Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2000-01-05TOWN OF ITHACA, PLANNING BOARD WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 5, 2000 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in special session on Wednesday, January 5, 2000, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 12:00 p.m. PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; James Ainslie, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; George Frantz, Assistant Town Planner. ALSO PRESENT: Brian Lowe, WVBR News; Joni Carroll, Cornell; Hal Craft, Cornell; Susan Murphy, Cornell; Jean Reese, Cornell; Shirley Egan, Cornell University Associate Council; Margery & Frank Shipe, Forest Home; Simon Wheeler, Ithaca Journal; Bill Wendt, Cornell; Bruce & Doug Brittain, 135 Warren Road; Isabel Peard, 214 Forest Home Drive; R. Davis Cutting, 10 The Byway; Alphonse Pieper, Historic Ithaca; Roger Garrison, 233 Forest Home Drive; Andrea Dutcher, Cornell; George Bayer, Forest Home; Robert Mueller, Forest Home; Marian Cutting, Forest Home; Lauren Bishop, Ithaca Journal; Stan Seltzer & Nancy Brcak, 228 Forest Home Drive; David Gross, 122 Judd Falls Road; Kirk Sigel, 223 Highgate Road; Darrell Wilson, 205 Muriel Street. Chairperson Wilcox called the meeting to order at 12:10 p.m., and stated that the Planning Board was reconvening the January 4, 2000 meeting. Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. AGENDA ITEM: Continuation of Discussion of Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for Cornell University's proposed North Campus Residential Initiative, and adoption of a Statement of Findings pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act regarding the North Campus project, located on the west side of Pleasant Grove Road and south side of Jessup Road on all or parts of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 67- 1 -1.1, 68 -1- 11.1, 68 -1 -11.2, and 68 -1 -12.2, in the R -30 Residence District, comprising approximately 14.1 acres of land. The overall project in both the City and Town of Ithaca is proposed to consist of new dormitories to house up to 560 new students, a new "community commons" dining hall /student activities center, a new road connecting the existing South Balch Drive to Pleasant Grove Road, a new parking lot, three new soccer fields, tennis courts and basketball courts, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge and Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agent. Board Member Mitrano stated that she revisited the Moore House before coming to the board meeting. The visit to the Moore House has made her position stronger. The house should be moved. She feels that if Cornell wants to move the house, she does not see any reason from a historical, historian, historian preservationist's point of view given the support which they have promised and PLANNING BOARD PAGE 2 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED committed themselves to. Board Member Mitrano stated that she is voting for the Moore House to be moved. Board Member Conneman stated that he feels even stronger. The house should stay where it is because it is historic. This house was built in 1817. Board Member Mitrano stated that the house is not going to be destroyed. It is going to be preserved. Board Member Conneman stated that location means more than house. It means location. Board Member Howe stated that he also visited the Moore House before the meeting. He is ready to vote on the new draft findings before the board. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she visited the site the day before. The more the board discusses the issue, she has become more convinced that the right location for this house is on its original site. She has heard some people saying that what surrounds the house is no longer appropriate. It has not been put in a way that reflects its location. There are residences around the house. It is a residential district. There are the Hasbrouck Apartments across the road. It is not that bad. It is not as if there is an industrial zone around the house. The drawing that Cornell presented trying to show what the house would look like on the Pleasant Grove Road site does not reflect what it will look like. The two houses adjacent to the north and south are much higher than the Moore House would be. Even if the house is raised, it will be sitting in a low area. It will not do it justice the way the original site did. The house is older than the University. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she is convinced that there can be uses found for this house. She has heard other people suggest that this would be a perfect place for volunteer programs. For example this could be a location for volunteers from the campus club to teach visiting students and spouses English as a second language. She has also heard that there is a group of retired faculty that has a space in Day Hall where they can meet. The University could use the Day Hall space more profitably. It is also a location on campus that is hard to get to. There is no available parking. The Moore House is very close to the A -Lot. It would be a good location for groups like this. Several groups could share the house under the sponsorship of the University. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she thinks that it is possible to change the plans in such a way that the house would remain on site and that there could be additional improvements in the parking and a further reduction in traffic in surrounding neighborhoods. Board Member Ainslie stated that he voted for the Cornell plan. It is his idea that Cornell is in the business of students. He has family that attended Cornell. He is advocator of sports. The plan does look reasonable. The Moore House is going to be preserved. Cornell has put a tremendous amount of effort into it. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 3 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Thayer stated that he agrees with Board Member Ainslie. The fields do look better in the Cornell plan than any other plan he has seen with the Moore House in place. Everyone agrees that they would like to see the Moore House remain on site. He would not want it to stay with a retaining wall 25 -feet away from the backdoor and the athletic fields wide open underneath. There is no foreseeable use for the building. He would much rather see it preserved, moved and a single family living in the house. It will look good on the lot. It has a beautiful backyard. It has a nice hedgerow to the north. Chairperson Wilcox stated that reasonable people would be on both sides of this issue. It makes it very unique to see an issue that can divide people. He has been undecided on this matter for a long time. At the January 4t" meeting he was tilted towards leaving the house in its current location. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he reviewed many of the documents that the board has received from various experts, State Historic Preservation Office, Historic Ithaca and correspondence. The experts indicate a preference for wanting to leave the house there. They are o.k. with moving it assuming appropriate mitigation measures are taken. The experts would prefer to see the house remain on site. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he feels that would be the best thing. Moving it may not be such a bad thing, but leaving it where it is the best thing. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the other issue is traffic through Forest Home. The board needs to decide if it is comfortable with the plan as proposed. Seeing this plan from its original presentation to the board to what exists today, he is comfortable that the board has mitigated traffic impacts in Forest Home to a reasonable extent. The through road should help internalize traffic within the Cornell property. Many of the traffic calming devices originally planned for the through road have been removed. Even though there is a letter stating traffic will be reduced through Forest Home, he is comfortable in taking the position that there will be a small to moderate impact on traffic. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the board has a revised Findings Statement before them. Mr. Frantz and staff have done their best to incorporate the changes that were suggested and discussed. The Findings Statement as written has gone through numerous changes. Board Member Hoffmann stated that on top of page two of the Findings, it list the materials submitted as part of the applicant submission providing adequate basis to make the findings. All of these documents show the old configurations of the parking lots. There are other items that have not been updated. She is wondering if there is some way to change the language to reflect it. She knows that they have seen various drawings that are updated drawings. If the documents are mentioned, it should be mentioned that they are not the most current documents. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the board has seen drawings showing the revised parking lot. Board Member Hoffmann stated that the board has seen two revisions. One of the parking lot to the west of Helen Newman Hall and of the parking lot in the Town of Ithaca. Mr. Frantz stated that they fall within the category of other materials submitted. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 4 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Attorney Barney stated that the resolution to approve the site plan will recite the documentation again and it will be current materials. Mr. Frantz stated that on the top of page 2, before and other materials submitted the date is January 5, 2000. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the language as revised with regard to the Moore House is consistent with what is believed to be the majority decision of this board. Board Member Ainslie stated that he is confused as to what part Cornell will play as far as money if the Moore House is to remain on site. If the house is moved, Cornell will pay to move the house and fill the site. What is Cornell's responsibility if the Moore House is left at its present site? John Kiefer, Cornell University, stated that the discussions regarding uses for the Moore House in its current location have not resulted in any programs that might be located there. They have not taken the next step to figure out how they might fund the programs. Board Member Ainslie asked if Cornell has decided on any money if it is not relocated. Mr. Kiefer stated that they have not had any formal discussions on how they would fund a program in the Moore House or fund maintenance work. Board Member Ainslie asked if they would maintain the house. Would Cornell paint it? There is a lot of work to be done on the house? Mr. Kiefer stated that he couldn't speak for the University. He can speak to what he would support. It is not in the University's interest to have a house on North Campus that is falling apart. It would not be his choice to support it. Board Member Conneman asked what does that mean. Does it mean you would support keeping it up so that it would not fall apart? Does it mean that he would support having the house falling apart? If they were to take one half of one percent of the cost of the project, it is more than $250,000. A lot could be done with the house if they spent that type of money. Mr. Kiefer stated that it is not in the University's best interest to have a house on North Campus that looks bad. Board Member Conneman stated that Mr. Kiefer is saying that if the house were to remain they would maintain the house. Mr. Kiefer stated that if the house were to remain on site for the next 10 years he would support that the University spends money doing maintenance work. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 5 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann asked what is the University's responsibility when it comes to taking care of a house with respect to the State Dormitory Authority and the funding coming from them. Mr. Kiefer stated that it is defined in the letter that Rick Lord and SHPO sent to the Dormitory Authority. SHPO stated that if off -site preservation were to take place, that there are many things that they would require to have happen. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she was referring to if the house were to remain on site. Mr. Kiefer stated that SHPO has not made a statement in that regard. The Dormitory Authority also has not made a statement in that regard. He does not think that any standards have been established or discussed. Board Member Hoffmann asked if he was aware of any regulations that do not have to be expressed in letters. Mr. Kiefer stated that he does not know what happens if the Moore House remains on site. There may not be any requirements from the funding authorities if the house is separated from the site and there is no work taking place there. Board Member Hoffmann asked if there is a way that the board could find out. Board Member Mitrano asked what if there was no North Campus Residential Initiative and Cornell came to the board wanting to move the Moore House off the property. Attorney Barney stated that it is an educational use in a residential zone. It would be modification of site plan. They would be before the board with the same issues. Board Member Mitrano asked if the board could require Cornell to keep the house on the site. Attorney Barney stated that the board couldn't do anything arbitrary or unreasonable. An argument or rationale could be constructed that says the building should not be moved based upon it's historical context. On the other hand the responsibility of the board is to balance historical requirements and needs versus the educational requirements and needs. A rational argument could be produced on either side of it. Board Member Mitrano stated that if the house were segregated from the initiative, would Cornell have greater feasibility in getting what it wanted with regard to Moore House. Attorney Barney stated that the issues are the same. If Cornell came in with the argument that it is a complete drain on their finances. It is detrimental to their educational needs. It depends on the factual content. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 6 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Mitrano stated that the Comprehensive Plan incorporates a dedication that the Town has to supporting educational uses. It is very much in the Comprehensive Plan to be recognizing Cornell's desire to be promoting this educational purpose. Attorney Barney stated that he does not have a discomfort whichever way the board decides. There are reasonable people on both sides of the issue. There are reasons for either side. A decision could be made either way. Board Member Conneman asked if at any meetings at Cornell did anyone say that they will improve the Moore House and then offer it to departments. There is a difference between here is the Moore House take it or leave it for your program and saying that they will put $100,000 into upgrading the Moore House so that it would be more accessible to programs. Mr. Kiefer stated that they did not do that. The reason they did not do that is because they took their lead on what would be the best thing to happen with the Moore House from the Historic Preservation consultants. In each case the two consultants stated that the site had changed sufficiently and that off -site preservation was not a bad thing. Mr. Stearns said it was good preservation. They learned that it was o.k. to preserve the house off -site. It is o.k. not to pursue any more than they already had pursued. Board Member Conneman asked if Cornell hired Stearns and Wheler or if it was done voluntarily. Mr. Kiefer responded that they hired Stearns and Wheler. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he agrees that off site preservation is not a bad thing. Attorney Barney stated that the question is if they hired Stearns to say that or if they hired Stearns to give an opinion. Board Member Conneman stated that this board has had site plans where traffic engineers were hired to address a very narrow part of an issue. Mr. Kiefer stated that when he spoke with Carl Stearns, he explained the situation. He explained that many people were concerned about the house. Mr. Kiefer asked him to be objective about the situation. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he feels that off site preservation is not a bad thing. He thinks that on site preservation is better. Board Member Thayer stated that if the house and site are left, there is not room for the third field. Has any thought been given to that arrangement? PLANNING BOARD PAGE 7 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Kanter stated that staff has done a lot of looking at this. It is not a matter of tweaking. It is a matter of giving up the third soccer field. Board Member Conneman asked why the field could not be located elsewhere. There are lots of facilities at Cornell that teams that compete nationally have to go to. People can get to places. Why couldn't the field be located elsewhere particularly if it is argued that it is not for the students alone that live in the complex? Board Member Mitrano stated that the students have stated genuine concern. Students have stated their concerns just as residents of Forest Home have stated their concerns. Board Member Conneman stated that in the early days of the University, students walked from Balch Hall to upper Alumni Field. Mr. Frantz stated that staff has concluded that three soccer fields and the Moore House could not fit on this site. He did ask the question if there is any place close by where a third soccer field could be located. People have talked about the open field north of A -Lot. It is not practical. There is a wetland that bisects that field. There would need to be a tremendous amount of grading. The distance people would have to walk is great. There have been several Planning Board meetings in the last few years regarding proposed Cornell athletic facilities and what they refer to as Precinct 9. This is where the new softball field is located. Major concerns have risen from those proposals. They have the same concerns. Mr. Kiefer stated that it is important to have the fields integral to the North Campus. Board Member Conneman stated that if it were only for the students that lived on North Campus then he would agree. The argument has been made several times that those fields had to be a certain size, with a certain distance between them because of national competition. National competition does not have to occur with the North Campus Residential Initiative. It can occur elsewhere on campus. All the students that came before the board talked about competing nationally. Board Member Hoffmann stated that it was the third field that was going to be closest to Moore House Board Member Conneman stated that their product is education. Part of it is historic preservation. Board Member Howe stated that it is unfortunate that a creative solution was not found for integrating the Moore House into the plan. If there is a child that is with a family and the family does not want it, love it, or take care of it, sometimes it is better to put the child under a different situation. He calls the question and recommends that the board take a vote. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 8 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Frantz stated that on page 3, B1, Isaac needs to be changed to Benjamin. If the board desires, Mr. Brittain suggested that in A2, "and during nighttime peak hours" be deleted. Chairperson Wilcox asked what was the rationale. Bruce Brittain, 135 Warren Road, stated it was not analyzed in the Environmental Impact Statement. Mr. Frantz stated that he included it because there was a lot of concern about nighttime off - peak traffic through Forest Home. RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -7 - SEQR Findings Statement Proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative. MOTION made by James Ainslie, seconded by Larry Thayer. WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration of Adoption of a Statement of Findings pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act regarding the proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative, to be located on the west side of Pleasant Grove Road and south side of Jessup Road on all or parts of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 67- 1 -1.1, 68 -1- 11.1, 68 -1 -11.2, and 68 -1 -12.2, comprising approximately 14.1 acres of land. The overall project in both the City and Town of Ithaca is proposed to consist of new dormitories to house up to 560 new students, a new "community commons" dining hall /student activities center, a new road connecting the existing South Balch Drive to Pleasant Grove Road, a new parking lot, three new soccer fields, tennis courts and basketball courts, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge and Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has been designated to act as Lead Agency in environmental review, and 3. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is an Involved Agency with regard to required site plan approval, and 4. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for said North Campus Residential Initiative project and pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617 has: 1) made a positive determination of environmental significance; and 2) overseen the preparation, completion and acceptance of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a Final Environmental Impact Statement; and 3) issued its own Findings Statement with regard to said Project, and PLANNING BOARD PAGE 9 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 5. Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617, the Planning Board is required to issue its own Findings Statement with regard to said Project, and 6. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on October 19, 1999 and at subsequent meetings on November 2, 1999, January 4, 2000 and January 5, 2000, has reviewed a draft Findings Statement prepared by the Town Planning Department, comments received from members of the public regarding the proposed North Campus Residential Initiative and its potential impacts on the environment, and other information and materials related to the proposed facility. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board does hereby adopt the Findings Statement for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative. AYES: Ainslie, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe. NAYS: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman. ABSTAIN: None. The MOTION was declared to be carried. Chairperson Wilcox stated that when the public hearing was advertised, it was advertised as both Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval. It gave the board the option of granting both Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval. Staff has recommended that the board grant Preliminary Site Plan Approval, then have conditions attached for Final Site Plan Approval. This will also need to come before the Zoning Board of Appeals. It is hard to tell what the Zoning Board of Appeals will do. Board Member Thayer stated that in paragraph f it talks about including specific traffic calming measures. He thought that they had eliminated traffic calming measures. Chairperson Wilcox stated that it is meant to say that if the drawings are not final then they need to be updated. Board Member Howe stated that he would like to recommend that the parking lot be reduced more. There is a net increase of 26 parking spaces. He recommends that the parking lot be reduced from 122 to 96 parking spaces. Chairperson Wilcox stated that it would mean that there would be no net increases in parking spaces on the project site. Board Member Howe stated that hopefully it would mean less traffic. When there are parking spaces, people use them. Hopefully it would make people rely more on public transportation. It is a very large parking lot near the Observatory. It is not desirable. Board Member Mitrano stated that there are going to be 80 additional employees. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 10 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox stated that there would be additional employees. He cannot say if there is sufficient parking in the area including the A -Lot to support or not to support reasonable needs of visitors and employees. He does not have any issue with visitors parking in A -Lot and walking. Board Member Hoffmann stated that A -Lot is under -used. She would like to see the parking spaces reduced especially if the parking lot west of Helen Newman can retain all the spaces. Board Member Thayer asked if they reduce the number of parking spaces, could an area be set aside in case they are needed. Chairperson Wilcox stated that this board has consistently approved less parking spaces when there is area reserved for future parking. They are not able to get the future parking until they come back to the board. If Cornell believes that they need 122 parking spaces and the board decides on 96 to 100, then they are going to design the site to reserve the space for future parking. It would make sense for Cornell to have an area set aside. Chairperson Wilcox asked Board Member Howe what is the rationale for 96 parking spaces. Board Member Howe responded that it is based on the numbers that Mr. Frantz presented last night. It is based on the fact that there are 26 net new spaces. Mr. Frantz stated that the existing number of parking spaces is 176. The current proposed parking is 202 parking spaces. This would be 18 spaces west of Helen Newman Hall, 54 spaces along Sisson Place, 130 spaces in the new parking lot, which includes the 122 shown plus the 8 future spaces. The reduction in the size of this parking lot by 26 spaces would mean no net gain in parking as a result of the project. Chairperson Wilcox asked if someone could address the issue of utilization of A -Lot. Bill Wendt, Cornell University, stated that the A -Lot is utilized as a faculty and staff lot. It has 6 to 8% vacancy rates at peak times. It does have room for additional parkers should there be additional employees. The hope is that every time they change transit routes they get more people to take the bus and have extra spaces. It is their goal to minimize the need for additional parking. They would like to be prepared should they need additional parking. They would like to encourage people to use the bus. Chairperson Wilcox asked how many spaces are there in A -Lot. Mr. Wendt responded that there are about 700 parking spaces. Kathy Wolf, Trowbridge & Wolf, stated that Mr. Frantz's numbers were assuming that the new lot was 130 parking spaces. The reduction by the 26 net parking spaces would come off the 130 as opposed to the 122. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 11 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox stated that he proposes that the board approve a maximum of 100 parking spaces. Then Cornell could show the rest reserved for future use. Attorney Barney asked which parking lot he was referring to. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the current lot proposed for 122 parking spaces be reduced to no more 100 parking spaces. Attorney Barney stated that they would have less parking with a larger building than they have now Chairperson Wilcox stated that there would be 4 fewer spaces. A -Lot has on average 42 to 56 vacancies. The A -Lot is sufficiently close to the project site to accommodate the increased traffic. Mr. Frantz stated that if the parking spaces were not present, people would not be driving. There is a potential for decreasing traffic impact. Chairperson Wilcox stated that they have allowed Cornell to have the parking spaces set aside Board Member Hoffmann stated that it has been possible to increase the parking west of Helen Newman a little from the original proposal. It might be possible to increase it even more. Some of the parking that would be lost could be returned to this area. She would like to see if there is a serious attempt at reducing the size of the parking lot in the Town of Ithaca, that it be reconfigured in a way that will allow parking spaces to be set aside while allowing the Moore House to remain on site. Board Member Mitrano asked if the cars are going to A -Lot, how are they more likely to be staying out of Forest Home. There are 80 new employees. She does not understand how they would stay out of Forest Home by going to A -Lot. Board Member Howe stated that it is hard to determine the route they would take. It depends upon which direction they are coming in from. The point is why provide that number of spaces until a need is shown that those numbers of spaces are needed. Hopefully by doing that, the traffic patterns can be identified and more people will use mass transit. The large lot next to the Observatory is inappropriate. Mr. Frantz stated that it is not just parking in A -Lot. It is the overall use of the parking lot, not just employees, but students. If those spaces are not there, there might be a chance that those students will not drive or will park elsewhere. Board Member Mitrano asked if students are allowed in the parking lot. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 12 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Frantz stated that they would be parking there at nighttime. The community commons will be open until 11:00 p.m. or 12:00 a.m. It reduces the opportunity to park and some of the attractiveness. Board Member Hoffmann stated that there would be some metered parking. Mr. Frantz stated that Cornell could adjust the number of metered versus employee. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he senses the board is in agreement with a reduction in the number of parking spaces. Board Member Thayer asked if Cornell feels that this is a practical solution. Ms. Wolf stated that the number of parking spaces that they proposed was not arbitrary. She has confidence that the number was a logical one. The University is willing to go along with the reduced size if they have the option of reserving area for future parking. They would prefer to have 104 parking spaces. Board Member Howe stated that he would like to see signage that makes it clear that the through road is not just for the campus center. It is a road that goes through Cornell. Chairperson Wilcox stated that he remembers a submission that had an example of a possible sign that might be put up. Mr. Kanter stated that there are limitations on signs in an R -30 district. Chairperson Wilcox asked if there is a sign proposed for the new intersection. Joni Carroll, Cornell University, stated that the sign is not shown on the site plan. The reason it that Cornell usually supplies its own signage. They had not asked the consultants to do that. They are contemplating either end of the new through road. There would be a sign at the intersection to direct people to the site. Chairperson Wilcox asked if the board would like the current sign moved closer to Jessup Road or a second sign. Board Member Thayer stated that he would prefer to see a second sign. The current Cornell signs are small. Could the board ask for the sign to be a maximum size at the corner? Chairperson Wilcox stated that he wants to make sure that the board balances the visual aspects of the sign as well. Attorney Barney stated that the board could make as a condition of Preliminary Approval that proposed signs be submitted as part of Final Approval. This would give the board an opportunity to see the signs. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 13 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Frantz stated that the idea is to let the general public know that they can also get to Central Campus by using the through road. Board Member Hoffmann stated that condition d should be removed on the third page. It talks about the parcel available in Forest Home. On the first page, under 1, the number of tennis and basketball courts should be mentioned. The second page, point a, mentions the documents. They are old plans and they do not reflect the proposed situation. Do the conditions address the changes? Mr. Kanter stated that these are the most recent submissions. They are dated October 15, 1999 as the resolution states. Board Member Hoffmann stated that the parking lot configurations are not shown as the board has talked about recently. Mr. Frantz stated that there is a condition of revision of the site plan to redesign the parking lot. Mr. Kanter stated that there was an informal sketch of the parking area that the presented to the board. It is no longer relevant because it will not happen. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she wants to be sure that everything is how it should be. Mr. Frantz stated that he did go through the drawing submissions. He confirmed that these were the same plans that were approved by the City of Ithaca. He has spent a lot of time comparing the drawings. Chairperson Wilcox stated that there is a difference between Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval. When this board grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval, they are in essence giving the project approval subject to the fulfillment of various conditions that they set. The Final Site Plan Approval generally involves checking to see if the conditions they set have been met. It is not a complete review of the project. The board should not grant Preliminary and then change their minds and not grant Final. Preliminary means that they accept the plan as proposed with the changes that they added. Final is granted when the conditions are met satisfactorily to the board. Board Member Hoffmann stated that it does not mean that the Final Approval has to be the same. There can be major changes. Board Member Conneman stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals might add conditions. Attorney Barney stated that the resolution does not specifically state that the Cradit -Moore House is being moved. Condition a should be modified to state that preservation of the Cradit -Moore House is to occur as part of the North Campus Residential Initiative and such preservation includes the relocation of the house to the site on Pleasant Grove Road. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 14 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann stated that it does not talk about preservation of the Cradit -Moore House on site. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the majority of the board feels that it should be relocated off site Board Member Conneman stated that the Zoning Board of Appeals should know how all board members feel. Mr. Frantz stated that they will be supplied with all minutes regarding the North Campus Residential Initiative. Board Member Thayer stated that under condition c, number 2 could be deleted. Board Member Hoffmann stated that she does not feel that condition b and c under the recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals apply if the house is moved from its site. It is in the Comprehensive Plan to promote educational uses in the Town. It is also in the Comprehensive Plan to preserve historic properties. The statements are not true if the house is moved. Board Member Ainslie stated that the house is still being preserved. Chairperson Wilcox stated that they are making a recommendation and they need to make those findings in order to make the recommendation. Attorney Barney stated that it depends upon the opinion of the majority of the board. Chairperson Wilcox stated that there is potential in a Comprehensive Plan and with a project before the board, that there might be conflicting goals. The Comprehensive Plan states that they would like to preserve historic structures to the extent practicable. Board Member Mitrano stated that condition c does not disagree with it. RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -8 - Preliminary Site Plan Approval & Recommendation to Zoning Board of Appeals with Regard to Request for Special Approval for the Proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative. MOTION made by Tracy Mitrano, seconded by Larry Thayer. WHEREAS: 1. This action is the Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for that portion of the proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative located within the Town of Ithaca, to be located on the west side of Pleasant Grove Road and south side of Jessup Road on all or parts of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 67- 1 -1.11 68 -1 -11.1, 68 -1 -11.2, and 68 -1 -12.2, in the R -30 PLANNING BOARD PAGE 15 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Residence District comprising approximately 14.1 acres of land. The overall project in both the City and Town of Ithaca is proposed to consist of new dormitories to house up to 560 new students, a new "community commons" dining hall /student activities center, a new road connecting the existing South Balch Drive to Pleasant Grove Road, a new parking lot, three new soccer fields, four tennis courts and two basketball courts, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge and Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board has been designated to act as Lead Agency in environmental review, and 3. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for said North Campus Residential Initiative and pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617 has: 1) made a positive determination of environmental significance; and 2) overseen the preparation, completion and acceptance of a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a Final Environmental Impact Statement; and 3) issued its own Findings Statement with regard to said Project, and 4. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as an Involved Agency with regard to site plan approval, has pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617, issued its own Findings Statement with regard to said Project, and 5. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing on October 19, heard comments and reviewed written comments on the proposed project from members of the public, reviewed an application submission which includes a set of maps and drawings entitled "Preliminary Site Plan Review Submission to the Town of Ithaca" dated September 29, 1999, a draft Statement of Findings for the proposed project, and other information and application materials, and 6. The Planning Board, at a regular meeting on November 2, 1999, discussed in detail the proposed project, the attendant draft Statement of Finding for the project and the issue of appropriate zoning for the site, and, based on its discussions and input from members of the public did recommend to the Town Board that the subject property be rezoned from MR- Multiple Residence District to R -30 Residential District, and 7. The Town Board, on December 13, 1999 did rezone the subject property from MR- Multiple Residence District to R -30 Residential District, which allows as Special Approval educational uses such as those proposed by the applicant, and 8. The Planning Board, at a subsequent Public Hearing on January 4, 2000, and at an adjourned meeting on January 5, 2000, has reviewed an application submission which includes a set of maps and drawings entitled "Preliminary Site Plan Review Submission to the Town of Ithaca" dated December 22, 1999 and including drawings entitled "North Campus Residential Initiative Preliminary Site Plan" dated October 18, 1999; "Landscape Materials Plan" (Sheet L -1, L -2) dated October 15, 1999; "Grading Plan" (Sheet L -3, L -4) dated October 15, 1999; "Planting PLANNING BOARD PAGE 16 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Plan" (L -5, L -6) dated October 15, 1999; "Site Details" (Sheet L -8 through Sheet L -17) all dated October 15, 1999, with various revision dates; "Preliminary Site Plan" (Sheet C3), "Preliminary Utility Plan" (Sheet C4) and "Detail Sheet" (Sheet C7, C8), all dated October 15, 1999, with various revision dates; "Misc. Plan" (Sheet C6), dated October 15, 1999 and revised November 5, 1999; "Profiles" (Sheet C9) dated October 15, 1999; "Electrical Site Plan (Lighting) (Sheet SE -2, dated October 15, 1999, and other information and application materials. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan checklists, 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 Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for that portion of the proposed Cornell University North Campus Residential Initiative located within the Town of Ithaca, as proposed in a series of drawings entitled "Preliminary Site Plan Review Submission to the Town of Ithaca" dated December 22, 1999 and including drawings entitled "North Campus Residential Initiative Preliminary Site Plan" dated October 18, 1999; "Landscape Materials Plan" (Sheet L -1, L -2) dated October 15, 1999; "Grading Plan" (Sheet L- 3, L -4) dated October 15, 1999; "Planting Plan" (L -5, L -6) dated October 15, 1999; "Site Details" (Sheet L -8 through Sheet L -17) all dated October 15, 1999, with various revision dates; "Preliminary Site Plan" (Sheet C3), "Preliminary Utility Plan" (Sheet C4) and "Detail Sheet" (Sheet C7, C8), all dated October 15, 1999, with various revision dates; "Misc. Plan" (Sheet C6), dated October 15, 1999 and revised November 5, 1999; "Profiles" (Sheet C9) dated October 15, 1999; "Electrical Site Plan (Lighting) (Sheet SE -2, dated October 15, 1999, and other application materials, subject to the following conditions: a. preservation of the Cradit -Moore house shall be an integral part of the overall North Campus residential Initiative project, such preservation to include relocation of the house to the site proposed on Pleasant Grove Road and refurbishing of the house in accordance with good historical preservation practices, including any requirements imposed by the State Historic Preservation Office; b. prior to Final Site Plan Approval, completion and signing of the memorandum of understanding between the State Historic Preservation Office and Cornell University, or other agreement or document satisfactory to the Director of Planning and Attorney for the Town, outlining the parameters under which the Cradit -Moore House can be relocated and measures which will be taken by Cornell University to preserve the historic architectural integrity of the structure and its eligibility for listing on the State and /or National Registers of Historic Places, such agreement or document to include assurances and time schedules satisfactory to the above officials to insure the relocation and restoration shall occur and be completed on a timely basis; PLANNING BOARD PAGE 17 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED C. receipt of evidence satisfactory to the Director of Planning and Attorney for the Town that the relocation of the Cradit -Moore House to the site in Cayuga Heights complies with all requirements of the Village of Cayuga Heights, such evidence to include copies of building permits and any other documentation issued by the Village, prior to issuance of any building permits by the Town of Ithaca; d. prior to Final Site Plan Approval, receipt of deed restrictions or other documentation satisfactory to the Director of Planning and Attorney for the Town that would assure the Cradit -Moore House will be maintained in accordance with good preservation standards; e. completion of a Phase 2 archaeological investigation of the existing Cradit -Moore House grounds; f. revision of Sheets L -5 and L -6, "Planting Plan" to include an exact delineation of those existing trees on the Cradit -Moore House site to be preserved as shown on the drawing entitled "Survey of Vegetation to be Removed /Preserved as a Result of Moore House Relocation" dated September 27, 1999, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; g. revision of Sheet C3 "Preliminary Site Plan" to include specific traffic calming measures, if any, proposed on that portion of the proposed new connecting road between South Balch Drive and Pleasant Grove Road within the Town of Ithaca, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; h. revision of Sheet L -3 "Grading Plan" to eliminate any earth disturbance inside the drip line of the canopies of the existing line of conifer trees located between the proposed through street and the grounds of the Fuertes Observatory, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; revision of Sheet L -3 and L -4 to include the name and seal of the registered land surveyor(s) or engineer(s) who prepared the topographic survey of the site, and date of said survey, prior to Final Site Plan Approval; j. revision of the appropriate portion of the site plan, to reduce the number of parking spaces in the parking lot east of the Community Commons, to no more than 104, with an area reserved for possible future construction of up to 26 additional spaces (if subsequently approved by this board), prior to Final Site Plan Approval; k. submission for approval by this Board as part of the Final Site Plan Approval process of the proposed signage for the intersection of Pleasant Grove Road and Jessup Road and at Pleasant Grove Road and the new campus road showing location and details of the proposed signs. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board, in making recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals, determines the following: PLANNING BOARD PAGE 18 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED 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: Ainslie, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe. NAYS: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman. ABSTAIN: None. The MOTION was declared to be carried. AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of nomination and election of Vice Chairperson of Planning Board for 2000. Chairperson Wilcox stated that the current Vice Chairperson is Board Member Hoffmann. The Vice - Chairperson fills in when the Chair is unable to attend a meeting. Resolution No. 2000 -9 - Nomination and Election Planning Board Vice - Chairperson 2000. MOTION made by Mitrano, seconded by Ainslie RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board does hereby nominate and elect Eva Hoffmann as Vice Chairperson of the Planning Board for the year 2000. FURTHER RESOLVED, that said election shall be reported to the Town Board. AYES: Wilcox, Thayer, Ainslie, Conneman, Mitrano, Howe. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Hoffmann. The MOTION was declared to be carried. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 19 JANUARY 5, 2000 APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED - MARCH 7, 2000 - APPROVED - APPROVED - APPROVED Mr. Kanter stated that there is only one two -lot subdivision on the agenda for the January 18th meeting. He suggests that the meeting be cancelled. It is not worth holding a meeting for one item. Board Member Howe asked when the board could expect to be looking at final approval. Mr. Kanter stated that it is scheduled for the February 9th Zoning Board of Appeals meeting. The earliest it could come back to the Planning Board is February 15th Chairperson Wilcox stated that Cornell University does have to go back to the City because they are increasing the size of the parking lot to the west. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT: Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the January 5, 2000 meeting of Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 1:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted: Carrie L. Coates, Deputy Town Clerk. TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD ATTENDANCE SHEET DATE: January 5, 2000 PLEASE PRINTYOUR NAME PLEASE PRINTAM)RESS/AFFILIATION (Please PRINT to ensure accuracy in official minutes) t+ CtA � y l it ec ILI w_ Ni2Vv205-a— Pck n iSoLs2rLI 9,9 ' e23 I TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD ATTENDANCE SHEET DATE: January 5, 2000 PLEA5E PRINTYOUR NAME PLEA5E PRINTADDRE55/AFFILIATION (Please PRINT to ensure accuracy in official minutes.) f�c,► G — ,�1i d/V K 0, +�