))ur which pertains to the parking. Understanding what Attorney Barney stated earlier, the provision of the Planning Eloard Page 26 May 5, 1998 .APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED parking spaces, currently the plan provides for forty-two parking spaces. Under the current language of subsection G, you would have two parking spaces for every three dwelling rooms, which would come out to be fifty-two parking space, and an allowance that it could be reduced by twenty-five percent. What they are looking for is a little more assurance of what the sense will be. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Board has shown a history of wanting to reduce the amount of asphalt, if the applicant shows that the reduced number of parking spaces is reasonable. If it can be proved to the Board's satisfaction that forty-two is sufficient, than in general, the Board has been willing to reduce the amount of impermeable surface that exist. The site needs to have the capability to add parking spaces if needed. Mr. Runkel stated it would be more appropriate to compare this to the R-30 district which has specific provisions to parking in part it allows for nursing homes. In that instance the code points to section forty-five of the code which states you need to have one parking space for every three employees. In that instances, it would be reduced from the two parking spaces for every three dwelling rooms. It also points to section sixty-nine of the Code, that would use a one parking space for every two rue provision. In both instances because the nature of the use is more similar to the nursing home type of use than the business district, it may make more sense to reduce the parking requirement based on that requirement. Mr. Villa stated the maximum number of employees the facility would have during the day, or at any one time for both facilities, would be twenty-three , there will be forty-two . So if every one drove individually, there would be twenty-three parking spaces occupied. Every one is not going to leave and arrive at the same time, so there will be some flexibility there. Even though they have set up their time frame 7 a.m. to 3 p.m., 3 p.m. to 11 p.m., and 11 p.m. to 7 a.m., there is also flexibility in the schedule. So not every one adheres to the shift times. Some employees arrive at 9 a.m. and others will not leave until 7 p.m. With the number of people that live in the Sterling House, there is only about five percent that may have cars. In the facility of forty-six units, there will be about three cars. He feels they have accommodated the number that is needed, and at 5 o'clock p.m. the number of employees on site drops drastically. Most of the visitors do come after 5 p.m., and with the forty-two spaces available, there would be sufficient spaces available for them. Chairperson Wilcox asked what they were going for, not to have the ten extra spaces put aside that the Board would require. Mr. Villa responded that they felt forty-two parking spaces would be sufficient for both facilities. As it stands right now, it says fifty-two . They would like to have the reduction down to forty-two, which is what they have set up. This is based on the traffic flow that has been generated at other facilities, is more than sufficient to handle any of the people coming and going. Attorney Barney asked if it was their request that the ordinance be rewritten to limit it to forty-two , or to be given the reduction that the ordinance presently drafted allows. Mr. Villa stated that whatever the Board feels responsible to do is fine. Attorney Barney stated as the attorney, he was more comfortable with the language in the Ithacare Law. The advantage is once it is up and operating, there is a five year period where you can decide if there is inadequate parking on the site. 11--' Phil Runkel stated another option was, if the Board liked the language, to alter the ratio of two _ _:Irking spaces to every three dwelling rooms to one parking space for every two dwelling rooms. That Planning 18oard ' Page 27 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED would bring them in compliance with the forty-two . He understands Attomey Barney's point of not limiting the number, allowing some flexibility. Director of Planning Kanter stated he was concerned with having adequate parking for any large events that will happen at the facilities. That is where he feels the number is critical. Linda Burns, office is in a fifty-two bed unit at Clarbridge in Fayetteville, stated that often people have made the comment they think they are not open because there are not any cars out front. Most of the employees park on the side parking lot, and they often have a couple of employees park out front so people know they are open. There may be two to three families visit during the day. On special events, there is a circular drive, and people park in the parking areas and around the circular drive. Their special events are not numerous. The most numerous ones are when they have their grand opening and they invite the community. After that it is really a quiet setting. She stated at her office they have twenty-six parking spaces and twelve might be used during the day. Director of Planning Kanter stated that they will be requesting fire lanes, and they certainly do not want people parking in the reserved areas. So it still leaves the main question of what is the maximum parking capacity for this facility realistically. Ms. Burns stated they did not park in their fires lanes. The fire lane is in the front of the building and no one is allowed to park there. As far as special events that would require extra parking beyond their limitation, they had that happen on three occasions and that was at their grand opening. Mr. Villa stated when they opened the facility they will not have twenty-three employees when they first open. Ms. Bums also stated when they have the special event there are no residents present at the facility, there are really no staff except for the dining and administrative staff. Board Member Hoffmann stated she was thinking along the same lines as Director of Planning Kanter. When she was thinking of activities, she was thinking of what often happens at nursing homes and similar facilities in this area. That is, school or college students will come and do special events for the residence which means groups of people are coming. Ms. Burns stated that people come in buses or vans which means they only need one parking space. Board Member Hoffmann stated that was not necessarily the case. She thinks there could be occasions where there might be a problem finding parking and it all depends on what they offer the residence. Ms. Bums stated they have programs with the community, daycare centers, elementary and high schools, but they bring one vehicle to park. Board Member Hoffmann stated in this community they have a lot of college students, activities involving them often means that they come in their own car. Mr. Villa stated a lot of the events that would be administered there, would be addressed ahead of time. ti Planning Board Page 28 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Ms. Burns stated they most often get their visitors in the evening and the special events are usually during the day. They have not had any problems with their special events. Chairperson Wilcox stated Director of Planning Kanter stated forty-two parking spaces sounded adequate except for occasional events. If the occasional events become often instead of occasional, he is sure the Board will hear about the problem from the residence. That would require more parking spaces to be built. There would be ten set aside in reserve in case such a problem occurs. Board Member Ainslie stated he was hoping they did not have an event like Lakeside does with their pre-Christmas Bazaars where both sides of Route 96 has cars. Another question was, they must have a little over flow on Mother's Day. Ms. Bums replied a lot of the time on Mother's Day, families come and pick their family member up and leave for the day. Board Member Hoffmann asked on the first of the Special Land Use District under point 2131, it mentioned off street garage or parking spaces for residence. There is not a garage indicated on the plans and since they heard very few residence who will have their own cars, could they strike garage or. Attorney Barney stated it was a general provision and they would have to come back, as required. In terms of the law, as to what is permitted in the area, he does not know why a garage would not be permitted. It is not shown on the plan, but there is a potential, and typically you allow garages where ever you allow cars. Some facilities like to store their van they transport their residence in. Board Member Hoffmann stated that the next point talked about accessory buildings and wanted to "--z'Psk if there were any more accessory buildings than the two already on the plan. \�j • Mr. Trowbridge stated the two structures are fences that enclose dumpsters, they do not have a roof structure over them. The issue is whether they are structures, the built form, they are fenced in areas. Mr. Trowbridge stated he wanted to clarify the subdivision. They have read the resolution and the historical documentations relative to the requirements of the subdivision. They wanted to make sure they understand that there is a fourteen and a half acre requirement that should fulfill all the park land set aside exclusive of any right of way to Riley Drive, not platted in the subdivision. There just needs to be a clarification that any other nonplatted right of way of Riley Drive is not being considered in addition to the fourteen and a half acres as the park set aside. They wanted to make sure that in the future the right a way will not be considered additional set a side space. The Perry's have no intention of building Riley Road other than perhaps a small segment that was platted as a part of phase two Shalebrook. The Perry's wished to have it clarified of the Riley Road extension. For example if the Town of Ithaca decided to build Riley Road, the acreage included in the right of way would not be added to the fourteen and a half acres that the Town of Ithaca chose to build the road. Director of Planning Kanter stated the Town of Ithaca is unlikely to build a road. unless development occurs. If development does occur, the roadway would be platted as part of future development in addition to the park set aside acreage. The park acreage they are talking about is based on a ten percent figure of the total parcel. Mr. Trowbridge stated the Perrys were concerned that if the road were to happen unrelated to future development. For example, the Town of Ithaca wanted to build the road in anticipation of anything else ' appening on Perry Farm other than phase two Shalebrook that the acreage included in the right of way bUld not be set a side in addition to the fourteen and a half acres. Planning Board ' Page 29 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Attorney Barney asked if the Town of Ithaca would then have to buy the land to extend the road. Mr. Trowbridge stated Attorney Barney was correct. If there was no associated development that was going to extend and build the additional portion of Riley Road. It would be mapped at this point. Mr. Trowbridge showed where Riley Road was on a sketch and stated that a part of Riley Road was platted as part of phase two Shalebrook. Mr. Runkel stated what they were asking to be part of the subdivision plan, is the Town of Ithaca pay an easement. They would not be looking for ownership of a road right a way, but they would be looking for an easement that would provide potential access to get to the park. Mr. Trowbridge asked if the Town of Ithaca started to build a road unrelative to an easement, is the area that is now being developed, be in addition to the fourteen and a half already set a side. Attorney Barney replied it was to provide access to the fourteen and a half acres that are being set a side. Mr. Trowbridge stated it is an issue at some point of the extent of the road development. He can see the Town of Ithaca coming back at some time and providing access to the park. Mr. Trowbridge stated that if showed up in the resolution, and the issue is that if the resolution becomes part of the public record, there needs to be some more clarification, Director of Planning Kanter stated the intent was to give the Town of Ithaca easement, access, as a right of way to the park site. The answer is no additional compensation is expected to be granted to the owners. Attorney Barney stated they did not expect a sixty foot right of way large enough to put a road on until there is further development. They do want some sort of access to the park. Mr. Herrick presented and explained the sketches to the Board indicating what materials were going to be used on Sterling House and Sterling Cottage. Stone, brick, aluminum siding, roof shingles and the colors that were going to be used were presented on the sketches. Board Member Ainslie asked what the ingredients in the cultured brick against regular brick. Mr. Herrick stated he was unable to answer the question, and would be able to get an answer for him. He thought what they may be talking about is a base stone that is precut. Elsie Dentes, 11 Perry Lane, stated she was not very happy with the facade, it was all facade materials and is not solid structures. If the buildings are to blend with the neighborhood, there are not any other aluminum siding buildings on Bundy Road or Perry Lane. She does not feel the longevity of the building materials are a quality that will last a long time and question what it will look like twenty, thirty years from now. Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing at 10:44 p.m. Board Member Hoffmann stated it would be useful to have designations as to what direction the evations face. Planning Board Page 30 May 5, 1998 ,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox asked to have the Tot Lot explained. Director of Planning Kanter explained the Tot Lot is about forty-six thousand +/- square foot area that is suppose to be dedicated to the Town of Ithaca as a park in conjunction with the final approval of the Perry Lane subdivision. So far that has not happened. Basically it is the decision of the Planning Board of how you feel it fits into the overall development of the site. Director of Planning Kanter stated there was some discussion between staff and with the Perrys and it seems reasonable that a Tot Lot like this would be a good idea at this type of location, even if only Perry Lane was present. The Tot Lot was part of the original approval for Perry Lane and has not taken place. There were also suppose to be some access, not easements, dedicated to the Town of Ithaca to have pedestrian pathways from Perry Lane through Joseph Place over to the Tot Lot. That is why there are references in this resolution to try to tie that up at this point. Board Member Hoffmann asked if there was a connection from the very end of the tum around, directly to the south, to a recreation space. Director of Planning Kanter stated there was not, it was from the Edwin Drive down to the Tot Lot. Chairperson Wilcox wanted to know why the Tot Lot today might be considered a good idea given the park land accumulation that is starting to accumulate for the community park. Director of Planning Kanter stated it was a directly accessible area for children to play in. It is a nice closed in area for a neighborhood park. The Board could determine that it becomes redundant with the bigger park, but this park area which is now proposed to be combined with another park area on Sgrecci property, is a little bit further away from Bundy Road and Perry Lane. It is thought to be a good addition to that area. Chairperson Wilcox stated it seems like it is difficult to get to it given the further development that has not taken place. Ms. Dentes stated if you have not seen the areas of the Tot Lot, it is a wonderful slope and levels out into levels down into a run off area. The Perrys and the Sgreccis have been nice enough to keep it mowed, and the children love to go sleigh riding on it and play baseball. In nature, it is different from the other parks. Carl Sgrecci, 1132 Trumansburg Road, stated he wanted to clarify the reason it has not been given to the Town of Ithaca. The Town's election at the time of the subdivision approval, was not to take it. It has been available and they have been willing to transfer it and the Perrys have been willing to transfer it to the Town also. Their concern at this time is that it is beginning to be used by the children in the neighborhood, and they are not prepared to take the liability associated with that. If it not going to be assumed by the Town as a public park as originally intended, they (Sgreccis and Perrys) are going to have to restrict the use of the property. Director of Planning Kanter stated the Town had not turned down the park, but it has been held in limbo. Simply because of the legal access. Which is why the Tot Lot should be accompanied by the access conveyance strips. In the original history and original schedule, it was anticipated that within two or three years of granting the Preliminary and Final approval for Perry Lane, the second road would have been in. Unfortunately with the economics of it, it has not happened. With at the time, the Town did not want to take on the responsibility in maintaining the area, they decided that to just wait until the other subdivision was finalized until they took ownership. So now they still have the option of going ahead with the existing right of ays. Director of Planning Kanter stated it was suppose to be a small neighborhood park to serve the Planning Board Page 31 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED;- APPROVED - APPROVED residents, or future residents in that area. It has a different purpose than the community park they are envisioning years down the road. Chairperson Wilcox stated the resolution states if the Planning Board approves it, the Board makes the recommendation to the Town that the Town accept it as park land with the appropriate easements. Mr. Runkel stated on the Preliminary Subdivision Approval, in the conditions attached, there are a number of conditions that would need to be completed prior to final granting of Final Subdivision Approval. They are listed as conditions A through J. There is a concern of when and how to get those done. The timing of the getting those done, so there is not an indefinite period of time before the Subdivision Approval would be granted by the Planning Board. Chairperson Wilcox stated he would not speak for the Town Board, which were the first two items. He stated that some of them the applicant had to do themselves. Mr. Villa stated letter C, for example, were they referring to the Tot Lot or referring to the area on the larger plat. Director of Planning Kanter stated that they were referring to the Tot Lot. Mr. Villa stated they could not answer the question. Attorney Barney stated the problem he had was with the procedure, they did not have a project until the land is subdivided off. This step needs to occur in order to have the project occur. As he stated to Mr. Runkel before the meeting, they could probably take the subdivision section out, but at some point it needs to be dealt with before building permits are obtained. Mr. Runkel asked if it was reasonable to ask that their subdivision get approved. Director of Planning Kanter stated a concern was if the Town was not looking to accept dedication of that park in the near future, does it make sense to survey the exact location. Attorney Barney stated the feeling of the Town had changed from then. They were thinking of obtaining absolute title now to the Tot Lot and the park. Director of Planning Kanter stated he thought it was the Town Boards desire to do that, especially in light of the newly adopted Park, Recreation, Open Space Plan. The area on the southern, southeastern part of the property is shown in the adopted plan as a future community park area. Chairperson Wilcox stated it was his feeling was he wanted the survey because the Comprehensive Plan, the Parks and Open Space, are doing a lot of long range planning to put together a park in that area. Mr. Runkel stated in terms of locking up all the stuff which needs to get done, there is a concern on their part about the timing standpoint of getting all of that done prior to receiving Final Subdivision Approval. Is it possible to push out the conditions, recognizing that they could not start building, but as a way of push the timing up so they could at least complete the other items. Chairperson Wilcox stated the Town Board would consider enacting the Zoning Amendment, in June. z ter the Town Board acts on zoning, then there is a responsibility for the applicant to fulfill the conditions that ",,—,Jay be set forth in Preliminary Site Plan and Preliminary Subdivision. After those are complete, the applicant Planning Board Page 32 May 5, 1998 ;,APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED comes back to the Planning Board for Final Preliminary Site Plan, so that is the second meeting in June, and potentially in July. The responsibility the applicant is to fulfill the terms. The Board has decided that they _ want the Final Subdivision to include that piece of land surveyed so that the Town Board can decide whether they want to take possession of it. He asked if some one could explain the phrase "in fee simple." Attorney Barney stated it was the Anglo-Saxon method of conveying property back, the most complete title you can receive is "fee simple absolute." MOTION by Eva Hoffmann, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is considering Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning of the project site from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District(SLUD) in conjunction with the proposed construction of two buildings, one a 46 unit-,53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800 +/-square feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer/memory-care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), to be known as Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) respectively, including parking, landscaping and other site improvements, to be located on 8.24 +/- acres at the intersection of NYS Rte. 96/Trumansburg Road and Bundy Road, on.a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2, Residence District R-15. Richard and Mary Perry, Owners; Pioneer Development Company, LLC, Applicant; Michael J. Villa, Agent, and 2. The Town of Ithaca Town Board, in a resolution dated August 11, 1997, has referred the petition to rezone the above-referenced parcel to the Planning Board for a recommendation, and i�3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, in a letter dated April 3, 1998, has indicated its intent to serve as lead agency to involved and interested agencies regarding the environmental review of the proposed rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision Approval for the proposed Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage proposal, and circulated a notice of intent to serve as lead agency to involved and interested agencies, and 4. The proposed rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision Approval are Type I actions pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Town of Ithaca Local Law No. 5 of the Year 1988 Providing for Environmental Review of Actions in the Town of Ithaca, and 5. The Planning Board, at a meeting held on April 21, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) Part I prepared by the applicant, Parts II and III of the EAF prepared by the Town Planning staff, and has reviewed other application materials, including a Design Review Application (April 21, 1998), a Stormwater Management Study (March 27, 1998), excerpts from a feasibility study regarding traffic impacts (March 1998), and supplemental information provided by Trowbridge and Wolf (April 15, 1998), including a photographic visual analysis, all of which are incorporated into the EAF, and 6. Based on the above, the Planning Board, at its April 21, 1998 meeting, issued a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to the proposed rezoning, Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval, and Planning Board ' Page 33 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 7. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as -- adequate preliminary plans for Sterling House of Ithaca and Woven Hearts, entitled "SK-2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, "SK-3 Site Plan," dated 3/9/98, "SK-4 Site Section," dated 3/9/98, "C-1 Drainage& Erosion Control Plan," dated 3/19/98, "C-2 Utility Plan," dated 3/19/98, "C-3 Details," dated 3/19/98, "C-4 Details," dated 3/19/98, "L-1 Grading Plan," dated 3/19/98, "L-2 Landscape Plan," dated 3/19/98, "L-3 Site Details," dated 3/19/98, "Wovenhearts 36 Bed Memory Care" (building elevations), dated 3/17/98, "A-5 Sterling House Building Elevations," dated 3/6/98, additional materials included in the "Design Review Application -Woven Hearts & Sterling House of Ithaca," dated April 21, 1998, and other application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 78 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, hereby finds that: a. There is a need for the proposed Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage project in the proposed location, and b. The existing and probable future character of the Town will not be adversely affected by the proposed rezoning and project development; and C. The proposed rezoning from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town, which designates the project site as appropriate for "Suburban Residential' development, and in addition, is adequately served by public water and sewer facilities, is proximate to the City of Ithaca, and is served by public transit; and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of Ithaca Town Board enact the proposed local law to amend the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance by rezoning that portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2 which is proposed for the Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage development, which is shown as Proposed Parcel A and Proposed Parcel B, totaling 8.24 +/- acres in size, as shown on "SK-2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, and as described in "Schedule A" of the proposed Local Law. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2, totaling 133.76 +/- acres, into three lots, including Proposed Parcel A consisting of 4.24 +/- acres, Proposed Parcel B consisting of 3.995 +/- acres, and the remaining portion of Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2 consisting of 125.53 +/- acres, as shown on the drawing entitled "Sterling House &Woven Hearts of Ithaca, SK-2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, prepared by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., T.G. Miller, P.C., conditioned upon the following to be completed prior to the granting of Final Subdivision Approval: a. Rezoning by the Town Board of the proposed project site as described above (i.e., Proposed Parcels A and B) from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) prior to consideration of Final Subdivision Approval by the Planning Board; and i �1 Planning Board Page 34 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED b. Acceptance by the Town Board of the location of the"Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park"; and C. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to include detailed survey information and labeling of the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park," and d. Provisions, in writing, to guarantee future access to the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park", for review and approval by the Attorney for the Town; and e. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show locations of all ingress/egress easements that will provide access to the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park," and acceptance by the Town Board of the locations of said easements; and f. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show the location, boundaries and dimensions, with specific survey information, of the "Tot Lot," consisting of approximately 46,000 square feet in area djacent to Williams Brook, that was to be dedicated to the Town of Ithaca in conjunction withthe Preliminary Subdivision Approval of the Shalebrook Subdivision - Stage 1, together with the access strips from Perry Lane and Joseph Place that were to be dedicated to the Town in fee simple to provide access to the Tot Lot; and g. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show the specific locations of the portion F� of Riley Drive and Joseph Place as future road right-of ways, said roads having been specifically delineated on the plan for"Shalebrook Subdivision," revised 4/16/90, prepared by Peter D. Novelli, P.E., Novelli & Co., and signed by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Chair on 5/3/91; and h. Submission to and approval by the Town Attorney of the language of any easements deemed necessary to ensure ingress and egress, between Proposed Parcels A and B, over the driveways and parking lots, and easements between Parcels A and B for utility lines and drainage facilities, including storm drains and detention basin, to ensure that future owners of both parcels have full rights to use all of the above-mentioned facilities. I. Revision of the subdivision plat title to incorporate the updated name of the project, by deleting the reference to "Woven Hearts," and adding the name "Sterling Cottage." j. Before construction of any improvements anywhere on the project site 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 2. That the Planning Board hereby finds that the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca C;) for Use as Park" is an appropriate location for a community park, as described in the "Town of Ithaca Planning BoardPage 35 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED _ Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan", adopted by the Town Board on December 8, 1997, and that said park dedication, together with the "Tot Lot" that was to dedicated to the Town in conjunction with previous subdivision of the Perry parcel, shall fulfill the parkland reservation requirements of the entire remaining lands in the original 133.76 +/- acre parcel which is the subject of this preliminary subdivision approval. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage development to consist of two buildings, one a 46 unit - 53 bed assisted living facility (appro)imately 28,800 +/- square feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer/memory-care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), including'parking, landscaping and other site improvements, as shown on preliminary plans for Sterling House of Ithaca and Woven Hearts, entitled "SK-2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, "SK-3 Site Plan," dated 3/9/98, "SK- 4 Site Section," dated 3/9/98, "C-1 Drainage & Erosion Control Plan," dated 3/19/98, "C-2 Utility Plan," dated 3/19/98, "C-3 Details," dated 3/19/98, "C-4 Details," dated 3/19/98, "L-1 Grading Plan," dated 3/19/98, "L-2 Landscape Plan," dated 3/19/98, '1-3 Site Details," dated 3/19/98, "Wovenhearts 36 Bed Memory Care" (building elevations), dated 3/17/98, "A-5 Sterling House Building Elevations," dated 3/6/98, additional materials included in the "Design Review Application - Woven Hearts & Sterling House of Ithaca," dated April 21, 1998, and other application materials, conditioned upon the following: a. Rezoning of the proposed project site by the Town Board from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District(SLUD) prior to consideration of Final Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board; b. Preparation and submission of final design and construction details of all proposed drainage and stormwater management improvements, and sedimentation and erosion control measures, for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to Final Site Plan Approval; C. Submission of final construction details of all proposed structures, roads, water and sewage facilities, and other improvements, including locations of all proposed curbing along driveways, parking areas, or sidewalks, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; d. Submission of final details of size, location, design, and construction materials of all proposed signs and lighting, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; e. Submission of a revised landscaping plan and planting schedule incorporating the plant species revisions proposed by Trowbridge & Wolf, which respond to concerns raised regarding height of trees and potential blockage of views and invasive plant species, dated April 23, 1998, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; f. Submission of final, detailed building elevations and floor plans for all buildings, including descriptions of building materials and colors, and revision of the building elevation drawings to be labelled by direction, instead of front, side or rear, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; r Planning BoardPage 36 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED g. Provision of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and/or federal agencies prior to issuance of any building permits. h. Revision of the titles of all of the above-referenced site plan drawings to incorporate the updated name of the project, by deleting the reference to "Woven Hearts," and adding the name "Sterling Cottage." i. Revision of the site plan to show the location of any required fire hydrant and proposed fire and other emergency zones, subject to approval of the City of Ithaca Fire Department and the Town of Ithaca Director of Building and Zoning. j. Submission of an estimate of the cost of all site and building improvements (excluding the cost of land), prepared by a licensed professional engineer, and subject to review and approval of the Town Engineer. k. Revision of sheets L-1, L-2 &SK-3 to show the area reserved for eleven additional parking spaces. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That if the proposed local law recommended for approval at this meeting is adopted by the Town Board,and if such law as adopted permits the Planning Board to reduce the required parking as permitted pursuant to the draft of the local law submitted to this meeting,this Board will grant a reduction in the number of spaces required from 52 spaces to 41, subject to the right of the Town,pursuant to the referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, to require additional spaces if the reduced number of parking spaces is found by the Planning Board to be inadequate. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Planning Board requests the Town Board to request the State DOT to re-stripe Route 96 as a no passing zone from the City limits to Hayts Road, and that the speed limit be reduced to 45 M.P.H. all the way north to Hayts Road. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Thayer, Bell, Ainslie, Kenerson. NAYS- None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: Other Business. There was no other business to be discussed. AGENDA ITEM; Adjournment: Upon Motion, Chairperson Wilcox declared the May 5, 1998, Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 11:17 p.m. - Prepared by: Planning Board Page 37 May 5, 1998 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Carrie L. Coates, Keyboard Specialist/Minutes Recorder Mary Bryant, Administrative Secretary for the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. �I 61 z Ithaca,New York 14850 Tuesday.May 5, 1998 AGENDA 7:30 P.M. Persons to be heard. 7:35 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding an amendment to Local Law No. I of the year 1998 Providing For a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety(90)Days,said amendment proposed to extend the moratorium for an additional seventy-five(75) days. 7:40 P.M. SEQR Determination,St.Catherine of Siena Church Subdivision,Blackstone Avenue. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.71-1-10 into two lots,consisting of a new 0.8+/-acre lot and the remaining 9.3+/-acre parcel,located on Blackstone Avenue,Residence District R-15. St.Catherine of Siena Church,Owner/Applicant; Elena Flash,Esq.,Agent. 7:55 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed addition to the Montessori School Annex,to consist of 2,175+/-square feet of additional classroom space,located at 117 East King Road,Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.43-2-7,R-15 Residence District.Montessori School,Owner/Applicant;Peter Demjanec,Agent. 8:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of Recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding two sign variances proposed by Montessori School,one sign variance proposed at the Montessori School main building located at 120 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.43-1-3.5,R-30 Residence District,the other proposed at the Montessori School Annex located at 117 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.43-2-7,R-15 Residence District. Montessori School,Owner/Applicant;Peter Demjanec,Agent. 8:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals(ZBA)regarding the proposed modification of a condition ofthe Special Approval,granted by the ZBA on April 19, 1989,which restricts occupancy in the Maplewood Park Apartments(formerly Cornell Quarters)to graduate students and their families, located at 201 Maple Avenue between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street,on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.63-2-10.2, Residence District R-9.The proposed modification of the condition is to change the occupancy restriction to include,in addition to graduate students,those persons of post graduate and graduate student age and above who are short term t university affiliated visitors and participants. Cornell University,Owner/Applicant,Ann Shumate,Associate Director of Campus Life,Agent. 8:45 P.M. SEQR Determination,PRI Site Plan Modifications,1259 Trumansburg Road. 8:55 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution(PRI)consisting of alterations to the second story of the recently completed addition,modification of the north entrance for accessibility for the handicapped,installation of a sidewalk,expansion of the existing parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the north entrance area,located at 1259 Trumansburg Road(Route 96)on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.24-3-3.1,R-30 Residence District.Paleontological Research Institution, Owner/Applicant;Dr.Warren Allmon,PRI Director,and Anton J.Egner,Egner and Assoc.,Agents. 9:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING:Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval,Preliminary Subdivision Approval,and a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District(SLUD)for the proposed construction of two buildings,one a 46 unit-53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800+/-square feet),and the other a 32 unit-36 bed Alzheimer/memory-care facility(approximately 18,800+/-square feet),to be known as Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage respectively,including parking, landscaping and other site improvements,to be located on 8.24+/-acres at the intersection of NYS Rte. 96/Trumansburg Road and Bundy Road,Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.27-1-11.2,Residence District R-15. Richard and Mary Petry,Owners;Pioneer Development Company,LLC,Applicant;Michael J.Villa,Agent. I 1 Approval of Minutes: March 17, 1998(in packet) 12. Other Business. 13. Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter,AICP Director of Planning 273-1747 NOTE:IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND,PLEASE NOTIFY MARY BRYANT AT 273-1747. (A quorum of four(4)members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, May S, 1998 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, May 5, 1998, at 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:35 p.m. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding an amendment to Local Low No. . �:; �. ia.. Xde, a.... r... a..'. a.:•, a�.` LA,.. x:> :.s.:x�+.- .- c.s`a.v..3:MG.M.,�d i�� .`rv3.J Le gals 11 Le gals 1 1 of the year 1998 Providing For a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Enter. tainment Businesses for a Pe. riod of Ninety (90) Days, said amendment proposed to extend the moratorium for an additional seventy -five (75) days. 7:45 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Sub- division Approval for the pro- r osed subdivision of Town of thaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10 into two lots, consist- ing of a new 0.8 ± acre lot and the remaining 9.3 ± acre parcel, located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence District R -15. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., Agent. 7:55 P.M. Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed addition to the Montessori School Annex, to consist of 2,175 ± square feet of additional classroom space, located at 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -2 -7, R -15 Residence District. Montes- sori School, Owner/ Applicant; Peter -Demjanec, Aggent. 8:15 P.M. Consideration of Recommendations to the Zon- ing Board of Appeals regard- ing two sign variances pro- posed by Montessori School, one sign variance proposed at the Montessori School main building located at 120 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43- 1 -3.5, R -30 Residence s District, the other proposed at the Montessori School Annex ( located at 117 East King s Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -2 -7, R.15 Resi- dence District. Montessori School, Owner /Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent. 8:30 P.M. Consideration of a 1 Recommendation to the Zon- o ing Board of Appeals (ZBAI s regarding the propose( B modification of a condition of T the Special Approval, R granted by the ZBA on April a 19, 1989, which restricts oc- cupancyy in the Ma lewoad Pi Park A artments formerly p Cornell Quarters) to graduate c students and their families, S located at 201 Maple Ave- h nue between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, on Town th of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. b 63 -2 -10.2, Residence District R -9. The proposed modifica. In tion of the condition is to m change the occupancy re- b or striction to include, in addi. as tion to graduate students, those persons of post me Sgraduate and graduate stu- m ent age and above who are short term university affiliated ti visitors and participants. Cor- nell University, Owner/ Aoolicont: Ann Shumate. Associate Director of Campus Life, Aggent. 8.55 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Rec- ommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for pro. posed modifications to the Paleontological Research In. stitution (PRI) consisting of al- terations to the second story of the recently completed addition, modification of the north entrance for acces- sibili.y for the handicapped, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the existing parking area, and regrading and drainoge improvements to the north entrance area, located at 1259 Truman' Road (Route 96) on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 3 -3.1, R -30 Resi. dence District. Paleontologi- cal Research Institution, Owner /Applicant; Dr. War- ren Allmon, PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner and Assoc. Agents. 9:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Ap. proval, Preliminary Subdivi- sion Approval, and a Rec- ommendation to the Town Board regarding the pro - posed rezoningg from R -15 Residence to SPecial Land Use District (SL D) for the _ proposed construction of two buildings, one a 46 unit -53 bed assisted living facility approximately 28,800 ± quare feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer/ _ memory -care facility F approximately 18,800± quare feet), to be known as Sterling House df Ithaca and Sterling Cottage respectively, L ncludin9 parking, andscaping and other site mprovements, to be located - n 8.24 *_ acres at the inter. ection of NYS Rte. 96/ rumanslo Road and and Road, Town of Ithaca ax Parcel No. 27 -1 -11.2, - esidence District R -15. Rich' rd and Mary Perry, Owners; oneer Development Com- any LLC, Applicant; Mi. hae( J. Villa. Agent. aid Planning Board will at aid times and said place he all persons in support of — uch matters or obiections ereto. Persons may appear y aggent or in person, dividuals with visual impair - ents, hearing impairments other special needs, will e provided with assistance necessary, upon request. s rsons desiring assistance ust make such a request not ss than 48 hours prior to the me of the, public hearings. Jonahan Kanter, AICP t Director of Planning 273 -1747 d s 0 s A A K m dE Itl a. Apnl 29, i YY8 ww�wArrw r. n�ert en wn CAD s 0 s A A K m dE Itl a. NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, May 5, 1998 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, May 5, 1998, at 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:35 P.M. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding an amendment to Local Law No. 1 of the year 1998 Providing For a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety (90) Days, said amendment proposed to extend the moratorium for an additional seventy-five (75) days. 7:45 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71-1-10 into two lots, consisting of a new 0.8 +/- acre lot and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel, located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence District R-15. St Catherine of Siena Church, Owner/Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., Agent. 7:55 P.M. Consideration of Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed addition to the Montessori School Annex, to consist of 2,175 +/- square feet of additional classroom space, located at 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-7, R-15 Residence District. Montessori School, Owner/Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent. 8:15 P.M. Consideration of Recommendations to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding two sign variances proposed by Montessori School, one sign variance proposed at the Montessori School main building located at 120 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-1-3.5, R-30 Residence District, the other proposed at the Montessori School Annex located at 117 East King Road on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43-2-7, R-15 Residence District. Montessori School, Owner/Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent. 8:30 P.M. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) regarding the proposed modification of a condition of the Special Approval, granted by the ZBA on April 19, 1989, which restricts occupancy in the Maplewood Park Apartments (formerly Cornell Quarters) to graduate students and their families, located at 201 Maple Avenue between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63-2-10.2, Residence District R-9. The proposed modification of the condition is to change the occupancy restriction to include, in addition to graduate students, those persons of post graduate and graduate student age and above who are short term university affiliated visitors and participants. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; Ann Shumate, Associate Director of Campus Life, Agent. 8:55 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI) consisting of alterations to the second story of the recently completed addition, modification of the north entrance for accessibility for the handicapped, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the existing parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the north entrance area, located at 1259* Trumansburg Road (Route 96) on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-3-3.1, R-30 Residence District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner/Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon, PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner and Assoc., Agents. 9:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUR) for the proposed construction of two buildings, one a 46 unit - 53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800 +/- square feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer/memory-care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), to be known as Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage respectively, including parking, landscaping and other site improvements, to be located on 8.24 +/- acres at the intersection of NYS Rte. 96/Trumansburg Road and Bundy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-1-11.2, Residence District R-is. Richard and Mary Perry, Owners; Pioneer Development Company, LLC, Applicant; Michael J. Villa, 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 agent or in person. Individuals with j visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance %1 as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 46 hours prior to the time of the public hearings. TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Karen McGuire 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. Mav 5. 1998, 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: April 27. 1998 Date of Publication: April 29 . 1998 r Karen McGuire. Secretary Town of Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS.: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 14 day of TPzu f . 1998. ll, / Notary Public. JOAN LENT NOTEis00PA ROTARY PUBuc, RCA1T. OF NE{V YORK RESIDING IN TGM?F;e ; COUNTY REG. NO 49'4(4i MY CO "'TST"'NEXPERE_S!.4ARCH30„A,2 'W ADOPTED RESOLUTION: SEQR Paleontological Research Institution 1259 Trumansburg Road Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval Planning Board, May 5, 1998 MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed alterations to the second story addition, modification of the north entrance for handicap accessibility, modification of an existing bathroom for handicap accessibility, installation of a sidewalk. expansion of the parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the entrance area. at the Paleontological Research Institute located at 1259 Trumansburg Road (Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 3 -3.1, R -30 Residential District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner /Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon, PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, 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 The Planning Board, on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant. a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part II prepared by planning staff drawings labeled "PRI Exist. Bldg Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev. ", dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision "First Floor Plan ", and "Interior Elevations and Details" each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, 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; 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, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Thayer, Ainslie. NAYS -None. ^ BSTENTION - Bell. The MOTION was declared to be carried. Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. Mary Bryant, ministraty e Secretary. h ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Paleontological Research Institution 1259 Trumansburg Road Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Recommendation Regarding Special Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals Planning Board, May 5, 1998 WHEREAS: 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation regarding Special Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals for proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution (PRI) consisting of alterations to the second story addition, modification of the north entrance for handicap accessibility, modification of an existing bathroom for handicap accessibility, installation of a sidewalk, expansion of the parking area, and regrading and drainage improvements to the north entrance area. PRI is located at 129 Trumansburg Road (Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 3 -3.1, R -30 Residential District. Paleontological Research Institution, Owner /Applicant; Dr. Warren Allmon. PRI Director, and Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, 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 May 5, 1998, reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant and a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part II prepared by planning staff, and made a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to Site Plan Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on May 5. 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, drawings entitled "PRI Exist. Bldg. Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev." dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision ", "First Floor Plan'', and '`Interior Elevations and Details ", each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, 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 for the proposed modifications to the Paleontological Research Institution, as shown on the drawings entitled "PRI Exist. Bldg. Alterations - Partial Plan & Ext. Elev. ", dated 3/26/98, "Sidewalk & Parking Revision ". "First Floor Plan ". and "Interior Elevations and Details" each dated 3/31/98, prepared by Anton J. Egner, Egner & Associates, and additional application materials, subject to the following conditions: a, obtaining the required special approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to issuance of any building permit, and b revision of drawing No. 9742 -1 labelling Exterior Elevation 2 as "North" Elevation, and ADOPTED RESOLUTION, Paleontological Research Institution 129 Trumansburg Road Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Recommendation Regarding Special Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals Planning Board, May 5, 1998 c. revision of drawing 9823 -A02 to correct the title by changing it from "Second Floor Addition" to "Two -story addition ", and d. revision of drawing 9742 -L2 by labelling the existing building as "Institution" instead of "Institute'', and e. submission of an original or mylar copy and two paper copies of the final site plan to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board, in making its 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. AYES- Wilcox, Hoffman, Ainslie, Kenerson, Thayer. NAYS- None. ABSTAIN - Bell. The MOTION was declared to be carried. C1 Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. Mary Bryant, . dministra ive Secretary. 2 PRELIMINARY SITE PL;LN CHECKLIST PRCJ= CT Nr`ME Paleontological Research Institution 9804271 P RCS =.CT iTUMS E .R PRA :RER Susan Ritter V ITEM? Su MITT EZD N NOT APPLIC_ =LE 'N WA =VE CCN' COND OF O- AP::r;' L 1. ✓ ComTi le Gna De Ie RSV = °r / E��ir �- -_ . Lam^. _ocmen a. L' �� z. ev4 =w :.=C w Agreement and Back -up y Le�ie_ccmen �— W4 t`n ho Ci nC �J ii ( == reQL.'_r=a) (Cn on,= (_) c"_ _v each ) 2. ✓ Pa` /me_ ^_t Gf re'i ie;a f° _S . lji Deocsit of escrow. T L 3. ✓u11y compiezed ar_d signed Shcrt Environmental Assessment Fora,, Part I (SEA?), or Lcnc En-;-iror_-=nta_ Assessment corn, Part I (LED,7' . (See Town Planner as t0 w (C t0 .sIUb'm_ _ ) a _ __ Proposed preliil__iarV Si` °_ pla ^, Wit^ the fO110Wi'g information_, ==z be filed in the office of the Tower Planner at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Planning Board me °_ting at which preli mi nary aper: j 1S requested. Information_ may be sup_oli ed on more one drawing if necessa _ y. a. ✓ Vicinity Man showing the general location of the property and proposed project at a scale of 1" =1000' or 1"= 2000'. b. ✓ Natural features within and immediately adjacer_t to the site including but not limited tc streams, lakes, flocdplai ns, ponds, wetlands, wocalan as, brushla nas, significant natural habitats or ot:_er features pertinent to reVi =_w 0= the prcposea project. c. V/\// Exact bcu.ndar y 1___es of the t=acz, i ndi coated by a he 'iii S__ ^_OWi ng loCa=_Cn and de �_�: o all monuments, gi'v'ing property mezes and bounds t0 t: nearest cn� -te = :�, a ng' es� tc the nea ~est mi nut �nd a� least one bearing. d. Size, location, and use of a =l existing structure, parking areas, access drives, of =- s.reet loading area, signs, lighting, pedestrian facilities, landsca_ing, ana other e: { =st_.�g features pert_nen- to plan review. e. Size, location, proposed us`, desig.., and construction materials of all proposed structures . FK?I r%.r,VAgv S" E DL��i C1BC'�C �.S.,, Pace 2 M. lz Existing and proposed site tcpccraphv repr =Sented by contour lines with intervals as required by the Planning Board, but not to exceed : (five) feet, including a grading plan describing the volumes c. cut and fill materials and thei r compcs_ti on, an_d __ ^_eluding elevations of proposed buildings, signage, lighting, and other features. n. L Drainage plan which includes a description of method used for analysis, the calculation of drainage area above point of entry for each water course entering or abutting the site, and proposed mezIcd of on -site retention if required. c. ✓ Border lines bounding site plan s:.ee.s one inch from the left edge and one -ha_. inch from each o_, t e other eGCeS . All requlreC l:: ^_.ormatlon_, including signatures, seals, dates and such in.or7.1Ca C s al! be W;th'_n tna border. p. ✓ Map scale in bar form, and north pcinc. f ✓ Locat_on, design, and ccr_structi r_ ma�er_als c= all . c. ✓ Name of prcpcs proposed park,n.g areas, access dr_-res, an o..- screec loading areas. r. 'tip Name of Town, County, and State. g N 1 S4 Z=, lccati cn des_gn , a_ ^_d cor.str,cz_cn may.__ c= , _a_s S. all`propcsed signs and lig h inig. of Site Plan, including any applicable revision dates. h Location, design, and ccr_structicn materials o, all proposed pedeszrian and bicycle facilities. t. 1\11A Key map i. rv/� Lanidscaping p_ :__ anc plan -'_ g loca cP_ an_d Z ropcSel�. d_S' gn C= .' j. 14A Location, design, and construction materials of all proposed water and sewage facilities. k. N' A Location of anv e: {,sting or proposed f_-_ and ct her emergency zones, includnc the location_ c_ fi.r_ hydrants. Location, na<<e, and dimensions of each existing or proposed street and allev and each existing orrprcpcsed - - utility, drainage, or similar easement within, abutting, or in the immediate vicinity of the pro_cesed project, M. lz Existing and proposed site tcpccraphv repr =Sented by contour lines with intervals as required by the Planning Board, but not to exceed : (five) feet, including a grading plan describing the volumes c. cut and fill materials and thei r compcs_ti on, an_d __ ^_eluding elevations of proposed buildings, signage, lighting, and other features. n. L Drainage plan which includes a description of method used for analysis, the calculation of drainage area above point of entry for each water course entering or abutting the site, and proposed mezIcd of on -site retention if required. c. ✓ Border lines bounding site plan s:.ee.s one inch from the left edge and one -ha_. inch from each o_, t e other eGCeS . All requlreC l:: ^_.ormatlon_, including signatures, seals, dates and such in.or7.1Ca C s al! be W;th'_n tna border. p. ✓ Map scale in bar form, and north pcinc. c. ✓ Name of prcpcs =d project. r. 'tip Name of Town, County, and State. S. ✓ Date of Site Plan, including any applicable revision dates. t. 1\11A Key map (when more than one sheet is submitted). PRELIM;NP.Rv SITE PLPsy CHEC CLIS"_' Pace 3 u. l,! Name and seal of the recistered land si.:rve cr(S) or engineer(s) who prepared the toccgrap'rilc and boundar'i / survey and the date of. survev. 6. ✓ Name (s) and addresses) of all prccerty cw-ers and perscrs who have an interest in the si�.e and of parcels abutti nc the sites, or withi n 500' c= t:z_ sites, including easements or riches -cf -wavy, plus the tax parcel numbers. 7. Estimate of the cos` of im_crovemen_s (excluding t ^e T)urCnase cost o= (anal to he pr °_par °,4 / licensed professional e.a�neer. 8. V Three (3) dark -_i ne pri_.ts o= the p ropcsed Si �e and 25 cOD1es o= all S ^eels of t :e cs2d 1 - V in reduced format (no larger than ?1" x 1711) and cccv of all other items r =coined above (Except Dei�lopTent Review Applicaticn and escrow = orms;. p_ari'=cra \pr:'_ :m :s.___ mb \5/:4/95 °aleontoloai cal ReseaYcn Instit ltic 9804271 Susan Ri = PY 1 CC NV� tea? G - -- S. ✓ �e= G_! =_c S.Z!:!Cw 6. Ccns =_mac= serwace 7. AND Cne 1DOPTED RESOLUTION: Montessori School Main Building- Proposed Sign 120 East King Road Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Sign Review Board (Planning Board), May 5, 1998 MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals has received an application for a free standing sign at the Montessori School Main Building located on 120 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -1- 3.5, Residence District R -30. Montessori School, Owner /Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent, and 2. Said sign measures approximately 20 square feet in size. whereas the Town of Ithaca Sign Law permits a maximum size of 4 square feet for freestanding signs in residential districts, and 3. The Board of Appeals, pursuant to the Town's Sign Law, has referred the application for said sign to the Sign Review Board (Planning Board) for its review and recommendations, and The Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board. at a public hearing held on May 5, 1998, reviewed a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, and Part II, prepared by Planning staff for the Zoning Board of Appeals, who will act as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed sign; drawings labeled "Design A," dated April 1, 1998, prepared by Demjanec and Associates Architects., and additional application materials, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the proposed sign variance for the Montessori Main Building, for the sign shown in "Design A," dated April 1, 1998. subject to the following condition: That the total height of the sign shall not exceed 6 feet, as measured from ground elevation. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Ainslie. Bell, Thayer. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. 1 Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. 0 ct, d i L, 4 t, 7 Mary B&At, Admirgstratvie Secretary. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Montessori School Annex Building - Proposed Sign 117 East King Road Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Sign Review Board (Planning Board), May 5, 1998 MOTION by James Ainslie, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1. The Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals has received an application for a free standing sign at the Montessori School Annex Building, located on 117 East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43- 2-7, Residence District R -15. Montessori School. Owner /Applicant; Peter Demjanec, Agent, and 2. Said sign measures approximately 10 square feet in size, whereas the Town of Ithaca. Sign Law permits a maximum size of 4 square feet for freestanding signs in residential districts, and 3. The Board of Appeals, pursuant to the Town's Sign Law, has referred the application for said sign to the Sign Review Board (Planning Board) for its review and recommendations, and The Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board, at a public hearing, held on May 5, 1998, reviewed a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, and Part II, prepared by Planning staff for the Zoning Board of Appeals, who will act as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the proposed sign; drawings labeled "Design D," dated April 1, 1998, prepared by Demjanec and Associates Architects, and additional application materials, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the proposed sign variance for the Montessori School Annex Building, for the sign as shown in "Design D," dated April 1, 1998, subject to the following condition: That permission be obtained from Tompkins County to install said sign within the county -owned road right -of -way, as shown on the site plan drawing A -1, revised March 27, 1998. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Ainslie, Thayer, Bell, Kenerson NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. Mary ive Secretary. � � 4(n +tip FINAL SITE PLAN CHECKLIST V = ITEM SUBMITTED N/A = NOT APPLICABLE W = WAIVE COND = CONDITION OF APPROVE_; 3. 6. 1� 7. PROJECT NAME PROJECT NUMBER PREPARER Completed and signed Development Review Application, Development Review Escrow Agreement, and Back -up Withholding Form (i= rewired). (Only (1) copy each Payment of additional review fees as needed and deposited in an escrow account. All other items submitted with the preliminary site plan application with modifications made according to the approval given by the Town Planning Board. Record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits frCm county, state, and /or federal agencies. eSubmit COG=S of all permits or approvals so granted. j5c�,w.i Ste' �,k -�•�� �II�SDCi) Detailed sizing and final all required improvements. material specifications of Construction details of all proposed structures, roads, water /sewage facilities, and other improvements. One (1) or Original .m lar g y_ copy and two paper copies of the final site plan_ to be retained by the Town of Ithaca. PLANBORD \FINALS M mb/5/14/96 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Maplewood Park Apartments Cornell University Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals Modification of Occupancy Restrictions Planning Board, May 5, 1998 MOTION by Gregory Bell, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Modification of Special Approval with regard to the occupancy restrictions for the Cornell University Maplewood Park graduate student housing complex imposed by he Zoning Board of Appeals as part of its granting of Special Approval on April 19, 1989, said Maplewood Park being located on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 63 -2 -1, -2, -3, -10.2 and - 14, Residence District R -9. Cornell University, Owner; Ann Shumate, Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals is legislatively determined to act as lead agency in environmental review, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I submitted by the applicant and a Part II prepared by the Town Planning Department, and other application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board, in making recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, detennines 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 modification; 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 modification of its conditions of Special Approval granted April 19, 1989 be approved, subject to the following condition: that occupancy by persons other than registered Cornell University graduate students be limited to persons twenty-one years of age or older, temporarily affiliated with the University as visiting. researchers, academic fellows, faculty, scholars or other similar academic or professional associations. and their families. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffman, Bell, Ainslie, Thayer, Kenerson NAYS - None. he MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. / n A McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. Mary Bryant, ministrat' e Secretary. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Amendment to Local Law No. 1, 1998, Extending the Moratorium on Adult Entertainment Businesses for an Additional Seventy -five (75) Days Recommendation to the Town Board Planning Board, May 5, 1998 MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS: 1 The Town Board enacted Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1998 "Providing for a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety (90) Days," on February 9,1998, and 2. Said proposed local law establishes interim regulations prohibiting the establishment of adult entertainment businesses for a period of ninety (90) days from the date of enactment of the local law in order to provide a reasonable period of time for the Town of Ithaca Planning Department to conduct a study regarding the potential secondary effects of such uses on th surrounding community, and to provide a reasonable period of time for the Town Board to draft and consider regulations regarding the establishment of such uses within the Town of Ithaca, and 3. The Town Board has been diligently pursuing the preparation of a draft local law which would regulate adult entertainment businesses, and has also prepared a draft study re ardin the secondary affects of such uses (April 6, 1998), and g g 4. The above - referenced moratorium is set to expire on or about May 9. 1998, and the Town Board has proposed extending the current moratorium for an additional seventy-five (75) days in order to provide sufficient time to complete the above - referenced study and revise hedra t proposed local law, and 5. The Town Board has referred said proposed amendment to Local Law No. 1, 1998, to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for their recommendation, and 6. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on May 5,1998, has reviewed the above - referenced local law amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, pursuant to Article XIV, Section 78 of the Town Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, hereby finds that: of ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Amendment to Local Law No. 1, 1998, Extending the Moratorium on Adult Entertainment Businesses for an Additional Seventy -five (75) Days Recommendation to the Town Board Planning Board, May 5,1998 a. There is a need for the proposed seventy -five (75) day extension of the moratorium for the establishment of adult entertainment businesses, and b. The existing and probable future character of the Town will not be adversely affected; and C, The proposed amendment to the local law is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town, and will allow the Planning Department to complete a study of the potential secondary effects of adult entertainment businesses and will allow the proper consideration of a draft local law regarding the regulation of such uses; and '9E IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of Ithaca Town Board enact the proposed amendment to Local Law No. 1 of the Year 1998 "Providing for a Moratorium for the Establishment of Adult Entertainment Businesses for a Period of Ninety (90) Days ", by extending the moratorium for an additional seventy -five (75) days. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Thayer, Ainslie, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. d p / Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. 2 Mary B Administratvie Secretary. DOPTED RESOLUTION: SEQR: St. Catherine of Siena Church 2 -Lot Subdivision Blackstone Avenue Preliminary and Final Subdivision A pproval Planning Board, Mav 5, 1998 MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie: WHEREAS. 1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10 into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre parcel, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel. The property is located on Blackstone Avenue';'Residence District R -15. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., 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 Subdivision Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot No. 10, Map of Lots 6- 7- 10- 11 -12, on Arthur A. Prince Development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5, 1960, and most recently amended by Allen T. Fulkerson. L.S., on April 2, 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of Lot 10, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to Subdivision Approval, as proposed; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed; and therefore, neither a Long Environmental Assessment Form nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Kenerson, Ainslie, Thayer, Bell. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. �1CU�m'1'1'lcMx.; Karen McGuire, Secretary. Town of Ithaca. Mary B inisitative Secretary. .DOPTED RESOLUTION: St. Catherine of Siena Church 2 -Lot Subdivision Blackstone Avenue Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval Planning Board, May 5, 1998 MOTION by Gregory Bell. seconded by Eva Hoffmann: WHEREAS: 1 • This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10 into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre parcel, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel. The property is located on Blackstone Avenue, Residence District R -15. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner /Applicant; Elena Flash, Esq., Agent, and 2• This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has, on May 5, 1998, reviewed and accepted as adequate the Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and has made a negative determination of environmental significance, and The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot Nc Development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared recently amended by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., Lot 10, and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 2. on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a 10, Map of Lots 6- 7- 10- 11 -12, on Arthur A. Prince by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5, 1960, and most on April 2, 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Subdivision Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10, into two lots consisting of a 0.8 +/- acre par el, and the remaining 9.3 +/- acre parcel, as shown on the survey map entitled "Subdivision Map -Lot No. 10, Map of Lots 6-7-10-11-12, on Arthur A. Prince Development, Town of Ithaca, NY," prepared by Carl Crandall, C. E., dated July 5. 1960, and most recently amended by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., on April 2, 1998 to show the proposed subdivision of Lot 10, subject to the following conditions: .DOPTED RESOLUTION: St. Catherine of Blackstone Aver Preliminary and Planning Board, Siena Church 2 -Lot Subdivision iue Final Subdivision Approval May 5, 1998 a• Revision of the survey map to delete the subtitle "Map of Lots 6- 7- 10 -11- 12, and to delete the labeling of lots 6, 7, and 11, since those parcels have been consolidated back into Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -10. Instead, lots 6, 7, and 11 should be labeled as `'part of Tax Map Parcel No. 71- 1 -10,'' and on Submission of an original or mylar copy of the survey and four copies for signature Chairperson of the Planning Board prior to recording in the office of the Couty Clerky the AYES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Bell, Thayer, Kenerson, Ainslie. NAYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. 11.1 1� Uy21 V /l 1 ( n i.I Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. Mary Bryant dministr ive Secretary. ARTICLE VI SECTION 3 6 . PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT CHECKLIST' ?_17 Lam- I t✓, J�:I,�C1 "iy r �l PR=PaRER W = WA_�7ED NIA = NOT APPLC!LE COND = CONDITION OF A?PRCVI The l.ems 1? sterd be.0 u- ' es., waved by t::e f;lec C- n P_an: ° -- s r'=S- .- _- before an ap D_1Cat_On fCr a pr =_1 _ -- -rl S?_: C_'i _s_ __ a: �= ��i3_ 1s aea:;.°__ Complete_. These materials s::a_l be filed wit :' at 1_ =St thirty (30) Calendar days pr.or to the Pla ring Scar. rne_ti .nc at wn_cn , pre_m_nar -- c approval is reuested. r 1 \" Cne Comnl°__ec anC. s_C^_e^. L'e'ielCpTient Re _�W A_ D1'_Cat.C% 2. r 3 LV / y, One Development. Review Escrcw ACr°_°_ment and Back -u.0 W.thhold_ng For n (� f recur ed) Payment of review fees. 4. Deposit of escrow. 5. One fully completed Form, Part I (SEA=), Part I (LEAF) . (See and s_yned S'.cr. En-i_ror_menta'_ P.ssessTent or Lcr_c Enviror_mental Assessment Form, Town, Planner as to which to submit.) 6 • WA Estimate of Costs of Sate improvements (=xclu ` :nc COSt o= 1=r� ac;_ prepared and pro`ess_onal fees) to be preT re (- ��f?ra�^_`r) c by a licensed professional enc' -neer. 71 � Four full size dark-line prints of the preliminary plat and 25 reduced COD? e_s of all shee'.= C' the pre =' mi nary plat reduced copies to be no Zaraer than 11" by 17 11) wi,_h the following information: a. _ Vies - - -ty Ma_ show-inc the General location o= the procer.y, 1" =,000' or b. _�� Genera' layout, includ_nC lot lanes with d mensicns; b_OC}C and 1Ct nL'mberS ; h. ^n'n1a :i anG all my line, wIz.01 F ; feet Wide h_g .way rights- o=- wa,,T; areaS to be r =_ser-rec =cr L'Se in CCmmCn bpi reS'_dentS of the Subd'_lT =SiCi :, Sites =Cr dra_naCe, Cr Ct._ =r pu.=cS °_; and w :t_ ^_ dimensions . ,n C. General layout of the proccsed h'_a:!? 'rS, b1CC1 {S, and lots T+J :LP__n t_ ^_e Dr"DCS °_� 5':DG :'T =5 T`n_at "-f` �i=way names. qq qji�� q9 Preliminary Subdivision Plat Checklist d. P f i. Contour izter-ra =s, feet when the s?cce more than i:ve feet percent. to LS�� da='1m, 15 less cl . w n =' SlOpe ZS c= riot more _��.lr .tier men_ gre a z e r an ; t.-.a _ - two anc not four Cut =ura_ L°_ =`.res :v__ and immec_ate1V aC]aCen_ to t e proposed SL yd_ _S_ �._, 1nC_ud1nC p__ = =ed 1CLS h_ ^'wav imp rCVeme__. _ t s, plpe_ines, cower tr=n5 _3S_ �n 1_n°_ other s_ SLruCtures, other s'_Cn; =_cant O_ cw C. Structures W1t..1n and imm,=e a V each utility, __ drainage, or similar easement drainage adjacent to the proposed Of subd_v:.s_or_, includ_ng im;:ediate parks of the entering or abutting wetlands, cri_i the ca= envircnmenta= areas, and ocher s,c:__ =icant features . J D1reCl.lCn O_ cw C. a_i Wczer c^.Lr�es. Ca_c'.11___OP_ C_ each utility, __ drainage, or similar easement drainage area above point Of entr.r for each water course im;:ediate vicinity of the entering or abutting proposed subdivision_. the tract. Location and description cf all section line corners and goverr_me_ ^_t surrey mcr_u: =en =s in or near the Subd_'risicr?, to at least cr_e o= which the subdivision shall be re`erence d by true courses a_^_d dls =ances . 2 Location, name, and dimensions of each existing highway and alley and each utility, drainage, or similar easement within, abutti__ ^_g, or in the im;:ediate vicinity of the proposed subdivision_. j.� Natural features within. and immediately adjacent to the proposed subd= VlslCn, inClud'_ng drai =!age Chan_.e15, bodies o. water, Wooded areas, ar:d Other significant features. Identification_ of areas subject tc flooding as indicated on E47 D Flood Boundary Maps, Wetla: ds Macs. k. Width at building line o. lees located on a curve or having riOP.- parall S1de !_nes, Wh= n reC''� red bV the D1 anr_.4n (: Bcarc 1._ Names and addresses of cwn_rs parcels abutting r'.e proposed su'cG_vis_On. MI Names of recorded subd_J1__cns abu. =_ng the propos=al sL'Ddivis ion . P_. !v ?�eSLr1Ct1Ve CCV._..an_s, i. any. O. Key mcap, when more t_^.at c:-= S: =e- 13 regl' t0 pr Sc__C. plat. r Preliminary a. V Subdivision Plat Checklist Name c= subd,'risior_, W'iC� spa_? roL dupl_c3_�' LCe name enc ='ee= 1a:' c= ary of er subC_v;s_cr_ in t :e coun -v. , Name c` er ar�n_tec` enc ='ee= 1a:' p1=.� , 1ar_dscace ec__^_er cerscr_ w=o p.a... r / / Na e (s) and adaress',es; o= tie cWner ,S` _ -.: , - - - s. L Nay „�. (s; a__�. ad ...reSJ J, C. �.��. 5..:;C_'I__.C- • -. -- __ -`- subc , v_de= (s) is ;are) ncc t:.e ccvner (S. . t. Map Scale in bar forte ( 1” =50' c= L" =_00') and ncr / point. u. ti Date c p_at, and a�:i app__ca _e rs'r_s_or ca :es . V, Names of town, a 7. d stac_.�� w. Border lines bounding the S Weer,, One i_ ^_c : L: ;(n the left edge and one-half: inC i Lrom eaC. ^ ^_ C= the Ot'e= ed�eS; al' inf=mar. ion , including a_l plat lines, lette_i:_c, signatures and seals, si.all be W =L _n the lines. 3 A�TTr?S v�. 37 F=NA:, Sri3D=V, ST_dN PL,'_^ C�=zCFLIST r t,. — ... �• :V fin. �� � V = ITEM W = wA74 =,:) COND = C'CNC_!_CN C_ A_ =C;; " % w _ Tzw:: = -�= 5 d = °, =Cr° an ap io ca: .Cr r:r a ate: r:va= ? 5 C�_. ^= C^, "" _�__ . T'- Ca' %S Bcar3 m _t_:jc a= wn__c = pr°___.. nary a_ a nd s:C :l e'i- 2 De'I °� m° :_ RevleNr =SCrZ ACr °p s anc CaC' •• �iJ___ _ _ C p :{ : r�l o= 1 _ 4. Depcs'_t o= escrow. r°c:ired because met. SVT ^m_t_ad w_t tra? ; m_na= r c:at accrova' or sub sta= ti a_ mcd___Ca=_Ci_s Pave. CCC'1rrad s' mce pr °? ? m' na=y plat approva_, one =_? y comple�eC and s_c S�_cr_ Lc o r r _c El v�ror_men_al I (Se= low:_ r_a___e_ as to w c to s m_t ) Cw::ar' s Cer .I icate . A cer =_ =_cat= s_c-:ed by the cw'-er (s) to _ _ the er=ect t�Ia`_ �ie t.'_ °`r cows t:'-e 1 a^C, that he Cawse'a t lane to be survevec a= c_v_ce�, a-d ta_ ha ma' {as the cec_catier_s indicated om t__ ^_e pl. a= . SL'r'IeVCr' S Cer �:_:Ca�e : Cer z_ =1Ca =e S_C�_eC. a G Sea_e^. Dit a r= ester_=d land s_ 7rPey tc be err =cc tea_ (') tie p1=_ represents a survey ma ,4e bti i._m, (L) ti?e D1a= 1S a CO? reC' reCresenta=icn or a =1 ex= or 1: CL' ^Car:.a5 Or t la_ c: survevea arC L e So r,d_V;S_c C _ (3) all mcn .M= . =3 p=__ ac�ua'_1v ea_ arc t :ne_r 1�ca =' ^.r:, sze a:?C mG -er_a? are_ CCr=eC:.1V Si Ow^ , an C= avid Naw Yo_'.{ S_� =e laws r °_ - - = -,c to s'_cc^c anc mCr= ?aCOr( =) Te COL:sa_r S t0 tom °_ p_=- a.c the - • ^- -c re _ .s s hCwn cn c= r� =err 3 071 the D_at C Two CCp _es C _ a= =- °_n = a_ .. .-1%�_ C = t e Wa_° ' _ and /or sewaCa syszem . i v, 3!u j Final Subdivision Plat caec.%Iist 2 14 • FGu= full S;ze da::t -1i-e p =:nts of t e Erna_ o? a= a�_ d 25 = =duo =d r` ' °_S O. all Si_e°_ _s O_ = °_ L_na_ D_3 L:C ° C:.0 _eS t0 be ccc _ _ ao La�"e= than 1_" by 17" W. =n the fo.lcw_-c ? - _crtat_cr . woo �= - a .chwav and a' I °y ccunda-v c= r_Sht- o: -wa,r lines, sc_cw =: c bcunda= r, r_chc -c f -�ra.r e= ease �e_ ^_t w,dt a= d a= v other infcla =i cn need_d .cr Icca =ir.c such ? i -es -. ' L`ur'.'.CSeS�'C- eaSc! -er =3. c._ C..-__ _- ancles of '--- === se = =_c :, rac__, Ienc= c- nc° = - - --- arCS a: C °Cr =e or cur- ra =ure, W:th CaS_S 0= C'�r're da--' Le ^CC .S and d_S =an=eS S � he tc C e P__3reS= _ _ ore hi-dre ^t -- ?S S.a.L be t:: t:° P_ea-?'- nn has= minute. . c • �,� �`t F,chwav name= . d• ; Lccat_C r_a- a .d d_ ens_or_s of eac e.c_sc_ -c w�v _° a e_u- hoc and v, Craw—age, or _�li1a� Basemen= TX�t -, ahut_inc, or in the ;mined a -= S _ - - / V =C? .: =tV d bC= V:S_On. / e• � Exact bcunda =': lines of the tract, indicate hearty 1i ne, civi c the dimensions to the nearest cne hund_edc h foot, angles to the nearest one -hat= minute, and at least one .bearing; the traverse shall be balanced and closed with an error Of CLosu_e riot to exceed Cr_e to twc t eusa_ -d; the type of c? os;; -e s::a__ be noted - f , r LGCatiOn and desC =? ptiOr_ Of all secti OP_ 1? -^-= and cGV °"mile .t SLtr" eV monuments in Or near t .e subd? ViSiCn, to at least One of wh c'1 the SLbd? V_S_O:'_ shall be reer need by true courses and d_s= a:lces . c. V Location Of pr ^,_ e=ty by lecal description, includ_nc areas in acres or s ua=e fee'.. Source C= ti =? % inc ludirc deed record bock and pace numners h. '✓ N n ddress C. all owners o= the prc Nam and a d a - name and adcr=_sc cf a.1 perscrs w;_o have a- in the D =ODE= ='.i , S :c h as easementS or i, Name (s) a- _ addr =_ss (es) c= the suhd'v_ der( -! /— subd,v= der�s` is (are! not the owr_er(s` j. Af /�y Accurate lcca =_c-s a= des=-c =_ors C: a:i r k• ' AccLrace CLt_:neS a -C dESCr_pt =OnS CL an,J a= ea5 +t0 be ded_cac or reserved f ^r p.= ^ use or w; th the�pu=ses indicated a -;r areas to be Icy d__ cet-en fc_ common use_ c: a. L ,w-red � � °- a -= prcper-v 0ydners i n the suhdiv_s_on. I Eu_Ic_._c s? =hack I_,es w._^ d_.<< ° ^c_or_= . F1.aal Subdivision lat Checklist 3 m. LaL li nes, Lu__.r d:menS.ored, w;�,�, I fIct. tC t nearest Co.. - hundr.dth fact and a: ales or bea__nas to neares= oo, n. L width ac. 'cu_Ld___c 1_na c= l ss locae d or_ a curve cr = hav:re side when r= r=rd by the n : owP Pla"'�inc Sca_d. o. L/ Names and �ddressas or ewr_a=s c= a.1 parce;s a =i nc D. Names 0= r °_ =:rC_O S:C:'r_S:CrS 3�L:C =_na the C= CpCSe= blcaks ar-2 : ° - = °_^. c :nS t �=— su=dlI_s_On anZ t,:=_ i =cs a=_ r_umzered Zoo JV K=y ma^ when mer=e t^a; one sheJ_ is r U_red t.: So 1` V_Ci_ ^__ too V ma= S__..W ti.,e Jgane= :'_ 1CC3 =21Cr o= C: __ / prcperz_y, 1 " =1 00C� ` c 111=2000'' Name of subd_�r_s:c +, W"_ C17 Si.=.l net dupl_cata the f ` name o_ a.:r cc: eY s bc= v_s_cr_ i�n the county. �V c u Name a c sea_ C= th . raCi stered I3nd sur-seyor or enai.neer who prep tired the tozcgraphic in_o=ation. Date of SurVey• V, Name and sea= of rec_stered Ian d surveyor w::o mad. th. j bou_rda=y sur'r ev. Dat=e o_ _ r_e sur-r =v. W, Name (s) and aC ra5 (es) cL t::. cwr (s) x. Man scale or 1" =100') in Bar Fora and ncr =:= point. 4fA(ag' y. Dame of pl a. a. c a y a: C .'.ca ; e revZs_on dates. z . �, � Name Of town, e:un_y, a _d ca_` nK a= Border I _ ^_eS GC ::'__ 'a C _ S: :ee =, Cr_S IT nc 101 le == ed"ce a: c c = _ -na_= =cn f=pm e =c of edges; all in =c= atic-, inc'_uc:nc all p'_a= harder lines. e= =_dine cr ace ^t c th e C. CC__ ^..r C =3 :ace^ _r2n tha_ to W-1 Co 1 C =' - -C to 1 an d CoND c1.'� One Cr nal e= «:_l:ar Copy of c he to be red ^rd =- plat and =s. _.ee e= =_dine cr ace ^t c th e C. CC__ ^..r C =3 :ace^ _r2n tha_ to Fiaa? Subdivision Plat Checklist 1 g SECTION 38* IMPRO ^ _ PLANS AND RM1= INr O1RMATION Z. where_ improveme_^_ts are r= ^•i =ed for a proposed subci_v_s_cnj tae follow: nc decsments sh al? be su r „ „_t_ed tc t' e a=m 4. n De_ ar =me nt . /A a. < % b . c. ; IA e (' De�3_leG COn_Str'�LC =? C : p_3 n5 3 d S=ec i f icat ions f^,r war==e 11nes drawn_ to a scale o= 1” 50' , ve= _ica", on standard plan and prof_le , s cw accu=ate'v the profile of t1a e accurterances, etc he hicaway center li ne and location_ o= Deta_1ed con_str��c�lon_ 3s, a :� s: ec_. =__�c_.�= san t sewers and s cra_na =ce fac: i ; I °_S, 1,c -'u n _ta_ lcca__or_s and desc=_: tons c: P__ es, ma:i. c_es, and oche. facilities . �crwav pav,ng plans and s==__ =- ea =_cn_. The esC.imated Cost cf. Gradi=lg and Culver =s, swal es and Ct _= stt-= d_a_ma = Sanitary sewers, Water lines valves and firehydrants Paving, curbs, But tee s a: d s ldewa l ks , Anv other improverne nts reruir_d bv_ Tow- of Ithaca S dlvisicn Regulation=s . The p l an and p ro f i l e subdivision, with grade horizon=tal, and 1” = 5' sheets. Profiles shal highway or alley alcn_c t the sidewalks, if 7 . 1 .ft arse: rSLIz3_r.ek: o= each proposed hi ghwa,r in tae indicated, drawn_ to a scale o= 1” 50' ve= _ica", on standard plan and prof_le , s cw accu=ate'v the profile of t1a e he hicaway center li ne and location_ o= ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, May 5, 1998 MOTION by Eva Hoffmann, seconded by Lawrence Thayer: WHEREAS. 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is considering Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and a Recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning of the project site from R -15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) in conjunction with the proposed construction of two buildings, one a 46 unit - 53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800 +/- square feet), and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer /memory-care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), to be known as Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) respectively, including parking, landscaping and other site improvements, to be located on 8.24 +/- acres at the intersection of NYS Rte. 96 /Trumansburg Road and Bundy Road, on a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -11.2, Residence District R -15. Richard and Mary Perry, Owners; Pioneer Development Company, LLC, Applicant; Michael J. Villa, Agent, and 2. The Town of Ithaca Town Board, in a resolution dated August 11, 1997, has referred the petition to rezone the above - referenced parcel to the Planning Board for a recommendation, and 3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, in a letter dated April lead agency to involved and interested agencies regarding rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision Approval for the prol Cottage proposal, and circulated a notice of intent to serve agencies, and the )OS( as .998, has indicated its intent to serve as environmental review of the proposed ,d Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling lead agency to involved and interested 4. The proposed rezoning, Site Plan and Subdivision Approval are Type I actions pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Town of Ithaca Local Law No. 5 of the Year 1988 Providing for Environmental Review of Actions in the Town of Ithaca. and 5: The Planning Board, at a meeting held on April 21, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate the Full Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) Part I prepared by the applicant, Parts II and III of the EAF prepared by the Town Planning staff, and has reviewed other application materials, including a Design Review Application (April 21, 1998), a Stormwater Management Study (March 27, 1998), excerpts from a feasibility study regarding traffic impacts (March 1998), and supplemental information provided by Trowbridge and Wolf (April 15, 1998), including a photographic visual analysis, all of which are incorporated into the EAF, and 6. Based on the above, the Planning Board, at its April 21, 1998 meeting, issued a negative determination of environmental significance with regard to the proposed rezoning. Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval, and ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, iVlay 5, 1998 7. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on May 5, 1998, has reviewed and accepted as adequate preliminary plans for Sterling House of Ithaca and Woven Hearts, entitled "SK -2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98. "SK -3 Site Plan." dated 3/9/98, "SK -4 Site Section.'' dated 3 /9/98. "C -1 Drainage & Erosion Control Plan." dated 3/19/98, "C -2 Utility Plan.'' dated 3/19/98, "C -3 Details." dated 3/19/98, "C -4 Details," dated 3/19/981 -L-1 Grading Plan," dated 3/19/98, "L -2 Landscape Plan." dated 3/19/98, "L -3 Site Details." dated 3/19/98, `'Wovenhearts 36 Bed Memory Care" (building elevations), dated 3/17/98, "A -5 Sterling House Building Elevations," dated 3/6/98, additional materials included in the "Design Review- Application - `Woven Hearts & Sterling House of Ithaca." dated April 21, 1998, and other application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. pursuant to Article XIV, Section 78 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, hereby finds that: a. There is a need for the proposed Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage project in the proposed location, and b. The existing and probable future character of the Town will not be adversely affected by the proposed rezoning and project development: and C. The proposed rezoning from R -15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town, which designates the project site as appropriate for "Suburban Residential' development, and in addition, is adequately served by public water and sewer facilities, is proximate to the City of Ithaca, and is served by public transit; and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of Ithaca Town Board enact the proposed local law to amend the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance by rezoning that portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -11.2 which is proposed for the Sterling House of Ithaca and Sterling Cottage development, which is shown as Proposed Parcel A and Proposed Parcel B, totaling 8.24 +/- acres in size, as shown on "SK -2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, and as described in "Schedule A" of the proposed Local Law. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, May 5, 1998 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -11.2, totaling 133.76 +/- acres, into three lots, including Proposed Parcel A consisting of 4.24 +/- acres. Proposed Parcel B consisting of 31995 acres, and the remaining portion of Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -11.2 consisting of 12.53 +/- acres, as shown on the drawing entitled "Sterling House & Woven Hearts of Ithaca, SK -2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98, prepared by Allen T. Fulkerson, L.S., T.G. Miller, P.C.. conditioned upon the following to be completed prior to the granting of Final Subdivision Approval: a. Rezoning by the Town Board of the proposed project site as described above (i.e., Proposed Parcels A and B) from R -15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) prior to consideration of Final Subdivision Approval by the Planning Board; and b. Acceptance by the Town Board of the location of the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park and C. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to include detailed survey information and labeling of the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park," and d. Provisions, in writing, to guarantee future access to the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park'', for review- and approval by the Attorney for the Town; and e. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show locations of all ingress /egress easements that will provide access to the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park." and acceptance by the Town Board of the locations of said easements; and f. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show the location, boundaries and dimensions, with specific survey information, of the "Tot Lot." consisting of approximately 46,000 square feet in area adjacent to Williams Brook, that was to be dedicated to the Town of Ithaca in conjunction with the Preliminary Subdivision Approval of the Shalebrook Subdivision - Stage 1, together with the access strips from Pem; Lane and Joseph Place that were to be dedicated to the Town in fee simple to provide access to the Tot Lot; and g. Revision of the Preliminary Subdivision Plat to show- the specific locations of the portion of Rilev Drive and Joseph Place as future road right -of ways, said roads having been specifically delineated on the plan for " Shalebrook Subdivision," revised 4/16/90, prepared by Peter D. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, May �, 1998 Novelli, P.E., Novelli & Co., and signed by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Chair on 5/3/91; and h. Submission to and approval by the Town Attorney of the language of any easements deemed necessary to ensure ingress and egress. between Proposed Parcels A and B. over the driveways and parking lots, and easements between Parcels A and B for utility lines and drainage facilities, including storm drains and detention basin. to ensure that fixture owners of both parcels have frill rights to use all of the above - mentioned facilities. i. Revision of the subdivision plat title to incorporate the updated name of the project, by deleting the reference to "Woven Hearts," and adding the name "Sterling Cottage." j. Before construction of any improvements anywhere on the project site 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 2. That the Planning Board hereby finds that the "Parcel Proposed for Dedication to the Town of Ithaca for Use as Park" is an appropriate location for a community park, as described in the "Town of Ithaca Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan ", adopted by the Town Board on December 8, 1997, and that said park dedication, together with the "Tot Lot" that was to dedicated to the Town in conjunction with previous subdivision of the Perry parcel, shall fulfill the parkland reservation requirements of the entire remaining lands in the original 133.76 +/- acre parcel which is the subject of this preliminary subdivision approval. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED. 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage development to consist of two buildings, one a 46 unit - 53 bed assisted living facility (approximately 28,800 +/- square feet). and the other a 32 unit - 36 bed Alzheimer /memory- care facility (approximately 18,800 +/- square feet), including parking, landscaping and other site improvements, as shown on preliminary plans for Sterling House of Ithaca and Woven Hearts, entitled "SK -2 Preliminary Subdivision Plat," dated 3/9/98. 9'SK -3 Site Plan," dated 3/9/98, "SK -4 Site Section," dated 3/9/98, "C -1 Drainage & Erosion Control Plan." dated 3/19/98, "C -2 Utility Plan," dated 3/19/98, "C -3 Details," dated 3/19/98, "C -4 Details," dated 3/19/98, "L -1 Grading Plan," dated 3/19/98, "L -2 Landscape Plan," dated 3/19/983 "L -3 Site Details." dated 3/19/98, "Wovenhearts 36 Bed Memory Care" (building elevations), dated 3/17/98, "A -5 Sterling House Building Elevations," dated 3/6/98, additional materials included in the "Design Review Application - Woven Hearts & Sterling House of Ithaca," dated April 21, 1998, and other application materials, conditioned upon the following: 4 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, May 5, 1998 a. Rezoning of the proposed project site by the Town Board from R-15 Residence to Special Land Use District (SLUD) prior to consideration of Final Site Plan Approval by the Planning Board; b. Preparation and submission of final design and construction details of all proposed drainage and stormwater management improvements, and sedimentation and erosion control measures, for review and approval by the Town Engineer prior to Final Site Plan Approval: c. Submission of final construction details of all proposed structures, roads;-water and sewage facilities, and other improvements, including locations of all proposed curbing along driveways, parking areas, or sidewalks, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; d. Submission of final details of size, location, design, and construction materials of all proposed signs and lighting, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; e. Submission of a revised landscaping plan and planting schedule incorporating the plant species revisions proposed by Trowbridge & Wolf, which respond to concerns raised regarding height of trees and potential blockage of views and invasive plant species, dated April 2' ). 1998, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; f. Submission of final, detailed building elevations and floor plans for all buildings, including descriptions of building materials and colors, and revision of the building elevation drawings to be labelled by direction, instead of front, side or rear, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; g. Provision of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and /or federal agencies prior to issuance of any building permits. h. Revision of the titles of all of the above - referenced site plan drawings to incorporate the updated name of the project, by deleting the reference to "Woven Hearts," and adding the name "Sterling Cottage." i. Revision of the site plan to show the location of any required fire hydrant and proposed fire and other emergency zones, subject to approval of the City of Ithaca Fire Department and the Town of Ithaca Director of Building and Zoning. j. Submission of an estimate of the cost of all site and building improvements (excluding the cost of land), prepared by a licensed professional engineer, and subject to review and approval of the Town Engineer. k. Revision of sheets L -1, L -2 & SK -3 to show the area reserved for eleven additional parking spaces. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Sterling House of Ithaca & Sterling Cottage (formerly Woven Hearts) 1138 Trumansburg Road Preliminary Site Plan Approval, Preliminary Subdivision Approval, and Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Rezoning Planning Board, May 5, 1998 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That if the proposed local law recommended for approval at this meeting is adopted by the Town Board, and if such law as adopted permits the Planning Board to reduce the required parking as permitted pursuant to the draft of the local law submitted to this meeting. this Board will Grant a reduction in the number of spaces required from 52 spaces to 41, subject to the right of the Town, pursuant to the referenced provisions of the Zoning Ordinance, to require additional spaces if the reduced number of parking spaces is found by the Planning Board to be inadequate. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Planning Board requests the Town Board to request the State DOT to re- stripe Route 96 as a no passing zone from the City limits to Hayts Road, and that the speed limit be reduced to 45 M.P. H. all the way north to Hayts Road. 'YES - Wilcox, Hoffmann, Thayer, Bell, Ainslie, Kenerson. ,.4AYS - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca. tol Mary B PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN CHECKLIST PROJECT NAIME 5 ftthv" Ymxrp /-Sfex4 PROJECT NUMBER %% 07 ��ojj1�{fi PREPARER V mL I��.v►�2f� = ITEM SUBMITTED N/A = NOT APPLICABLE W = WAIVE COND = CONDITION OF APPROVAL 1. v It Completed and signed Development Review Application. a. Development Review Escrow Agreement and Back -up Withholding Form (if required) . (Only one (1) copy each.) 2. Payment of review fees. Deposit of escrow. 3. Fully completed and signed Short Environmental Assessment Form, Part I (SEAF), or Long Environmental Assessment Form, Part I (LEAF). (See Town Planner as to which to submit.) 4. Proposed preliminary site plan, with the following information, must be filed in the office of the Town Planner at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the Planning Board meeting at which preliminary approval is requested. Information may be supplied on more than / one drawing if necessary. a. Vicinity Map showing the general location of the property and proposed project at a scale of 1" =1000' or 1"= 2000'. b. .Z Natural features within and immediately adjacent to the site including but not limited to streams, lakes, floodplains, ponds, wetlands, woodlands, brushlands, significant natural habitats or other features /Exact pertinent to review of the proposed project. c. boundary lines of the tract, indicated by a heavy line, showing location and description of all monuments, giving property metes and bounds to the nearest one - tenth, angles to the nearest minute, and at / least one bearing. d. Size, location, and use of all existing structures, parking areas, access drives, off - street loading areas, signs, lighting, pedestrian facilities, landscaping, / and other existing features pertinent to plan review. e. V Size, location, proposed use, design, and construction materials of all proposed structures. ���q Q PRELIMIN;UZY SITE PLAN CHECKLIST Pace 2 J f. Location, design, and construction materials or l L a__ proposed parking areas, access drives, and off - street loading areas. g.C•Size, location, design, and constructi / all proposed signs and lighting. h. Location, design, and construction mat proposed pedestrian and bicycle facili on materials of erials of all ties. i.C6N� Landscaping plan and planting schedule including Cf,( rnv,'S) location and proposed design of butters. j• J Location, design, and construction materials of all proposed water and sewage facilities. k.COA1tLocation of anv existing or proposed fire and other emergency zones, including the location of fire hydrants. 1. 1. p J 7 t E Location, proposed utility, abutting, project. name, and dimensions of each existing or street and alley and each existing or� proposed drainage, or similar easement within, or in the immediate vicinity of the proposed Existing and proposed site topography represented by contour lines with intervals as required by the Planning Board, but not to exceed 5 (five) feet, including a grading plan describing the volumes of cut and fill materials and their composition, and including elevations of proposed buildings, signage, lighting, and other features. Drainage plan which includes a description of method used for analysis, the calculation of drainage area above point of entry for each water course entering or abutting the site, and proposed method of on -site retention if required. Border lines bounding site plan sheets one inch from the left edge and one -half inch from each of the other edges. All required information, including signatures, seals, dates and such information shall be within the border. Map scale in bar form, and north point. Name of proposed project. Name of Town, County, and State. Date of Site Plan, including any aprolicable revision dates. Key map (when more than one sheet is submitted) . PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN CHECKLIST Page 3 U, Name and seal of the registered land surveyor (s) or engineers) who prepared the topographic and boundary / survey and the date of survey. Name (s) and address (es) of all property owners a.nd persons who have an interest in the site and of parcels abutting the site, or within 500' of the site, including easements or rights -of -way, plus the tax parcel numbers. 7. COHbo Estimate of the cost of improvements (excluding the purchase cost of land) to be prepared (preferably) by a licensed professional engineer. 8. Three (3) dark -line prints of the proposed Sits. Plan and 25 copies of all sheets of the proposed Sit Plan in reduced format (no larger than 11" x 1711) and ccpy of all other items required above (Except Development Review Application and escrow forms) . plarihor3 \prelimis.ite mb \5/14/96 T 1� = ITEM Stj=I T':E�j W N/A = NOT A7DJTOA.�_.E COND = COND ITION OF A ' �;R Cv Tne ,.ems L_1�u Zn before a calendar approvva_ 1. V 2, Zm 5. 6. Y P==?` wow., Nom) j.AT CHECZL_TST 9 -707 zeC be_CW, Un_es5 wa_'i °^ CV _"c '7_a: ^C Soar` a^.p__C3L -C:_ LCr a p_ e__:Tt___ _mot _ �� r._ i _�_ ._ ayC= J� a_ __ deemec These ma.er __ lals S 1 f' 1 w. days prior to the P =ann_= Bcar_ mee_inc a. w. =- . -- cre._...___a= t is re jested. One Comp_e_e� anC S i c :e^. L_ e _�N one Deve7 C'_Cme_ ^_t Re'i i=w ESC'_"Cw P_c:S men= and w_tnC!C;rlg FCrm (' _ Payment of review fees. Deposit of escrow. One fully COmip'lete� anC► S_gnea = .Or_ E^'i _rOnTte_ ^_L _ A= ==5 Form, Part I (SEA.=) , or Long Environmental Assesst,tenc Form, Part I (LEAF) . (Sze Tow:_ Planner as to wni ci to sahm_L ) Estimate of costs of Site i:nproveme nts (excluding cos= of land Map snowing ace..:_Sit i on n a d p_o_essior_al �^ ee ec are f s) L , be pr__ ar _ e D y, ( ^" =_ ~a - by a licensed professional enginee =. Four full Si reduced copi reduced copi fol wing it 10 z es es fo dark -line prints of all sheets of to be no la =Cer rma�icr: of the p_elim_na= p -a- a d 2S the pre'iminary pla. (_ne t' a'.' 1111 by 17") w.-'-'h L e a. vic_^_ty or Map snowing the gzl,era, .. lccat � on o� or b. v General lavcu., i nc' ud_nc lot lines ^ with :_ dimes_cns; block a: d lct =, .__, :ben ♦:_^ L Wi y de L _ r r -w��r; a =ear to be ee . -_ -wG -� �" - use in Commc :_ by reside_ v 0= t -e S'�.Od_v =S_cr; s_= =s i .r no�res_den.ia_, ncn- rub:__ `se=; ea:emec__ :o= u_____ =es, w_Ln Ci_menS'_CnS . C. A G enera! lavouU of the a' /S, b.'CC.t {j, ana' /I lots w =tn_n t_ ^_c c=CCS =^� S': C;'i_S_ '. T °n_ta =_'i °_ -_g,wa i r_aLme s . Preliminary d. L Y MI n. /V O. Subdivision Plat Checklist Coratour .r inter-ra.s, �- 'C T to liSC� da_ :m °_ . drainage area above _ _ feet when jaCe the Slope is less S t:.a '_nC_�C_.0 Dea lots, more than five feet when slope is .^___ _;Jay 1 mrrvver+' - perCe^t Cl.. - �,�, r �✓ I 1'1eC C= r_ot more than two .our percent and nct great ° -= than =our Cs! _ re_ .r a.l �- 'C T mec._atet °_ . drainage area above _ _ eacn wa_er course aG jaCe ^- _ �C t CrCCCSZ^ S aG_J_M_.a_, '_nC_�C_.0 Dea lots, .^___ _;Jay 1 mrrvver+' ^tom, l ir_'�ce5, Cl.. - �,�, r �✓ I 1'1eC _'r -r -J, -_ � _ D?per_ne�, pCwer transm_»_cn �tne_ S_C�: =__Cca nC Str':CtL'r °_S wet___' a nd i mm adjacent to the proposed subdi-rision, including parrs, wetlanCS, Cr__1C31 en'r_rc-menta_ ar=as, and cC.:1°__' sicn_ficant �eatures. Direc__cr_ o= f cw c= a.l water. courses Ca =cu___i cr_ c= . drainage area above point of entry_ for eacn wa_er course enteri nc or abutting the trac` . Location and cescription o all section line corners and government surVeV moni. me_ ^_tS in Cr near the subdi'Ti SiCn, to at least Cne of wr_ -i Cn the Subdivision shall be re =erenced by true courses and d_ stances. Location, name, and dimensions of each eX4Sting highway and alley and each utility, drainage, or similar easement withen, abutting, or in t-I immed_ate vicinity of the proposed Subdivision. Natural features within and immediately adjacent to the proposed subci-rision, including drainage channels, bodies of wate =", wCCCeG areas, a= Ot_'].er S_gn'_ =icant features. Iden.ti =ication o= areas s,.ZjeCt to flooding as indicated on HUD Flood Boundary Maps, Wetlands Macs. Width at building line of lots located o^ a curve or having non - parallel s.-de 1_nes w`en rec,_rec �,: the Pla.nn_rc 2 car3. - - Names and addresses c= cw-ers cf all parcels abu=tinc t:-e proposed subdivision.. Names of reccrcec Subc_viS_cr_S a'. ut =_ng the pr ,p ^sec s u.C(a or Restric ve covenants, if any. r � �ej map, w ?en more gnat one Sheet i s req red t'C pr�SenC plaC . IPA P=elinii=a= @• V/ S. t. Q. 7, W. Ram m:= aw.6: Subdivision Plat checklist Name c£ S =£5£7£S£os, a33=ee3(es; le£= c2 wE3c5 S5a23 @ciat. 2c2 3=222=3 =e S.e name £ = =m eac5 e£ Date c£ slat, ct.5e= a23 any ag.'icac2e =57£32== 3a =52. a22 de =(3) i3(a c£ any =c= other cw=a 3:. 5e55S7S3S=2 £2 _=Ia- ssall be \5 \E W£ Name of pla=ner, a==5£=e=t, es7£Eee=, lash S =�zeyc =, 1andsca=e a= =5£te =t, or c=5e= ce =3=E wE= =e3 t5e §.ega SZe==S clan c= Name i's) a=£ aa.=es3(es. of t5e ew25.(31 Naoefs1 i2 a=3 a33=ee3(es; le£= c2 235 3 =5327235 ='z�, ©£2 t2e @ciat. £ = =m eac5 e£ Date c£ slat, ct.5e= a23 any ag.'icac2e =57£32== 3a =52. a22 de =(3) i3(a =e) =c= c3e cw=a 3:. s1,abci _=Ia- Mag Scale i2 bar £c=2 (1 " =5J' le£= @ciat. £ = =m eac5 e£ Date c£ slat, ct.5e= a23 any ag.'icac2e =57£32== 3a =52. a22 Names c2 tow=, county, 2c =5e= lines e3§e and one i2£o=2atioE, signatures a hounaina -Ea1£ i2c5 incIQ3£27 S3 Seals, az3 s=ate. the sleet, cEe inch £ = =E tae le£= £ = =m eac5 e£ the ct.5e= 537532 a22 a23 ° l42 =S, _=Ia- ssall be \5 \E W£ K