Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2002-02-19TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2002 FILE DATE ,D&-Zo c> � The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, February 19, 2002, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m. PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Bill Troy, Attorney; Dan Walker, Director of Engineering (arrived @ 8:25 p.m.); Fred Noteboom, Highway Superintendent (arrived @ 7:50 p.m.); Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner. EXCUSED: Christine Balestra- Lehman, Planner. ALSO PRESENT: D. Rob Mackenzie, 6252 Brown Rd. Trumansburg NY; Jessica Keltz, Ithaca Times; Stacey Crawford, Better Housing for Tompkins County; Bruce John, Better Housing for Tompkins County; Tom Sanford, 138 Oakwood Rd; Marty Shapiro, 1962 Elmira Rd; Randy Hall, 225 Elmira Rd; John Fennessey, Conifer Realty; David Harding, Carl Jahn & Associates. Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:37 p.m. and accepted for the record the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on February 11, 2002, and February 13, 2002, 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 February 13, 2002. (Affidavit of Posting and Publication is hereto attached as Exhibit #1.) Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:37 p.m. With no persons present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:38 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination, Mackenzie 2 -Lot Subdivision, Corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:38 p.m. Marty Shapiro, 1962 Elmira Road Newfield - I am representing Doctor and Mrs. Mackenzie. Chairperson Wilcox - Would you give just a brief overview of the application and any environmental impacts that you might be aware of? PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Shapiro - Yes, to answer your second question first, there are no environmental impacts to which I am aware. This is a fairly simple subdivision taking one lot converting it into two properties located on the corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road. Both result in lots that conform in every way that I am aware of to the various codes and ordinances of the Town of Ithaca. I am aware of the Planning Departments suggestion that the entrance for the second lot be on Valley View Road. That is perfectly fine with my clients. In fact, it makes more sense. Other than that, I do not have nothing else. Chairperson Wilcox - Any questions? Board Member Hoffmann - It seems pretty straight forwards. Chairperson Wilcox - You can have a seat Board Member Conneman - I'll move it. Would someone like to move the SEOR motion? Chairperson Wilcox - So moved. Do I have a second? Board Member Howe - Second. Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by Rod Howe. RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -12 - SEOR Preliminary & Final Subdivision Approval, MacKenzie 2 -Lot Subdivision, Valley View Road & Elm Street Extension, Tax Parcel No. 29- 3 -3.2. MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Rod Howe, WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two lot subdivision at the corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 29- 3 -3.2, Residence District R -15. The proposal is to subdivide the 1.81 +/- acre parcel into a 0.93 + 1- acre parcel and a 0.88 + 1- acre parcel. D. Rob and Margaret MacKenzie, Owners /Applicants; Martin A. Shapiro, Esq., Agent, 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on February 19, 2002, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by Town Planning staff, a plat entitled, "MacKenzie Subdivision - Valley View Road, Lands of D. Rob and Margaret MacKenzie — Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, "prepared by Kenneth A. Baker L. S., dated September 13, 2000, and other application materials, and PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and, therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be required. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox - The SEQR motion is passed unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:40 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two lot subdivision at the corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 29.- 3 -3.2, Residence District R -15. The proposal is to subdivide the 1.81 ± acre parcel into a 0.93 ± acre parcel and a 0.88 ± acre parcel. D. Rob and Margaret Mackenzie, Owner /Applicant; Martin A. Shapiro, Esq., Agent. Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - This is a public hearing. If there is a member of the audience, member of the public who wishes to address the Planning Board, please step forward, give us your name and address. We will be very interested to hear what you have to say on the matter. There being none; we will close the public hearing at 7:41 p.m. and bring the matter back to the board. Chairperson Wilcox - I note, Chris is not here. In her cover memo, she simply recommends that the driveways front on Valley View Road. It is not relevant to the resolution because the action is subdivision, not site plan. Mr. Kanter - It is up to the board if you felt that you wanted to confirm that so that when it goes for a building permit, the Building Department knows that that is what the Planning Board would like, you can certainly add that as a condition. We did not feel it was necessary to specifically state it. It is ultimately up to the Highway Superintendent basically, to make those determinations anyway. Board Member Howe - If we don't need... 191 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - Any further discussion? Would someone like to move the motion for subdivision? Board Member Mitrano - Our visiting attorney would like to say a word. Mr. Troy - Not at all. I was just waving to somebody. Board Member Hoffmann - I'll move the motion. Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by Eva Hoffmann. Do I have a second? Board Member Talty - I'll second. Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by Kevin Talty. Any further discussion? RESOLUTION NO. sion, Valley View Road & Elm r and Final Subdivision MOTION made by Eva Hoffmann, seconded by Kevin Talty. WHEREAS: T No. 2 Urroj / ►ra 2 of 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two lot subdivision at the corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 29- 3 -3.2, Residence District R -15. The proposal is to subdivide the 1.81+/ - acre parcel into a 0.93 + 1- acre parcel and a 0.88 + 1- acre parcel. D. Rob and Margaret MacKenzie, Owners /Applicants; Martin A. Shapiro, Esq., Agent, 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 February 19, 2002, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on February 19, 2002, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a plat entitled, "MacKenzie Subdivision- Valley View Road, Lands of D. Rob and Margaret MacKenzie — Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," prepared by Kenneth A. Baker L. S., dated September 13, 2000, and other application materials; NO W THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED: 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 Checklist, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a 2 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two lot subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 29 -3 -3.2 located at the corner of Elm Street Extension and Valley View Road, as shown on the plat entitled "MacKenzie Subdivision - Valley View Road, Lands of D. Rob and Margaret MacKenzie," subject to the following condition: a. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the plat and three dark -lined prints, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Tally. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Sketch Plan review for the proposed modifications to the Quick Cash Auction House at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35. -1 -21, Business District "C ". The proposed modifications include renovations of a portion of the existing building for a retail shop, beauty salon or offices, placing four storage trailers on the rear of the site, and placing two display carts in the parking area near the road. Randy Hall, Owner /Applicant. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:43 p.m. Randy Hall, 225 Elmira Road - Our main office is at 225 Elmira Road. The property, just so you know so you are all familiar with it, is the Lyke New property. It used to be the old McGuire Gardens property. That is the property I purchased that we plan on an extension of our current facility. Right now we are over in what used to be the old Empire Lumber building. That is the property that we operate out of right now. Chairperson Wilcox - Are you operating the business there today? Mr. Hall - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - And that business is? Mr. Hall - The official DBA of the business is Quick Cash Auction House. The overall business, though, has taken. quite a bit of change actually. The business now is comprised of... We are close to being Central New York, if we are not already, Central New York's largest used furniture dealer. Along with that we have a moving service as well. The auction itself has been idle for about a year 61 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED and a half.. Whether we go back to the auction business or not is still a questionable thing at this time. Right now we got our hands full with what we do right now. Chairperson Wilcox - Now, you are buying used furniture and storing it on site for resale to the public or what? Mr. Hall - What we do at that particular location, where I am at now, there is showrooms there, warehouses. Because of the name people do get confused a little bit. We are open 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. It is a retail operation. And, yes, we warehouse a tremendous amount of furniture at that location. The warehouses and the facility are open for anyone to browse. Then at the second facility, that is on your desk right now, is going to be an extension of our current business. Board Member Hoffmann - What does extension mean in this case? Will there be some retail sales going on at this location, too? Mr. Hall - Absolutely. We submitted, earlier last year, what we intended on doing with the property. We got feedback from you or Andy Frost or whoever it might have been; that we would like to keep it open to the option of having a retail auction there if we so decide to go that route. But, primarily, at this point in time, we are looking at just selling retail goods. One of the proposals on your sheet there is talking about a three -room space in the building that I really do not need for the retail store. Those three rooms, I hoping I would be able to section off and get a front entrance so that I could rent that space out to help pay the mortgage and taxes on that property. Board Member Hoffmann - Would you use the existing greenhouse that is in back of the building, too? Mr. Hall - Yeah, that is a good question. The greenhouse right now, we have stored appliances in that portion of the building. We are quite crowded where we are now. So I have taken the appliances down there. They are being housed there right now. Eventually, long term, in respect to that and of course, it is a matter of checking with the building and specs and things like that. But, the structure itself for the greenhouse is extremely sturdy. What I would like to do when I can afford to do it is I would like to put aluminum over it. Just like aluminum siding type of thing. They do that with greenhouses. Right now it is still the plastic type thing. That only lasts for so long before it is going to be very effective as far as weather and things like that. At some point in time, yes, I'd like to use that building, that space more appropriately and put aluminum siding over the side of that. Board Member Hoffmann - Is there just one greenhouse or two? I thought I remember McGuire Gardens had two. Mr. Hall - They may have. There is only one there now. Board Member Thayer - How long do you intend to keep the storage trailers there? no PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Hall - That is a good question. In those papers it mentions... In fact, just this past week, I was going to have an opportunity to buy a nice metal building up in Cortland at a very, very reasonable price. It was a matter of taking it down and putting it back up. It was a pre- engineered building. It was all nut and bolt construction. That was something that I would have to submit another proposal to you folks to see if I would be able to put that building back up. Unfortunately, I couldn't find... I contacted three, four contractors to go in and give me a price to take down that building. Not a single one of them has gotten back to me. Hence, late this evening, at least hearsay, that the building got sold already. But to answer your question, Sir, as soon as I can afford to, I would love to put up a... There is kind of an incorrect statement in there. It says something about putting up a Morton building. It should read, "Morton or Morton type building." A pre- engineered, metal type, warehouse type building, that would be ideal for us. That property consists of 2.2 acres with 500 feet of road frontage. There certainly is ample space to put a large building in there to warehouse out of and still have plenty of parking. Board Member Thayer - What is the legality of the storage trailers on a commercial property? Chairperson Wilcox - Staff? Professional planning staff? Mr. Smith - The storage trailers kind of depended if they are classified as a structure or building or as trailers. If they are trailers, then they have to be registered, inspected, as any trailer would be. If it was a building, then it would need to meet the fire requirement, the building code requirements, steps going in, building loads, set backs, buffers, that type of thing. It depends on how they are classified. Mr. Kanter - Andy has not made that determination yet. Chairperson Wilcox - The issue is not whether they are legal or not, it is how to classify then assuming that they are legal. Their presence there is... Mr. Kanter - Well, we don't know that yet. I think that the answer is that we do not know. We haven't gotten a determination of the legality yet. Although, the reason this is before this board is because our Building and Zoning Department discovered these trailers along with a number of other situations on the property that were not in compliance with our codes. Mr. Hall - If I could I would like to comment on that a little bit. Chairperson Wilcox - Hold on for one second. Are you done? Mr. Kanter - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - Okay. Go ahead. Mr. Hall - In reference to what he said, when we first got the building and stuff, we have basically used the building for storage to this point, which is relatively non - productive as far as any income for me. It is hurting me a little bit until I can get this building open for retail. Some of what issues that Andy Frost has brought forth to me are that we have had things outside the building while we were 7 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED trying to clean the building inside. When he did bring it to my attention I did take care of them. Those things have been cleaned up. In regards to the trailers, I don't think they look that great there either. What I have proposed to do, and its in there, in fact this afternoon I discussed with a contractor to come in and sandblast at least the backs of the trailers and paint them all the same color. I put the trailers as far back to the end of the lot. I parked them all very equally in space. Very level in space and space around to get through to weed eat and mow, so that they will not be an eye sore. I didn't know there was a law, if there is a law, about trailers being on it as far as storage. I do know of other ones in the Town of Ithaca that are on Town of Ithaca property that are used for storage that are not road ready trailer. They do not have licenses on them. I do not know if this is something the board is unaware of or if it is something because I am a little bit more in the public view being right on Route 13. Like I said, my intensions are to keep the property looking well. I want to build a nice business there. I do not want it to be an eye sore. Board Member Mitrano - How has business been? Mr. Hall - Business is good. It is a little spotty and stuff this time of year. I have a handout here for the board. For those of you that have not been to my shop, you are all welcome to stop down and take a look. Chairperson Wilcox - Can I ask you to hand it out and then start talking once you get back to the microphone? I want to make sure we don't miss anything you say. The microphone is more for recording you than amplifying you. Mr. Hall presented attachment #1 to the board. Mr. Hall - What you have in front of you is... I wanted you to know a little bit about the business tonight, so that for future things, I am sure there are going to be other times that I need your cooperation. We are probably second to the actual City Recycling Center, Tompkins County's biggest recycling center. We buy and sell things people do not want, generally. We buy and sell things that would end up on a country road someplace quite often to be quite frank with you. The type of business that we are in... I built this business so that it is a door for everybody to walk into. Another words, I am not an antique dealer. I have antiques. People with money can shop there that want to buy high -end stuff. Young couples just starting out can buy things that they can afford. We have what we call low, medium and high antique furniture as well as household goods. We carry such a wide variety of things that it is the type of place you can come in and buy a chain saw or an antique vase or a toy for a child, bedding or whatever the case may be. I am probably the only guy in Ithaca that owns his own set of speed bumps. It is that type of place. You can come in and buy just about anything. Like I said, we really do recycle a tremendous amount of stuff that normally would probably end up in the trash or left in a landlord's apartment for the landlord to set out by the curb. I am not saying that that is all I carry is low -end stuff like that. It would be trash. It is an important consideration to take. I think that if you were ever to stop in, you would see exactly what I am referring to. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED What you have in front of you is a list. I did this real quick. I made this list up real quick. I probably have forgotten a good portion of the people that we have done business with in either a charity, a donation, or a reduced price fashion. We did quite a bit with the churches. I have a little soft heart in that area for some of the church people that come in and need a little help. We do our share for the community in regards to helping those who need help. If you have any questions about any of the things that are on there I would be glad to discuss them with you. Chairperson Wilcox - All right. Lets get to the actual aspects of the sketch plan review that we are looking at tonight. The first one is a small retail shop, beauty salon, something like that rented space, a door on the outside of the building. Potential parking issues that go with it. Questions, issues on that particular aspect? Board Member Hoffmann - I must say that I don't quite understand that if there is a shortage of space and if the business is good, why you want to build space to rent to other businesses rather than using that space yourself and omitting the trailers. Mr. Hall - That is a very good question. I pondered that myself quite a bit, but the way that those three rooms are designed and stuff, it would not be very effective for me for displaying furniture or really storing. They are pretty small rooms. I don't know if I gave the dimensions. They are like 10 by 12, 10 by 9. 1 really would get more out of it by being able to, and I am not decisive there as to who is going to rent or what it could be rented for, but it would make nice office space for someone. I considered just going out, you can go out and buy a whole beauty parlor these days for about $1,000. Just install that in there and have some girl come in and have her own business and pay me some rent for the mortgage. That was my bigger issue, to get more rental income out of it to help me pay my bills. The little bit of space that is there to house the things that I have... I have a lot of other warehouses, too, by the way that are not in the Town of Ithaca. I have one in Danby that I warehouse out of. I have got a little bit of space out in Groton. I have a little bit of space over in Brooktondale. I have a little bit of space up at my own residence. That space, to answer your question Ms. Hoffmann, is that it probably would not be as effective for me to use that space as much as it would be to collect some rental income from it. That is why I ask for that. Chairperson Wilcox - Any other comments? Board Member Mitrano - Okay, help me understand what we are working on here. I have read through the materials, more so than usual, quite honestly. Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Hall is asking us and we are here to give our opinion of what we think of his plans for property. As it is laid out in the materials, I think it is best looked at as three separate proposals. One, to rent out some of the space. Two, to keep the storage trailers. Three, the use of the display carts in the parking lot. Board Member Mitrano - Are we voting on these tonight? Chairperson Wilcox - This is simply a sketch plan review. We can hear from the applicant and he can hear from us. So that hopefully if he does come back at some future time with a plan... 9 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann - But what I also read in the memo from Michael is that there is a potential problem with not having enough parking spaces because the trailers and the two little display carts are in the parking lot. Then there is the issue of the aesthetics of the whole thing because it is so close to Route 13. That is a comment that we got back from County Planning Department, too. And that is related to these freestanding trailers. The County person suggested that the trailers could be put further back, but I remember from when I used to poke around there when it was McGuire Gardens that very soon after the parking lot ends it drops off. It goes into the natural area. Board Member Thayer - There is quite a drop there. Board Member Hoffmann - That is not a very practical suggestion really. Board Member Conneman - I guess that if you had lots of money maybe what you would do is build a building where the display carts are. Is that the thought? Mr. Hall - Not to confuse the issue, sir, but the display carts are probably something else that we are going to talk about in a minute. They are talking about the actual tractor - trailer boxes that I have there that I am storing additional furniture in. The answer to that is absolutely. Right now I am still in the business. Just about every penny I make on this business goes right back into the business. Hopefully someday I will have a little for myself. We will be able to expand the business to the extent that I can build this type of building. I will tell you this; my growth pattern for four years is just like this. It has not lightened up one bit. As you all know, when you first get started in business it is a tough go at times. It does take a while, but to answer your question, absolutely. In fact, I thought maybe I was going to have something going with this building in Cortland that I could bring down to you to see if I could get it approved to have that set up. But from what I hear this evening it got sold. Board Member Conneman - Why park the trailers there instead of at your other location? Mr. Hall - There is definitely no space there. There is no space what so ever there. As I said, I forget which one mentioned something about parking them further back... Believe me when I tell. It would probably be best if you was there and saw it, but there is plenty of parking. I mean I have got a huge, huge parking lot. So the trailers and the cart do not affect any parking. I can assure you that. The trailers I purposely put them closer to the building, to the main building and then as far towards the edge of the bank the one lady said she was familiar with. You have to have a certain amount of space in front of the trailer so a cab can come in here and pull in and out. So it can jockey the trailer around. I also made it very specific for the gentleman I bought the trailers from that he park those trailers very evenly, very flush with each other so that it did not look nasty. Unfortunately, they are older trailers and they still do not look that great to me either. As I put in the proposal, I definitely am going to paint the backsides of them. I think that will improve it a great deal. I don't know if it was Ms. Hoffmann or Ms. Mitrano that brought up the issue of the carts, if they are going to be an unsightly eye sore or not. Those carts are going to be painted before they are used. I want to decorate them. If it is Christmas time, they are going to have Christmas lights on them in a decorative fashion. Have them look good. If it is summertime I plan on hanging flower baskets from them. They are no different than any carts that you see along road stands to sell vegetables. That is what actually they are. They are actually produce carts. They are just a little bit nicer than the road 10 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED side stand carts that you would normally see. We have contacted a contractor to build shelving units inside these carts so then at night or during the day; the sides of the carts come up like a big awning all the way around it. Then people can come in and buy merchandise off the carts. At night, we drop the walls down and we have a bar system where we can padlock the carts so that people cannot get into them. I want the place to look great. We have repainted the entire building. It certainly looks a great deal better than when I bought it. The property itself looks a great deal better than when I bought it. There is a tremendous amount of rubbish and it was terribly overgrown. We hired landscapers to come in and clean all that up. There is still some to be done towards the back of the property. There is an old fence there that has been knocked down. That needs to be cleaned up and stuff. So we want to take care of all that. But I can assure you folks, that place looks a hundred times better than it did a year ago when I purchased it back in March. Board Member Thayer - Randy, that lot immediate to the right or to the south of the two entrances, is that yours? Mr. Hall - Yes it is. Board Member Thayer - That is part of the parking lot? Mr. Hall - Right. Maybe that is what some people did not realize. I own all the way down to the cemetery. But, yes that is correct. We own that whole entire lot. There has also been some clean fill put in there. In fact, I got asked this last year by two or three contractors if it was okay to bring in clean fill to put in there. There has been some put in there. It extends it a little bit. That is all hardpan in there. It is not like a muddy, grassy area. Whoever had that property, I don't know if it was back when McGuire's had it or whatever, apparently they must have at one time had that set up for parking or something. You can drive on that any time of the year and you are not going to sink in or anything. It is very hardpan. Board Member Howe - Fred, if you are just asking us on principle about the first one... Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah, I was and we kind of got off... Board Member Howe - I am certainly supportive. I want to support business. I realize we have a lot of questions about how many parking spaces would be needed depending on the business, etc., but for the first one I do not have any problem with the general concept. Chairperson Wilcox - Of course, details to be worked out. Does the site have sufficient parking spaces; do you need handicap spaces and where they are located, and all that sort of stuff? It would be your responsibility if it were what you should decide to rent those out. In the order that they're stated, the second one are the trailers. I hate the trailers. Board Member Thayer - I do to, but we do not know if they are legal or not. That is the problem. 11 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - I know. Did you see these pictures by the way? Board Member Thayer - Yeah, they look bad. Mr. Kanter - Larry, aside from the legal status in terms of whether they are a structure or not, the reason they are here tonight really is to determine whether they would comply with this board's site plan review standards and whether they would ultimately be approvable through a site plan review. That is really the key question for this board. The legal issues, per se, is a slightly different matter. Board Member Mitrano - Well, what are the site plan issues that are not legal? What are the criteria? Mr. Kanter - The criteria that you would normally apply to a site plan review that are stated in the Zoning Ordinance, which do not get to specific in terms of architectural review, but do certainly take into consideration design and aesthetic character and those types of things. Mr. Troy - Randy, are these trailers still registered with the Department of Motor Vehicles? Mr. Hall - No, sir. They are not. Mr. Troy - Were they registered when they were moved on to your property? Mr. Hall - I have no idea. I bought them from a fellow up in Danby. Mr. Troy - How long ago were they moved onto your property? Mr. Hall - They have been down there for eight, twelve months. I am guessing. I don't think it would be much more than that. Just so you know, in this picture here where it shows four trailers side by side. Those are the four trailers that we are discussing. The other two items, the big yellow truck and the smaller type building in there that is between the trailers, those two produce carts are parked end to end there. The yellow truck is a licensed truck. That is the truck we use all the time. The reason why I parked it down there for a while though is that I bought out a 72 -room hotel full of furniture. That truck is loaded with hotel furniture. One of my warehouses is tied up with some landlord's furniture. So we just recently emptied that warehouse to the landlord. Now that truck is going to move. We are taking the freight off of that truck and putting it into the warehouse. That truck will be back at our home office where our other trucks are parked as well. We run about four or five cargo type trucks, not quite that big, that is the largest one that we have. Then we have several pickup trucks and vans that we do deliveries with. That is just so... I did not want to confuse the issue with any of you that are not familiar with it. It is just the first four trailers that are in there that are the things that I wanted to try to paint up and make a little bit nicer. Then, like Mr. Conneman asked me, it is a temporary situation for me. If I had a crystal ball I could look into it and tell you when I could have a little more money to build a building there. I could certainly tell you that, but I do not have that available. Board Member Hoffmann - What about the display carts? Would they be parked next to the trailers at night or would they be in the location that you indicated on this sketch map that you gave us? Would they be in the parking lot all the time? 12 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Hall - Yeah, if we want to discuss that now about those produce trailers. I was okay with talking about the one issue there. Ideally, I wanted to try to park them... As you can see, there is quite a bit of distance from the road frontage to the interior of the parking lot. Those aprons are probably approximately two to three car lengths away from the road before you actually get into the parking lot itself. Ideally, I wanted to face... I sort of showed you my rough, I am terrible at that stuff, but I did the best I could for you. I wanted to sort of cock one towards the northbound lane and one towards the southbound lane so that oncoming traffic from either direction can see that the display trailers were there and open for business. I would prefer to try to keep those as close to that end of the lot as I can because whoever is running the store for me, the interior store which that happens to be the front door to the business, that person needs to keep an eye on those trailers. He needs to keep an eye on the public that is shopping off of those trailers so that if they need assistance or things do not get stolen. So to answer your question, I would like to have them somewhere in the vicinity. Board Member Hoffmann - And they would be there all time? They wouldn't be taken away to next to the trailers during night hours, for instance. Mr. Hall - You know, they could be taken away at nighttime if that was a mandatory type things from you alls. I would certainly put a hardship on me, if I had say a... The way I wanted to have it set up, ma'am, was so that one of the girls were in the office front end, they could just go out at night, drop the wall and put the lock in there. They would be done with it. It would be locked up for the night. But if I had to, because of whatever issues were raised here, those trailers had to be moved back. Yes they can be rolled back. I would have to send men down there to do just that each day, to roll them back. Then I would have to deal with whether things have fallen off the shelves. We have antique vases and things like that on there. I would have to secure everything, wheel them out there, wheel them back, and then wheel them back out in the daytime. Mr. Troy - Randy, what is the speed limit down there on Route 13? Mr. Hall - Through that section I would want to say 45, 50? Mr. Noteboom - It is 50 mph. Mr. Troy - What is it that you would be displaying in these carts that somebody traveling at 50 miles an hour would be able to see as they go by? Mr. Hall - I don't think it is so much whether they are actually going to see... It is just like a yard sale or anything else or a produce stand. You see it. You know it's there. You don't know if the apple is rotten or if they are shiny, but you know that there is a produce stand. On the overhead sign, that signage isn't going to change. The only thing that was there was the wording on it. On the signage it will probably have something about the display carts so that the message is there. Again, it is just like anything else. Somebody having a yard sale along side the road or a produce stand along side the road. You don't know if the bananas are rotten or fresh, but you know they got bananas there. You hope that they stop in and purchase something. Board Member Hoffmann - Could you clarify something for me? I understand what you are describing with the display carts and using them for people to shop out of. They will be open during 13 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED the day when there is someone in the store. But you also mentioned trailers. I just want to be sure if I understand this correctly. Are people also going to be able to go into the trailers and look around? Mr. Hall - No. Not what so ever. Those trailers are strictly for storage. Just storage. I am not going to sell off of them. I am not going to rent. People ask me if I wanted to rent them out. I have had people ask me if they could rent space from me. I have no intentions of doing that what so ever. I have no desire to do that what so ever. They are strictly just for my overflow. Board Member Howe - Again, if we are talking about general concepts per se, I have no problem with it. Again, we want to think about line of sight for traffic in and out. It sounds like primarily we want to talk about the storage trailers. Chairperson Wilcox - The display carts? Any comments, questions? Mr. Kanter - I will just add that our zoning does not allow it, but what the heck. Board Member Talty - Slight detail. Board Member Thayer - That is minor thing. Mr. Kanter - Our business zones do not allow outside displays. That would obviously require some type of variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals for that to be permitted. You would not be authorized to allow it in a site plan without that extra Zoning Board of Appeals permission. Chairperson Wilcox - I note Bill's comments of what can you see driving 50 miles an hour past these roadside stands. All right, trailers. Board Member Mitrano - I want to understand what Jon said. What did you just say? Did you say? Mr. Kanter - Basically, I just said that zoning does not allow outdoor displays such as what is proposed. It is as simple as that. Board Member Mitrano - So "c" is not a question because the law already defines it. Chairperson Wilcox - Well, if the applicant wants to pursue it he could. He would have to come before this board. He would have to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Board Member Mitrano - But, there is a law that sort of sets a standard. Mr. Kanter - Again, if you back up a little bit and pretend nothing is there yet and this is a vacant site and this were brought to the board as a site plan proposal, what would you want to see? This is kind of going backwards, like this is what's there and how can we justify keeping what is there. If you had a clean slate, is that an element you think would be appropriate to the site plan. If so, then this board certainly could recommend approval of it in the site plan conditioned on obtaining the necessary variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals. 14 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - If the roadside displays look nice, if they are well maintained... Mr. Hall - Which they will be. Chairperson Wilcox - If they are... I would have to be convinced that they wouldn't cause, I wouldn't have to be convinced, I would have to think about the fact that they wouldn't cause a hazard on the road, drivers slowing down. Board Member Talty - Rubbernecking. Chairperson Wilcox - Turning, rubbernecking, or something like that. I would have to think that through, but my initial reaction is not against it, if it is done properly and aesthetically pleasing to the eye and to the neighborhood. Board Member Mitrano - But, Mr. Hall, you don't have any intentions of going ahead and doing that without submitting site plan? Mr. Kanter - I don't mean to answer for him, but that is exactly why he is here tonight. He was basically requested to come before this board by our Zoning Enforcement Officer. Chairperson Wilcox - Now, as for the trailers, let's under the scenario that Jon's laid out. If he came to us and said I want to park four or five trailers out in the back, what do you think this board's reaction would be? Board Member Hoffmann - No way! Chairperson Wilcox - No way. Is there a different opinion on that one? Would someone like to offer another opinion on that? Board Member Mitrano - I don't have a settled opinion, but I do feel for people who are trying to get a business going. If it is legal, I think I'm certainly willing to listen to both sides of that story. Board Member Howe - I think that I would come down on the same. I would want to think about a time limit. Board Member Thayer - Time limit and a buffer. Board Member Talty - For a more permanent structure upon the time limit. So say that the board was to do a twelve or eighteen month, or whatever the time period maybe, with the recommendation that there would be a more permanent structure that would be more appealing. Chairperson Wilcox - How would we screen it though? What would we do to screen this assuming that we did not have these pictures to look at? We cannot ask them to put plants there in front of it because... Board Member Mitrano - Screen in what way? 061 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 -APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - So that cars driving along Route 13 don't see that. Board Member Thayer - I think Eva was thinking that maybe he could take down the greenhouse and put them back there. Is that your thought about a...? It is sort of a temporary structure back there. Board Member Hoffmann - I hadn't really thought about that. Board Member Thayer - It would be nice to get them in back of the building rather than right there because they certainly are very visible and not very good looking. Chairperson Wilcox - That's true. Board Member Hoffmann - I guess I just thought that they could be used. I did not know if he was able to use them, but if these display carts, which sound like they are going to be quite exposed to the weather in a certain way, too. They are going to be open, during business hours any way. If they can be used to display things, it seems to me that the greenhouses could be used to. I have an additional question actually related to that, having to do with the display carts. Chairperson Wilcox - Can we finish with the trailers? Board Member Hoffmann - This is just one question. I promise 1 won't go back after that. It seems to me that the display carts would only be used seasonally because in the middle of winter it does not seem very practical to have open carts like that for people to go and look at. Mr. Hall - Again, I think it's probably a good question. We display a tremendous amount of stuff at our location now outdoors because we are tucked in behind in a more secluded area. We do have a lot of stuff that is set outside. But the way these carts are built, they are pretty much weather proof. It is a tin roof. The awning comes up. Any rain or snow, if they were open during a nasty storm ... if it was probably really a blizzard or something really nasty where the product inside of it, which is not a perishable product, was getting wet or dampened, I would probably choose to shut them down. As far as regular weather that we are having this time of year, it does not seem to affect people from looking at the outdoor stuff and things like that. I mean I will agree with you a hundred percent. It is going to be a lot better in the summertime. There are a lot of people that don't want to get out of their car in the cold to look inside a cart to see what is for sale. It would certainly be much better in the summertime. Board Member Mitrano - So Mr. Hall, if people are actively going through these trailers, what do you do? Do you go out in the middle of the day if someone has sold a desk and grab another desk? How do they operate on a day -to -day basis? Mr. Hall - Okay. We are back to the storage trailer, correct? Board Member Mitrano - We are back to the trailers. 16 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Hall - If it will help you guys, the stands we are going to call carts and the trailers we'll call trailers. That is a pretty legitimate question to ask, ma'am. The trailers actually are pretty inactive as far as even our own use. It is only our own that go into the trailers. They are pretty inactive. They are pretty much an overflow of large buyouts. I do business with like Borg Warner, Cornell, and Cornell Federal Credit Unions. Board Member Mitrano - Here is what I'm thinking... Mr. Hall - My point is that some of that stuff is repetitious of what I already have in stock, but I eventually will use it. I will sell it. To answer your question, it is a place to store. It is a place to help me out. Then when we have the space, we filter it back into the retail operation of things. We have not been in those trailers for maybe three weeks. Then today, because we had some space open up in one of the warehouses, we were able to unload the yellow truck into one of the trailers so we could have that yellow truck back on the road to do our own functioning. It pretty much, I think I use the word in the presentation, it is just an overflow type area. It is feast or famine in this business. Sometimes merchandise is readily available and sometimes its not. So when I have the opportunity to take advantage of a good buy or maybe I get four estates back to back. I go in and clean out the entire estate or something, I have gotta have a place to put this stuff. Board Member Mitrano - I am going to offer a classic NIMBY argument. Mr. Hall - I'm sorry? Board Member Mitrano - Not In My Back Yard argument, which is given that you own a number of other locations, is there any other place where you could put these? Then use the yellow truck to ferry things back and forth. Mr. Hall - I don't own a number of other locations. I have a couple other spaces that I lease the spot and no, unfortunately... Board Member Mitrano - There is no other place that would perhaps be less rigorous with respect either to the law or site plan review that would be more propitious. Mr. Hall - None that I know of. The trailers are a big convenience for me to run that business so that I have it readily close by. Then I don't have to travel to Groton, Danby or someplace like that. Even at those places, like as I stated, there is not a place to put those trailers. I do not own other property that would do that. Chairperson Wilcox - What we learned, thank you, is that the trailers are not vital to the operation of that particular facility, to that building? Board Member Thayer - Right. Board Member Talty - On a day -to -day basis. 17 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - On a day -to -day basis, those trailers are not necessary to run your business at that particular facility. They aid you in running your business as a whole, whether it is this location or your other location on Elmira Road or use of other properties in Groton, Caroline and where ever else you mentioned. Mr. Hall - On the same token, sir that could change. That is the way it is right now. But, depending on the merchandise that I got in. A lot of times, its like, you gotta get the stuff, you gotta find a home for it, you gotta stash it some place and then you start working it. So I do not want to stand here and say that to you that I am only going to be in and out of them once every three weeks. I could be in and out of them every day for three weeks depending on what I have in them and what space is open to put some of the stuff that is stored in them. Mr. Kanter - I think that raises another interesting question in terms of the zoning. That is whether those trailers meet the retail business aspect of the business zone because if in fact they are really storage units for business that is conducted elsewhere, that does not meet the retail business provisions of the Business C District. These are just a number, a whole series of questions that have been raised that you are beginning to see. Mr. Hall - I can define that a little bit, though. Right now because the second store is not open, okay, as well as we intend... Chairperson Wilcox - I'm sorry, is not open? Mr. Hall - No. The Lyke New store is not open. It want to open it with your folks help. To get back to in that trailer, eventually not right today, eventually space for that store because when that store open: sell that are at the first location down to that store I would use at that other place. Do you follow where never has been since I've owned the property. I the statement that he made, the items that will be would be to filter into that store. That is storage > and I am able to take the products that I want to am going to have ample space for anything that I am coming from here? Board Member Mitrano - Yeah, but there are plenty, plenty of places I could think of anything from a law firm that stores its documents off site to furniture stores that do not have to have their warehouses right on location. Chairperson Wilcox - I want to try to wrap this up if we can. Mr. Hall - Furniture is a lot heavier to move around, lug around, and truck and more expensive than some files. Board Member Mitrano - I am trying to save your business rather than... Chairperson Wilcox - My sense here is that there is a general dissatisfaction with the trailers. Mr. Hall - I knew that before I came in there. Chairperson Wilcox - Well, it has been re- enforced. Let's put it that way. In PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Hall - All that I am asking is that if you could bear with the trailers. I would do everything that I could possibly do for the community, for the Town of Ithaca to make those trailers look respectable. As soon as I can afford to put in a building, I would have a more permanent building in there. Those trailers are essential to help me run that business. I bought the property so that I could expand my business. I could do more. It would handicap the hell out of me if I can't use those trailers down there. Board Member Mitrano - Six months? Board Member Howe - I think that there was some opening... Chairperson Wilcox - Yes, there was. I think it was either Kevin or possibly Rod that talked about some sort of time limit. There was some talk about screening of the trailers from the road. Screening could be fencing. Board Member Talty - It would be a pretty high fence. Mr. Hall - But... Chairperson Wilcox - Just sit tight. Now it's own turn. Now we are going to give you our feedback. Trailers, short term if at all. Twelve months? I heard eighteen, but twelve months, a year, and sort of a maximum and get them out of there. Screen from the road. Nobody wants to look at those trailers as they drive by from the road. They are ugly. They are just ugly. Board Member Talty - They are fifteen feet high. I do not know what kind of barrier you are going to but at fifteen feet. Chairperson Wilcox - I hate to say it, but find a town that does not have zoning and go park them there. Board Member Mitrano - Well, that was my point. Chairperson Wilcox - I shouldn't say it, but that is kind of what I'm thinking. Find a town where they don't care, whether that is Groton... I shouldn't name towns or I'm really going to get in trouble. Mr. Hall - You are aware that there are trailers parked in the Town of Ithaca in the same situation that I have. Chairperson Wilcox - My concern this evening, and I assume it is this board's concern, is this particular application in front of us. Mr. Hall - Wouldn't that be a little unjust to say this person can and this person can't? Board Member Mitrano - We have never allowed... Board Member Hoffmann - That is not up to us. 19 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 -APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - If there are trailers and they are illegal... Mr. Hall - Did you say that it is not up to you, ma'am? Chairperson Wilcox - Sir, if there are some trailers and there are some issues with them, then I assume that they have been reported to the Zoning Board of Appeals or to the Zoning Officer, who is Andy Frost, and if you would lodge a complaint with him, you can. But, what is in front of us this evening is this particular application. Okay? So, twelve months, screened, either fencing of some sort or so that you can't see them. Rod? Board Member Howe - I don't feel strongly about the screening. Board Member Mitrano - I don't either. I think it will put him back, if he is on that kind of budget. It will put him back if it is screened. Board Member Conneman - But, twelve months. No extension. You can't carry something... Chairperson Wilcox - I would love to see something ... I mean he is talking about painting the back of them. I would prefer just to see a fence or something. Board Member Talty - I think it is too much of a hardship considering what he is trying to do, get his business up and going. But, I think if we put some kind of a contingent in where you have to come back within nine months to show that what you are going to do at the completion of twelve months. I do not want to have the term of twelve months expire, and then you come in. Like coming in at the end of nine months and saying this is what I'm going to do within ninety days. This is what I am going to do once this term expires. Board Member Mitrano - I agree with Rod. I'd be okay with proposition one and I sure hope that, Mr. Hall, we don't see carts up there without a site plan. Mr. Kanter - Could I just add something for consideration? That the... Mr. Hall - I didn't quite understand... Mr. Kanter - Excuse me. I was starting to talk. The reason this is before this board as a sketch plan as opposed to a preliminary or final site plans review is because if you look in the materials, staff could not make heads or tails out of it. I assume it's probably similar for you. There is no scale. There is no survey of the property. There is not anything showing the parking area, the actual dimensions of the buildings, the whole thing. And so, hopefully, what we are talking about here is that the applicant before doing of any additional business on the site would come back with that kind of a site plan to this board that will specifically request what we have been talking about tonight. At that point, the board could consider the kinds of conditions that we are talking about. Hopefully, this is giving you feedback so that you will be able to come back with a plan as soon as possible. Presumably, from the letters that the Building Department has sent you, they have put you on notice that this does have to come in for a site plan approval and you still will not have that as of the end of 20 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED tonight. You have to submit the materials that this board will need to see for a detailed site plan showing all these things. Does that make sense? Mr. Hall - That is in regards to the trailers and the produce carts? Chairperson Wilcox - Yes. Mr. Hall - It is strictly in regards to that. Mr. Kanter - And the parking area, and the outer dimensions of the site to show if these things are in fact needing setbacks. Mr. Hall - When I leave here tonight, I am under the understanding that there is not going to be a problem with me putting in doorway. Is that correct, for the original thing? Everybody voted on that I believe. Chairperson Wilcox - Nobody has voted this evening. What we said is that the consensus of this board is that for you to rent out those additional rooms is not a problem, assuming that you come back with the appropriate plans. Show that there is sufficient parking for the businesses that you want to operate out of those three rooms. What we agreed to be the concept. What we haven't seen is the details. Okay? Understand that. You have come in and said that you would like to rent out this side of the property. Maybe a beauty salon, maybe something. This board has said that's a good idea. We agree with that. Now you have to come in with the details. What are you going to put there? What color is the door going to be? Is there enough parking on that lot to support those businesses? Do you need a handicap space and where is it going to be located? Those are the sorts of issues that you then come back with the details. Only then will we vote and approve something. Mr. Troy - You have no authority to go rent the place tonight or tomorrow until the site plan approval is concluded. Chairperson Wilcox - We have not voted on anything, other than a straw vote. Board Member Mitrano - Just by way, the next thing we are going to do has a site plan. This is a site plan. It is that kind of thing that we use routinely in order to make final, voted approvals. I am sure the attorney or those kinds of things can help you out. The staff can help you out. Mr. Hall - So, I've gotta hire an engineer or architect to do that sort of thing to put in a front door for three rooms that there is plenty of ample parking if anyone of you wanted to go down there and just eyeball it. You would see that there is plenty of parking. I'd be glad to hand a sign in front of the very first parking spot for handicap people. What you are putting me through... Board Member Talty - To get back to your earlier point about coming in here and treating everyone on an equal playing field ... that's what we demand. Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you, Kevin. 21 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED -MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Talty - I think that is correct, unless I over spoke too bluntly, but we try to keep everyone on an equal playing field and that's how we do it. Because without a site plan and those types of particulars and details, we can't vote on an equitable basis. Board Member Conneman - If Cornell University came in with a plan like that we would say the same thing to them. Where are the dimensions? Where are the details? Board Member Mitrano - You have said the same thing. Mr. Hall - Do you want me to take those back and draw dimensions on, put the numbers on for you all? I'll do the measurements. I'll have my guys help you measure it. Board Member Mitrano - Well, at that point the staff will help you. Speak with the staff about it. Chairperson Wilcox - The planning staff, the professionals, will assist you, but it is not their job to do your work, either. They will try to read our minds and say here is what we think the Planning Board will want to see in order to make a decision. Okay? Whether that's drawings with dimensions. Whether they want to see a layout of the parking spot spaces. They will use their good judgment. Usually it is pretty good. Usually we get the materials that we need in order to make a decision. Sometimes we ask for more information, so that we can make a reasoned decision. One, so that we can treat everyone equally. Two, so that we have a record of what we did and insure that everyone is in compliance with what has been approved. They will help you out, but they will not do the job for you, though. Anybody else this evening? Do you have any more questions? Mr. Hall - Am I leaving here with a twelve -month thing on the trailers? Chairperson Wilcox - You are not leaving here with anything. You have not gained anything other than the knowledge of the process. Mr. Hall - Where do we stand on the trailers? Chairperson Wilcox - Legally, where do we stand on the trailers? The trailers are not there legally right now. That would be my interpretation. Am I correct? Mr. Kanter - I think that is correct. Whether they are structures or not, because they do not... The question of whether they are structures, and then they further need to meet certain code requirements. That is something that Andy will have to determine. Mr. Troy - I think that what you can take away from this meeting tonight is that the board would be receptive to giving you twelve months from tonight to leave the trailers there subject to some conditions. They haven't yet agreed to do that. Until they agree to do that, those trailers should not be there because they have not been approved as part of the site plan. Hopefully, you are leaving here with some understanding of where you are vis -a -vis this board. If you comply with what they are requiring, using the Planning Board, maybe retaining the services of an architect or engineer, you probably can come in if you have listened and you look at the minutes of this meeting of what the 22 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED board is looking for. That would give you at least twelve months with these trailers. Is that a fair summary? Chairperson Wilcox - Yes. Thank you, Bill. Mr. Hall - What more information would you need in regards to the carts? Chairperson Wilcox - I want to know about colors, size. Mr. Troy - This is the type of thing, Randy, that the planning board can tell you what factors they are looking for. Chairperson Wilcox - Staff? Mr. Troy - Staff rather. Excuse me. Mr. Hall - Was there any other thing you wanted to know about other than color and size? Board Member Hoffmann - And placement. Chairperson Wilcox - And placement. Board Member Hoffmann - With dimensions or measurements of where they are going to be placed. Chairperson Wilcox - Staff can add whatever requirements they think are appropriate. Mr. Kanter - And of course we will use our standard checklist that we always use. Chairperson Wilcox - Yes. Absolutely. Mr. Kanter - It is not like we make these things up. Chairperson Wilcox - That is right. Agreed. Randy, I am sorry it was so painful, but... Mr. Hall - Yeah, the first guy had it easy. Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah. That is what we call a simple two -lot subdivision. Anything else, sir? Mr. Hall - No. Thank you for your time. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 8:44 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - What is the little red light that I see every once in a while? Board Member Talty - It just means that I need a charge. 23 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Preliminary discussion relating to the environmental review for the proposed Subdivision Approval, Site Plan Approval, and Recommendation to the Town Board on the Rezoning of +/ -15 acres from Residential R -15 to Multiple Residence MR, for the proposed Linderman Creek Apartments Phase II development located on Conifer Drive (a private drive), just off Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No's. 27 -1 -13.12 and 27-1- 13.16, Residence District R -15. The proposal includes 96 apartment units (72 units to be built initially, 24 units to be constructed in a later phase) in twelve buildings on 14 +/- acres of a 45 +/- acre parcel. The proposal also includes a community building, access drives, parking, sidewalks, landscaping, and a recreation area including a pavilion, basketball court, and play structures. A bus stop and bus turnaround area is proposed for the northern end of Conifer Drive. The proposed development would consist of affordable housing units with 36 of the units being handicapped accessible or handicapped adaptable. The applicant is also requesting to subdivide a +/ -2 acre parcel from Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -13.16 in order to consolidate it with the adjoining 43 -acre parcel (Tax Parcel No. 27 -1- 13.12). An additional +/- 30 acres will remain undeveloped, but will be retained by Confer Realty for possible future residential expansion. Estate of Anthony Ceracche, Owner (Tax Parcel No. 27 -1- 13.16), and Home Properties of New York, Owner (Tax Parcel No. 27-1- 13.16); Conifer Reality, LLC, Applicant; John Fennessey, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 8:46 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Good evening, John. Welcome back. John Fennessey, Conifer Realty - Thank you. With us are Bruce John and Stacy Crawford from Better Homes for Tompkins County. We also have David Harding, who is the gentleman in charge of the designing of this site plan. David is with Carl Jahn and Associates. He is landscape architect from Syracuse. I thought in the beginning tonight that maybe I would take a couple of minutes and go through all this land here and try to explain what is being proposed under the subdivision. Then thought that we would talk about the concepts of what we think our thoughts are about this parcel here. It has an impact on the traffic studies. We charged the traffic consultant money when he carried out his study to take a look at what would happen if we developed the balance of the land. What would that mean in the effectiveness of Conifer Drive coming into the site? Jon Kanter had asked that I revise page 2 of the EAF to have the numbers, in terms of acreage, describe the property. At the time that the EAF was prepared, we did not have that good of a survey, which did not detail exactly what's what. Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Fennessey, can I stop you for a second? The gentleman in the green shirt, are you with the group, or a member of the public? Tom Sanford, 138 Oakwood Lane - I live in the neighborhood. Chairperson Wilcox - Would you like to come up, around and be able to see? You are welcome to join us up here where you can see. We'll make you an honorary member, non - voting. Mr. Fennessey, thank you. 24 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Fennessey - This is Mecklenburg Road down here. Phase I of Linderman Creek, which was done a couple of years ago. This area here is owned by Conifer Realty Home Properties. This parcel of land, which is the dykated property and this piece of land right here are now owned by Anthony Cerrachi. What we intend to do. This is color coded to relay what is happening to each parcel. The first thing, which is what we are talking about here tonight in terms of site plan review, is this phase right here. It is lands owned by Anthony Cerrachi. This piece of land here, which is hash marked, is owned by Conifer Realty. It is going to be incorporated into this development, so that we will have the ten acres of the Cerrachi with the 2 point and change acres of here, to give us the twelve -acre for the proposed 72 units. Then in addition, we are asking that the land to be rezoned would be where the detention basin goes, this for Phase II of Linderman Creek would go. As well as this little strip of land here, where Phase III of Linderman Creek would go. There would be 24 units here and 72 here. In terms of the subdivision then, we would be subdividing this ... it would be a subdivision from this bigger parcel of Cerrachi land. It would be combining this piece in with here to make this development. Then in addition in orange, this is the entry road right here that would also be part of the subdivision. Finally, that would leave us back here with just over 28 acres of land that would be available for future development. After this part here is cut off, we would then have 29 acres back here, again, for future development. That means that all the land that was owned by Cerrachi would be eventually developed. This would be the Town Park here. Then this would be additional, future, unspecified housing. Is there clear to everybody that we are buying this from Cerrachi right now? We are proposing to subdivide it into this Phase II and a subsequent development. These 12 acres here and the land here to make one development parcel. Then we subdivide this piece of land here from here. Leaving these two parcels, which total 58 acres for future development. Are there questions on that? Board Member Hoffmann - Yes. Board Member Talty - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Fennessey, could I ask you to please get in front of the microphone? Board Member Hoffmann - What is the reason for subdividing off that smaller parcel on the western edge from the other part that is to be developed? Mr. Fennessey - The purpose of that is that it would be a separate legal entity that would develop it that way. This component right here would be developed, hopefully with everyone's approval, sometime this year. This might be so many years out that we don't know. It is going to be a separate legal parcel to be owned by us. It will have ingress and egress and rights of transfer across and utility exchange. When and if that ever gets developed, it will be a separate legal entity that develops it. Board Member Hoffmann - My next question then would be why is that? Why do you want to have it developed by separate legal entities? 25 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Fennessey - This is developed by one legal entity. This will be developed by another legal entity. That will be in turn as well. Board Member Hoffmann - All right, but in this case, the future development of three building for future development would be served by the same road system. I don't quite understand the division anyway. Mr. Fennessey - In financing the projects, it is required. This I not going to be incorporated within the mortgage of this parcel here. The bank that is involved will be the land that they are going to be controlling. They will not have any control over that. We, as the owners though, will be able to have ingress and egress across that, share utilities, when in fact we decide to do the third phase. Board Member Mitrano - So is the red phase the 95 or so...? Mr. Fennessey - The red phase right here, which includes this part here that is hash marked, the housing goes in here. This is the detention area over here. That is all Phase II, what we are proposing here and are discussing here this evening. These things here are off into the future. It is included here because in your package we are asking that this be rezoned multi - family, this be rezoned multi - family and that be rezoned multi - family. The rest of this stays as R -151 Chairperson Wilcox - Sometimes I think these subdivisions are more com be because of all these legal entities that either Conifer has created or will reasons. We have seen it before on funny subdivisions where banks ask right after we had our sketch plan review of College Circle that IAD created general, no issues with the subdivision other than the various legal entities all the pieces. Mr. Walker - I have an issue. Chairperson Wilcox - You have an issue? Mr. Walker - We will be creating three landlocked parcels by doing that. Mr. Kanter - You just noticed that? Chairperson Wilcox - Get a helicopter, as John Barney would say. plicated than they need to create or exist for various for it. I think in the paper a new legal entity. But, in that are created to control Mr. Walker - I would not recommend that the Planning Board approve that at this point. What I would suggest is, and I am not sure, why is the orange parcel being subdivided off, John, at this point? Mr. Fennessey - That is the road. It is out there by itself. We do have, as you know, there is a 60 foot easement that comes all the way down to here. Mr. Walker - What I would suggest is that the 60 foot easement be separated off as a parcel straight up, which would become a road to be dedicated to the Town. Even if the road weren't completed, at least there would be a town road right -of -way that would connect to those two adjacent parcels. If we we PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED extend a 100 feet into those two parcels, then they would each have a 100 -foot potential road frontage if the road was developed and dedicated to the Town. Mr. Troy - It does not solve the problem with parcel 3. Mr. Fennessey - We have agreements between ourselves. Board Member Mitrano - And you are making this suggestion for which reason, Dan? Mr. Walker - So that the two back parcels have potential legal access on the Town right -of -way. Board Member Mitrano - And the concern about something being landlocked was...? Mr. Walker - You can't build on it without access. Mr. Fennessey - I thought we already dedicated or already had an easement across here, 60 feet, that goes all the way back up to the Bundy land. Mr. Walker - The easement was for access for the park parcel that the Town owns. That is a slightly different animal because it is not meant to be built on. It is going to be just a park. The public would not be accessing it until such time as all the residential development is completed in that area. We do have another access coming in from the other side, potentially in the future, shown on the subdivision plat. Say after these two developments, Conifer decided, well I'm just going to sell these parcels off. They would have no access to a public road. I was just concurring with the Highway Superintendent and he indicated that at this point if that center section became a common road and we could upgrade it to Town standards, that the Town Highway Superintendent would consider taking over maintenance of that portion of the road immediately. Mr. Fennessey - This road here I believe was built to Town standards. Mr. Walker - Right. It is pretty much. You just have to get a turn around, but that is in the second phase. That would also simplify the bus issue; too, they wouldn't have to go onto the private property to access those parcels. Mr. Fennessey - Right now the school buses do come on the property, except for the high school kids, but there are only two high school kids on the property. So that is not a problem. TCAT will come up here. Mr. Kanter - I have to apologize for the confusion in the parcels, but it really was only late next week that we were beginning to formulate in our own minds what exactly these parcels were. That is exactly why we had John bring in the colored version of this. It was not clear until Thursday, I think it was, exactly what was really being proposed. So that the rear remaining parcels being landlocked is certainly an issue to be aware of. As Dan mentioned, there are different ways of approaching it. It seems like if the entrance road with the turn around were dedicated and approved as a Town road, that the parcels probably could be configured in a way that would actually touch on that public road, 27 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED and thereby have at least some frontage on a public road, whether they meet the required zoning or not, I'm not sure. At least they would have some visible frontage on a public road. That is a good question for Fred as to whether he would want to take ownership and maintenance responsibilities at this point. Mr. Fennessey - Can this issue be solved if this right -of -way, which exists up here, is amended so that this comes back up here another 100 feet, I guess it would be, to be a public access and just leave it at that and not build a road at this juncture. As long as there is public access across... Mr. Walker - If that portion of the land was shown as a public right -of -way, then we get the frontage on there. Then if a developer came in that was different than your company, it would be up to them to build the road and make the access. Mr. Fennessey - I think that is relatively simple specs to extend that up from here and have that entire distance... As I said, this part is built to Town standards, but extended up in here and coming in at least 100 feet and have that dedicated to the Town for a future roadway. Chairperson Wilcox - John, you are a professional planner. You understand the issue with landlocked parcels. Mr. Fennessey - Yes. That's why I want to make it clear, although we have frontage here, we do not intend to come out here with frontage. We intend to have a shared relation. The site plan was developed with that mind. That is what we have on the site plan that Dave will show you momentarily the proposed buildings. Let me take a minute here and talk about the concept of the future, which has an impact on the traffic study that we have commissioned. We have tried to give our transportation consultant some numbers to work from and say how much can we do back there before we have ourselves a problem with the roads. In his analysis, I believe he used a total of 218 dwelling units to occur in this remaining land, which as I mentioned before, consists of two parcels right now. One is 28 acres and the other is 27 acres. It is a total of 57 acres back there. If you just arbitrarily looked at the Zoning Ordinance it is an R -15. I have 2.5 million square feet of land back there and we divide it by 15,000 square foot unit. Then we end up with 165 units. So the 218 that he has in sight is really kind of over kill for what we would probably have here. We wanted to measure what would happen if we approached that in terms of the impact on traffic onto Mecklenburg Road. We had thought over time, what is the best way to develop this adjacent land? Our thoughts are to have this kind of drive continue here and then eventually up to Bundy Road. Then develop a series of lots for single - family homes. There is a road that comes up here next to the water tank. We would not propose that the road ever be opened up for traffic, but it would be a second means of ingress into the site from down here. David will explain that we do have a proposed emergency access here out onto 79. Our thinking here is maybe a total of 70 lots. We do not have any elderly housing here. We thought that it might be a good physical location to try to do some elderly housing here in the future, especially if we get TCAT to come up here. Our thoughts that we are probably going to be dealing with a proposal of 70 lots and 64 future apartments back there. It is a long stretch from the 218 that the traffic study has set forth. That is just to let you know what our thinking is in terms of the future. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED I think what I would like to do now is turn this over to David Harding for his explanation on the plan. But, before I go, are there any questions that anyone has concerning anything that we have gone over so far either on the concept plan or the future and or the subdivision. Board Member Hoffmann - When you were speaking about housing for the elderly, could you describe a little more what each building would be like? Mr. Fennessey - No, I couldn't. Chairperson Wilcox - It is concept. Board Member Hoffmann - Are you thinking of... Mr. Fennessey - It could be one big building. I don't know. The idea is numbers and location. Chairperson Wilcox - Looking for a place to live or looking to invest? Board Member Hoffmann - How many people would you imagine? You haven't thought of anything like that? Chairperson Wilcox - It is a concept. Mr. Fennessey - The number of people living in a dwelling unit? Board Member Hoffmann - Yes. Mr. Fennessey - I would say in the elderly 1.5 and in the single - family homes 3.4. That is what would guess. Chairperson Wilcox - Do we get to make New York State Police officer jokes again now that you're back? David Harding, Carl Jahn & Associates - That was a long time ago. Chairperson Wilcox - Yes, it was. Mr. Harding - I recognize a lot of you. I like your new digs here. Chairperson Wilcox - That's right. It is your first time in our new space, isn't it? Mr. Harding - It needs a drinking fountain, though. Chairperson Wilcox - David, could I have a name and an address. 29 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Harding - David Harding. I am a landscape architect with Carl Jahn & Associates, 450 South Salina, and Syracuse New York. I was the designer on Linderman Creek Phase I. As you may gather by his comments, Conifer hired us to do hopefully the same thing on Phase II. We use what we learned on Phase I as the model to developing Phase 11. We developed a very similar appearing plan, similar density, as you may have noticed in John's great summary of the project. I think it worked out to 6.3 dwelling units per acre here and 6.2 on the last one. As John mentioned, access would be coming in off of Conifer Drive into what was a key intersection. Then a little bit later in the planning process was the discussion about TCAT possibly providing bus service at the proposed road. There would be a temporary turn around at the head of that. At such time that the roadway would want to physically extend back into the rest of the site, it would presumably connect up into additional roadways and the turn around would go away. It is a loop similar to what we had in Phase 1. This site was a little more challenging than Phase I because we had more vertical feet to negotiate across the site. The biggest challenge here is handicap accessibility and by law, as John Fennessey said, have to be handicap accessible or handicap adaptable. So, it really introduced a lot of controlling factors in terms of how the grades could be arranged on site. Consequently, it does result in quite a bit of earthwork. There is no getting around it. We try to minimize it to the greatest extent possible because that is the least costly development solution. Our computer calculations indicate that we are balanced. So we will not be hauling material onto or off from the site, other than construction materials. John had mentioned that the detention basin that we are proposing to utilize on this little finger of land, that kind of gets left over between the two phases of development. There is wetland that you see illustrated here in the two colors. The more solid color being the portion of the wetland that we are preserving and the lighter yellow being the portions that are impacted by the grading activities. Mainly, the construction of the detention basin berm and here, the construction of the turn around. The total acreage that we would be disturbing is just shy of a tenth of an acre, which correlates with the Corps of Engineer's standards, where they allow you to impact up to that much under a pre - authorized activity nationwide permit system. We are anticipating that with the carving out of grade and flattening out the bottom here and the introduction of stormwater into the detention basin, that this wetland will eventually start to spread. It will probably recapture just about all the disturbed acreage. These are the three future units that Eva was asking about on the future parcel. The concept right now is that these structures are not being built at this time, however, the rough grading and finishing, mulching would occur as we start to flatten out that site. That was necessary to balance the earthwork over the entire site. That it will make it relatively easy to go in, in the future and build those three units. One of controlling factors in the design of this was the presence of a waterline right here. We were trying to work around it. One of the issues that was brought up by... I noticed in the comments from the Environmental Commission was the impact on the wetlands and what is going to happen in this little area here once the whole site is opened up, subject to rainfall over an extended period of time. Our intent is not to utilize the detention basin as a sedimentation basin during construction. Our intent, as part of the 30 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED stormwater control plan that is being developed, we are getting a State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit. Here is the wetland that we are preserving, the detention basin. What is going happen is when they first go in here and clear the site and start stripping topsoil, there is going to be several erosion control mechanisms put into place. Number one, in the orange, you will see that there is a silt fence that will be installed around the perimeter of the site at all the downhill locations where silt might run. Number two; two diversion swales will be constructed around the perimeter to direct water into a temporary sediment basin that is located here and here. Several feet of excavation will be made in the ground in a controlled outlet structure, such as a perforated sand pipe or a rock end. It will be employed to trap any sediment laden water and let that filter out of it before the water is allowed to discharge over into the detention basin. Our objection here is to protect that wetland during the construction process. Once the utilities and buildings are constructed and the contractor starts to get vegetation re- established on the site, they will then be able to fill these temporary basins back in and rely on the more permanent route. There was another question about preserving trees on site. There is an existing tree line that runs down approximately right through that area of the site over towards the site. Then there are sporadic mature trees located along Conifer Drive and other various locations. Wherever we can, we have graded things to preserve trees. For instance, there is a 24 -inch Maple located right at the head of Conifer Drive that we are preserving. There is another mature tree back in the detention basin area that we are preserving. There is a nice stand of trees; I think they are the same Walnuts that we had in the Phase I development that will be preserved along Conifer Circle. That is an existing tree and I think that is an existing tree that we are preserving. We looked at the plan and decided that it was possible to preserve a 24 -inch tree over in this location as well. It is a similar approach to what we took in Phase I. Wherever we could, we preserved a tree. It adds to the character of the site. It makes it that much more attractive. Also, similar to Phase I, we tried to maintain a buffer. We tried to maintain at least a 50 -foot wide buffer between Linderman Creek and the edge of the development. I think that is the only point where we came close to that. One of the other comments that the Environmental Commission had brought up was the size of the bus shelter at the turn around. That will be up to TCAT. We are just showing it conceptually. That would be theirs to construct. There was a comment about avoiding light pollution from the outdoor lights. What we are proposing to use are the same lights that were used on Phase I. They will actually be somewhat lower to the ground because they have found that it is a maintenance headache for them being up so high. They have to rent a cherry picker to change a light bulb. It will be even less conspicuous than there was in Phase I. 1 am sure that any problems... I will take questions if anyone has any questions. Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody? Eva? Board Member Hoffmann - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - You may start. 31 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann - Well, I will take them in no particular order. You were saying that there are additional trees that will be preserved from what you had originally thought. What I am wondering, with all the grading that you are proposing, are you certain that those trees will survive? Mr. Harding - Yes. The ones that we were confident would survive are the ones that we show. The ones that we weren't so sure, we didn't indicate as trying to save because we don't want to tell you that we are going to save something and then not be able to. The rule of thumb is to avoid any grade changes within the drip line of the tree. The final plans will show construction fences around each of those existing trees. As there will be construction fence around that wetland area and along the edge of the... We will eliminate the potential for that bulldozer operator to accidentally back over one of them. Board Member Hoffmann - The only thing that happened in Phase I that I understand was not counted on happening, was there were some berms created with extra soil. I thought some of them; one in particular, was unfortunate. The one fairly close to the road, in the southwestern portion of that property. It was not expected. It wasn't on the plans. Mr. Harding - It surprised me also. I'm still trying to get to the bottom of it. Our computer calculations indicated that we had a balance. I did not have one hundred percent confidence in the contractor, who was doing the work. I suspect that it may have been a datum problem or something. But there was a significant amount more extra soil there than there should have been. Board Member Hoffmann - Well, I am hoping that it is not going to happen this time. Mr. Harding - Me, too. Board Member Mitrano - Are you going to have the same contractor? Mr. Harding - Or I'm going to get a new computer program. That would be up to Conifer. Our office has highly recommended not using them. Board Member Hoffmann - I think maybe it would be a good idea to protect us from having that happening, if you find that there is more soil than needed, that there is a condition that says it has to be taken off the site, rather than being put into a berm that is just there for the convenience of putting the soil there. Chairperson Wilcox - And reducing cost. Any body else? Board Member Thayer - Is that an emergency entrance on the west end, there? Mr. Harding - Yeah, it is over here. It is similar to how we provided emergency access ... just so that you had two kinds of ingress and egress. Board Member Thayer - We had a lot of talk about sidewalks going to the main road. That is not going to be a sidewalk there, right? 32 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Harding - The reason why we had discussions about the sidewalk before, was how do we accommodate picking up the school kids. Board Member Thayer - Exactly. Mr. Harding - Now the buses come onto the site, so it is not an issue. Mr. Fennessey - If I could just make one contribution on the issue of the balance thing, I recall that David said that we are going to take and prepare this site over here to balance this site. In the event that we end up with too much fill, then we don't take from here all that is shown. That is one advantage. It is our own fill. Board Member Hoffmann - I would not want it to be moved somewhere else on the site in the second phase either. If what we are seeing here is what we are going to approve, I would like the end result to look like what we have seen and approved. Mr. Kanter. - It is interesting to point, Bill was just making a comment that lead me to want to say this more clearly. Although the Phase III, three additional buildings are being described as future phase development, we have actually asked for the same level of detail on that as all the other parts of the site. It is being considered as part of the rezoning. It also is being considered as part of this site plan approval. So that everything, the grading, the drainage, has been factored in, in terms of the detention basin. There are going to be some interesting questions. I think we are going to need to see some kind of an interim plan for landscaping and buffering before the three additional housing units are put in. I think it is going to be important to establish that buffer on the west side of the site before those three buildings are in. All of that really should be considered as part of this site plan approval. Mr. Harding - That is shown. These two plantings are illustrated here. It will be put in as part of this project. Chairperson Wilcox - I am looking at a letter. At the bottom it says, The Planning Board may have an issue with the removal of ten other 10 inch to 14 inch trees and a 24 inch tree' . Are those your insightful comments? Mr. Harding - Yes. I believe that there was a plan ... I had indicated that the red trees with the "X" in them are the ones that you are referring to. These other ones, just because of their location with respect to where the buildings are and grading issues, it was just not possible. The other trees that are colored in green are trees that we are saving. Chairperson Wilcox - Anyone else? Eva? Board Member Hoffmann - About the bus service, both the school bus and the TCAT bus service into the site, I don't get the impression that that's something that's definitely going to be happening. What do you know about that? 33 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Fennessey - What I know is that the school bus is now coming onto the site in Phase I. It is going around the circle and picking up elementary school children. They do not pick up the high school kids because we only have two there. We had one meeting with TCAT. They said that they would like to service that. A lot of our people use this, as it is right there, they have to walk down hill to get it. They said if you could provide a cul -de -sac that our bus could make the turning units, and then we would build a shelter and be on your site. I would guess based on the number of people that will be both in Phase I and Phase II, that it would be worth their while to do it. I understand the service is very efficient. They pick up every 30 minutes or something like that. Board Member Hoffmann - It sounds essentially like a promise that they will go in if you build the area for them to turn around. Mr. Fennessey - That is what I understand. I don't have anything in writing from them that says if you build we will come. Mr. Kanter - I think that we will need to be in touch with them now that this is back before the board. We need to get some kind of a commitment from them. Chairperson Wilcox - We would like to see the commitment. I am sure Mr. Fennessey would like to see the commitment before they build a turn around. Mr. Smith - One suggestion with the turn around that I have heard is centering it a little bit more on the roadway. Once the other road is a through road, this could be a traffic - calming device. Mr. Harding - The difficulty with that is that it impacts more wetland. So you have to choose which one you want. Chairperson Wilcox - Mike is our environmental planner. So I am sure which he would choose. Mr. Harding - We looked at that. We decided it would be too confusing of an intersection. The best approach would be to offset it so that at least part of the sub grade worked that needed to be done temporary pavement might be reutilized with future road pavement. Mr. Kanter - We will certainly have TCAT take a look at that plan and make sure that it ... I know that when we did meet with TCAT originally, we got a schematic diagram from them of what a turn around should be like. We should also get their sign off of whether that looks okay. Chairperson Wilcox - So you build the turn around and they provide the shelter. Mr. Harding - Do you want Conifer to submit some plans to TCAT? Mr. Kanter - We have submitted the basic package that you provided to this board also to TCAT. think that what I need to do is just follow up with them. Chairperson Wilcox - Any other questions? Comments? 34 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann - I have another question. It could be that I just don't know. I have to read the plan, but there is this large rectangular, pinkish crosshatched area near the wetland. What is that? Mr. Harding - That is the spillway for the detention basin. That is just going to be a rock area. Probably a medium stone build. Very similar to what was used out on the spillway for the Phase I detention basin going out to the highway ditch. That is to prevent any water that might overflow the berm to get down the embankment without eroding it. Board Member Hoffmann - So what is that going to look like? Mr. Harding - Very similar to the one that you see out on the highway frontage of Phase I. Board Member Hoffmann - Is that that area that is essentially rocks? Mr. Harding - Yes. Here is it in a much less conspicuous location. I have gone into that proposal proposing to utilize an erosion control blanket. Unfortunately, New York State DOT had authority over that and forced us to use the rocks. I agree with you. They are not the most aesthetic looking things. At least in this setting it is back in the woods. Board Member Hoffmann - How large is that? Mr. Harding - It is ten feet wide all together. The channel is eight feet wide and then the rocks that turn up to form a troth. I think it the overall dimension might be twelve feet. Then the length of it is approximately fifty feet long. That starts on the inside of the detention basin berm, comes across the top of the ten foot wide berm and then comes down this back slope down towards the creek. Board Member Hoffmann - So it is a sloping surface and it is fifty feet long? Five, zero? Mr. Harding - I am guessing that it is about fifty feet. I did not bring my scale with me. Mr. Walker - Just by looking at the scale it is probably about twenty feet wide and fifty feet long. Mr. Harding - There is a detail that I believe is in the packet that we submitted that shows the width of that. Board Member Hoffmann - It does not sound very attractive. Chairperson Wilcox - No. It is not very attractive, but it's buried now. Mr. Harding - I can take a look at utilizing a coconut fiber erosion control blanket here. The velocity is real low here. It should have the ability to protect the embankment. You do not want the dyke to fail. Mr. Walker - Being an organic substance, it will decompose over time. OCR PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Harding - The particular one that I use is a three to five year life expectancy. They do make a geosynthetic ones also that have a much longer lasting life. The real key is the interim period while you are getting vegetational establishment. Board Member Hoffmann - Is there supposed to be vegetation that grows there eventually? Mr. Harding - Yes. It is similar to what we proposed in the first phase. It will be seeded and mulched with a regular grass mixture then allowed to grow up in a meadow. In the detention basins you want to prevent the growth of large trees on the detention basin berm because in the eventuality that they grow old and die and blow over in the wind, they could create a problem. Probably on a once or twice or year basis you might mow the berm. The inside of the detention down below the berm line can be left unmowed and so that could establish itself as a wetland. Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody else? Questions? Mr. Fennessey? Mr. Fennessey - We thank you kindly. We would like to come back on the 5th of March if we could. Hopefully bring this to a conclusion. If there is anything else that is thought of in the interim, that could be passed on to planning staff and we will incorporate suggestions into the plans that we come back with. Again, we thank you very much for your time. Chairperson Wilcox - We got a lot of materials on Thursday. There are a lot of environmental materials to go through. I am glad we had this meeting before the one in March. The young lady from Better Housing, could I ask you to come forth? Stacy Crawford - Better Housing for Tompkins County. Chairperson Wilcox - Tell me about how the current Linderman Creek one is operating. Ms. Crawford - Very well, actually. The site staff that is there is not from our agency. We are in a joint venture agreement with Home Properties. We were in the development of that and the management as well as the development of Phase II now. I have been very impressed with the staff that has been on site there. They seem to have a very good grasp of what kind of issues that come up there, whether they are site related. We had a meeting recently with everybody to review what kind of things is there now, habitability issues, traffic flow, and issues with the apartments. Things that they would want to see changed in developing Linderman Creek II. 1 was very impressed with all the knowledge and all the awareness that the site staff has there. And also I think that is the case too of just the general tenant issues that come up there. Chairperson Wilcox - Occupancy rates? Ms. Crawford - Full. I believe that they have been quite full. There is a good -sized waiting list, a very healthy waiting list. Chairperson Wilcox - When were you here last? About a year ago? Ms. Crawford - In May. 36 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - It has been since about May when I last toured the The place looks nice. The worse looking thing is the detention basin tha probably the ugliest part of the site. It does serve a purpose and will serve some issues about sidewalks and minor little things about dumpsters and that, but overall, it does look very nice. Not that I am in a position to hear with the site, but certainly nothing has made the press. facility. I am impressed. t is sitting there. That is a purpose. Yeah, we had screening and things like about issues or problems Board Member Mitrano - Next time we meet, is there opportunity for the public to ask questions? Chairperson Wilcox - I will give the public a chance this evening if they would like to speak. I usually do. Is there anything else you would like to say? Ms. Crawford - Nothing that I would like to add right now. Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you. Sir? I always give the public a chance to speak even when there's not a public hearing. Bruce John, Chairman of the Board of Better Housing - I always let the ladies speak first. Our concern from an overall policy point of view is that we have housing at this level. Because we have senior citizen housing in various parts of the county. We are concerned about the medium, low - income housing. We have been particularly pleased with our relationship with Conifer. I was involved personally with Phase I. We would like to continue that relationship and feel that this housing is needed for the county. As a board, we look at the overall housing issue outside of the city. This fits well into our... Chairperson Wilcox - Sir, would you like to speak? I will ask you to come to the microphone. Tom Sanford, 138 Oakwood Lane - Oakwood Lane almost borders the property that we are looking at. I need some help from Jonathan. We just moved here September, by the way, from Minneapolis after twenty -five years in flat land. When we were here in May, my wife and I, to shop housing, I got up somehow to Mecklenburg Road and accidentally saw the buildings. I have to echo what I just heard a moment ago. It really ... the place looks great. I said, "How do you get in here' . When we moved here the Town and City were developing... I immediately, when I found out what the objections to the development were back then, I came down to this building to find out what was going to happen here. It is my understanding that this parcel here those borders to the north is a dedicated park. My recollection is that the access road that goes to Bundy Road is over to the far western edge of this. Mr. Kanter - Basically, where that blue line separates the rear parcels is the approximate location. Mr. Walker - We built the waterline this past fall. It looks like that road ... where it stops is at the "T" intersection basically. Where the road from Mecklenburg Road goes across, the Town park parcel is up in that upper right hand corner. We purposely located the waterline 150 feet off of the park boundary line so that the waterline would be in a future road right -of -way if it were developed, as it shows right here. It would have a row of lots that could be between the park and the road. 37 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Kanter - Also, the Town already owns this piece of future park, as well. It's actually a much larger piece. It came off the Perry Farm. Chairperson Wilcox - Go back to the other map, if we can. Mr. Sanford - This is the western most border... At what point in this whole process does the Town start thinking about how this will develop in relationship to what you are considering in this proposal? Chairperson Wilcox - It is interesting. This whole area came into play a couple of years ago. Both when Mr. Fennessey and Conifer Realty approached us about the initial development. At the same time to the north on the Perry parcel, were the assisted living facilities. What is it called? Mr. Kanter - Alterra. Chairperson Wilcox - It was at that point, I shouldn't say that point, but we started to look at, staff started to look at how we could put a future road in to connect those, get the parkland dedicated that adjoined each other. How it develops? That is up to the landowners. Mr. Sanford - That is up to the Town of Ithaca. Chairperson Wilcox - The Town sets the zoning, but it is up to the landowners to decide what they want to do. Mr. Sanford - What is the process of the parkland being developed? Mr. Kanter - That is actually shown on our Parks & Open Space plan as a community wide park. The intention is that it would serve a broad area on the West Hill. It would be a combination of some active, recreational fields on the more level open parts and then retention of the wooded areas in their natural state with things like trails and picnic areas and that type of thing. One thing about that property is, we recognize the wooded area is really quite nice and quite splendid to keep like it is. I think that is going to be an important consideration. Mr. Walker - If you go up the area that is to be cleared for the waterline, there is a hedgerow about two thirds of the way up. That is about the limit of where the wooded area, then there is a meadow area that has not been mowed or anything over the past eight or ten years. That is the open, more level area that we are talking. It is on the very left hand side of that parcel. As far as plans to develop that, it is going to be ... until housing really develops to a higher level of density like that, there won't really be a need for that park. We are not going to let City residents on it anyhow. (Ha Ha) Chairperson Wilcox - Are we all set? Any comments from staff? There being none, Mr. Fennessey, thank you. Thank you everybody else. Mr. Kanter - As far as the board is concerned, the staff is questioning the board now. Are you fairly comfortable with the level of detail provided in the environmental materials to proceed with an environmental determination at the next meeting? W PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - I am impressed by the weight and the magnitude. I can't sit here and say that I have read through them all just because there is so much there. Board Member Thayer - I did read most of it. Chairperson Wilcox - I read the long cover memo. Mr. Kanter - That was actually a joint effort done by pretty much all of us. Chairperson Wilcox - I am satisfied that we have the materials that we need to go forward. Ms. Ritter - Other people? Yes? Board Member Thayer - Yes. Board Member Mitrano - Yes. Ms. Ritter - I think that we would propose to have them come in on March 5th. We would have the SEQR review, preliminary site plan, as well as a recommendation for a rezoning. Chairperson Wilcox - When is College Circle coming in? Ms. Ritter - March 5th Chairperson Wilcox - That could be a long meeting. Ms. Ritter - It did help that we talked about a lot of these. It was part of the point. Chairperson Wilcox - Who is going first on March 5th? Ms. Ritter - It is a big agenda, but that was partly why we wanted to talk about a number of these things now. Certainly there will be more to talk about, maybe with some of the details. Chairperson Wilcox - We have the traffic study that we really didn't talk about this evening. Mr. Kanter - Sue's reminder please take seriously to retain and bring your materials again to the next meeting. So we don't have to duplicate it. Chairperson Wilcox - Our formal environmental planner. Ms. Ritter - So you would not expect to get a big packet except for another memo from us, the Part II of the SEQR and any other new materials that we got. We would not ask Mr. Fennessey to turn anything new in accept for what has been revised since this meeting. Chairperson Wilcox - Okay. [cis% PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann - I have a question and that is, this EAF form looks different from what we normally see. Ms. Ritter - It is. an updated form from the State. Board Member Hoffmann - I see. So this is not one that has been gone over by the Town then? Sometimes, I thought that the Town had made some adjustments. Ms. Ritter - You think it looks different? I am quite sure that is the latest form. Board Member Hoffmann - It looks very different to me. Mr. Kanter - No. I actually know what you are talking about. The form on the State website has the same questions, but this has a different format where you can actually have better space to work with. Board Member Hoffmann - There is nothing missing that we had added to our own form in this new one? Mr. Kanter - In the long form the Town did not revise the State form. The short form we kind of did a little bit, but not even that much. Ms. Ritter - You are missing our Part II, remember? Board Member Hoffmann - Yes. I realize that. Chairperson Wilcox - These people have a drive back to Syracuse, can we let them go? Ms. Ritter - I think we are all set. Chairperson Wilcox - We will see you on the 5th Board Member Thayer - It is amazing on the traffic. The survey was so detailed, but yet very little change. Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah, but did you also notice that one of the intersections with a level of service "f", had an average waiting time of like three minutes. It is a five - minute average wait. Board Member Thayer - Well, maybe at 5:00 p.m. It is very possible. That's true. Chairperson Wilcox - That is one of those bad intersections. It came up during Burger King about how bad it is. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 9:53 p.m. .N PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of a Sketch Plan review for the proposed expansion and renovation of the Town of Ithaca public works facility located at 106 Seven Mile Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 31- 2 -6.1, Residence District R -30. The proposal includes the renovation of ± 10,900 square feet of existing space and the addition of ± 16,000 square feet of new space to include new offices, breakroom, conference room, maintenance bay, wash bay, and storage space, and modifications of the existing parking area. Town of Ithaca, Owner /Applicant. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 9:55 p.m. Mr. Walker - I am Dan Walker. I'm the Town Engineer. 215 North Tioga Street is my place of business. We are finally moving ahead after we finished the Town Hall with the new Highway facility, which we have been in need of for at least the last five to ten years. The facility was basically built about thirty years ago. Right, Fred? Twenty -five years ago? Mr. Noteboom - It was built in 1976. Mr. Walker - On this site plan, I don't know if you have this exact site in your packet, the small rectangular area is what we have existing. It is about 11,000 square feet. Mr. Noteboom - The new addition is approximately, including the wash bay, 15,800 square feet. The old one is 10,800 square feet. Mr. Walker - So we are more than doubling the size of the facility. One of the reasons that we need this; you don't have this in your packet... This is not all of our equipment, but it is the most critical stuff that needs to be under cover. Right now what is under cover is just this portion of the area here. We have about forty percent of our essential equipment that we like to keep under cover for removing snow and servicing the sewers and water lines is stored outside right now. That is really where the need comes from. On the site plan this is the existing driveway. We are really not going to be moving it out too much further as this shaded driveway is showing. We will be moving about ten to twelve feet with a little bit of an extension of the roadway what is lawn now. The roof area will be increasing by about 15,000 square feet. A good portion of that are already gravel driveway surfaces. This of course is Seven Mile Drive. The driveway entrance in won't be changing. We don't show it on the site plan, but in this area we have this ugly little trailer, which we will be removing. Board Member Hoffmann - Is that one of those trailers that Mr. Hall was talking about? Mr. Walker - No. This is an office trailer. It was a temporary office trailer that we installed about ten years ago when we started building the water lines. We were going to get rid of it, but Fred said that we needed the office space, so we kept it. About half our engineering techs and office staff is working out of it right now. The other four people work in an office that is about ten feet wide and fifteen feet long. That is the Highway Superintendent, secretary, and Deputy Highway Superintendent. So it is three people, but there are usually five people in there all the time. K Again, this is the existing building office area that is 1500 square fee feet, roughly. An extension of the under cover. A maintenance shop up here that is long enough for us truck with a plow on it, they have to PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED on this line there and this is the expansion. We are building an A break room and conference area that is another 1200 square storage for the water and sewer equipment. It needs to be kept of 2400 square feet. Right now we have a little maintenance shop to pull a truck in with a plow on it. So if they have to maintain a take the plow off or leave the door open. Right now we kind of wash trucks in the area, over right in this area. It puts a lot of moisture in the general storage area, which isn't good. We got a separate wash bay. Currently we have a drainage system inside the facility for wash water and snowmelt and things that come off the trucks. There is an oil water separator and a sedimentation basin then it is discharged directly out into the stream. We have a SPDES permit to do that. The new facility, which includes the wash bay, the main truck storage area, the mechanics shop, and the other storage area, will all be going into a combined drainage system that will have a new oil pre - separator and sedimentation basin. That will be discharged into the sanitary sewer system. It will not be discharging to the surface waters at this point. Then the building elevations... This is basically the existing building. This is looking from the north elevation, which is not seen from the road. This looks over to Paul Jacob's trailer park, if anybody knows where that is. This is the wash bay; mechanics shop bay and additional storage area. Over the years equipment has gotten bigger and we needed more height to be able to raise the equipment and service it inside the buildings. These buildings are eighteen feet clear space now. We have about sixteen feet clear in these buildings. That is why these have a flat roof on them, not to increase the overall height excessively, but provide the adequate headroom that we need. There will be one exit coming out of the main storage area. An exit from the wash bay. On the opposite side, the south elevation, you will see the office space, the existing maintenance bay door, and then the main door into the existing space. The existing building is vertical metal siding, corrugated metal siding. We will be replacing all of that because it has deteriorated to the point where we need to replace it. It will have new insulation and increase the energy efficiency into the building. The new additions will have horizontal metal siding on it to give a little difference in the appearance. The west elevation, which is the... It is the backside, but they have got it wrong again. We have an architect that is directionally challenged. This is actually the east elevation, which faces the road. So looking into the site from Seven Mile Drive, this is what you would see. This is the office area. This is the break room area, which the roofline is slightly lower than the existing roofline. Then the new bays would have the higher elevation. The west elevation is what is seen from the west and really, the bank slopes down into that. No one is ever going to see that unless they are behind the building. Board Member Thayer - Are the exterior colors going to stay the same? A PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Walker - Have we decided on the color? Bright orange? We could go for the blue from the bridge, Ithaca blue. I'm assuming that we would stay with red. Board Member Thayer - That is why I asked. I don't like it. Mr. Noteboom - The green is nice. Mr. Walker - We do have a dark green. Board Member Thayer - That is a nice color. I like that better. Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah, better than the orange and the reds. Board Member Hoffmann - I think that since the building is so large, it should be a color that makes it blend in with the surrounding. Board Member Thayer - Forest green is good. Mr. Walker - I think we wanted the experts to help us out here. Board Member Hoffmann - I have another question. This, I assume, is taken looking across Five Mile Drive? Mr. Noteboom - The roadway is out here. So you are actually up back of this building. Board Member Hoffmann - This is a winter picture because there aren't any leaves on the trees. It looks to me like there is not a lot of screening of this facility from across the road. I was also wondering, the people in the trailer park, is there some screening between the site and the trailer park? Mr. Noteboom - Yes. There is an open field... On the north side there is an open field back here, but this is all wooded over here. Mr. Walker - If you look at this across a cornfield adjacent to tf area right in the area just to the this portion of the site for wood mulch. We do pile wood chips storage building, which is shown picture, this is looking towards... It is probably 500 hundred yards ie trailer park. ...Along, behind the trailer park. There is a wooded north of the facility there is a fairly dense wooded area. We do use chip storage and brush storage. Things for people to pick up, the in that area. It does not show on the site plan, but we do have a on this photo. Mr. Kanter - That will be added, right? Mr. Noteboom - No. There is a building there. Mr. Walker - He wants it added to the site plan. We will add it to the site plan. We did leave a few things off. We don't have our gas pumps or anything. This is the annex building in the upper right 1291 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED hand corner, the northeast corner that is where our Parks Department has a wood shop and equipment storage. The parks resources are located here. There is a bank here above the roadway. There are some trees. We have a private residence just to the south of that. There are a few cedar trees that are located in the front yard of the facility. They won't be disturbed. Mr. Noteboom - The area is mowed well and we try to keep it that way. Board Member Hoffmann - I think it is important that the Town itself sets a good example of having appropriate buffering with plants, natural materials between this. huge building and other residences around. Maybe there could also be some plantings right adjacent to the building on the fagade that faces the road. It would soften up the impact of the large wall. Mr. Walker - That would be difficult. Mr. Noteboom - As you see this road right here, it looks like there is more distance than I think there actually is. There are overhead doors in there. You would end up with small spacing. We could do some plans in there probably. Can't image large plants. Board Member Hoffmann - Small ones would make a difference, too. There are certain trees that are evergreen that are columnar, that would maybe break up that surface. Mr. Walker - I do not think we will be able to plant trees to close too the building because of traffic activity, but on the opposite side of the driveway we can look at additional trees. Part of the problems we have is if you look at the trees that we have out there right now, there are great over six feet in height. The deer population has trimmed them, so they don't have any bases to them any more. We can look at more plantings. Board Member Thayer - You won't need the trailer any more, either, right? Mr. Walker - The trailer will no longer be necessary. The 1200 square feet of office space will have space for the supervisors, Highway Superintendent, the three deputies, the clerk and two technicians. Board Member Conneman - We expect the same kind of plans that we would expect from Cornell, Ithaca College, Randy Hall and the Town of Ithaca. It would be helpful to put the little building in the plan. Mr. Walker - We will. We have a couple of other buildings out there that we probably should show. Chairperson Wilcox - Not probably, will show. Mr. Walker - We will show everything on the site. Mr. Kanter - Dan, what is the status of the drainage analysis that the engineers were doing? That's what the architects said at the time. Is that you? .. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Mr. Walker - No. The building engineers are supposed to be doing the site grading work. The biggest change in the drainage, of course, is the roof surface. The northern extent of the building is on, basically, an impervious surface right now. Much of the area that looks like a nice lawn right now, up until about two or five years ago was basically just a rough gravel surface. It was a mess. Mr. Noteboom - ? ?? Chairperson Wilcox - Plant something in kind. Mr. Walker - Rich is working on our landscaping plan. We will look at tree plantings along the eastern edge of the driveway and also look at screening out... Our property line ends at this point. The drainage system goes out to here. We'll need to show that. Board Member Howe - This is just a general presentation. Chairperson Wilcox - Rod has the chair that I have been getting at previous meeting. It just keeps sinking. Board Member Hoffmann - You can give me that chair. I like them to be low. Chairperson Wilcox - The Town Board has proposed that it establish itself as lead agency for environmental review. Anybody have an issue with that? Board Member Thayer - Why did they do that? Chairperson Wilcox - Why did they do that, Mr. Kanter? Are you aware of why the Town Board has proposed that it be lead agency for environmental review? Mr. Kanter - I think the simple, short answer is that it is a typical thing that these town board types do when they are proposing a facility like this. Seriously, the actions that the Town Board will have to do are authorization of the funds for the project, which could involve bonding or will involve some bonding or financing, which also triggers a permissive referendum on the part of the Town residents. If a certain percentage of the Town population files a petition, they can cause a referendum on the question of whether the facility should be built as proposed. It is a major funding decision and commitment of the Town Board on behalf of the Town residents. It is typical for a governmental entity like a Town Board to be lead agency when they are sponsoring a project like this. This board normally would think of themselves as conducting this kind of an environmental review because you are looking at the site plan issues, which typically are associated with environmental conditions and considerations. That same question was actually raised by Kirk Sigel, chair of our Zoning Board of Appeals. I got an email from him today. I sent a response back to Kirk indicating that the Town Board had made a conscious decision to submit these plans for review by the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals, even with questions legally of whether that would be necessary under state statues. There are questions about what types of governmental entities have to submit plans to other governmental entities. To avoid any questions or issues or possible controversies at this point in time with other M1 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED things that might be going on, the Town Board said that we are going to submit them for site plan approval and special approval. We hope that the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals will go along with the Town Board's proposal to be lead agency. Of course, it is us staff who put together the information that the board needs to make the determination. So here, the main difference is that we would be doing it for the Town Board, but it would be important for both the Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals to provide any kind of input to the Town Board in making that determination if you so choose to concur with the Town Board's request for lead agency designation. Chairperson Wilcox - What if we don't concur? Mr. Kanter - If you don't concur, I suppose that the Town Board actually might be willing to consider letting the Planning Board, for instance, be lead agency. Then you would have to conduct the environmental review. There are some time considerations, as well, which Dan and Fred could probably mention in terms of the time line for getting the whole project in place. There are a lot of different critical points in the process. SEAR is kind of a critical one because it is allowing all the other parts to happen. None of them can really go on without a SEQR determination being done. Mr. Walker - Right now the schedule... Chairperson Wilcox - I don't want you guys to argue that we have a schedule to meet; therefore, the SEAR review should be done this way. Mr. Walker - Why not? Chairperson Wilcox - Wait before you go there, Dan. Hold on. Why do I, you guys can shut me up if you want me to... Why do I feel, this is no disrespect to the Town Board members ... Why do I feel that their job is not to, of course they do SEAR all of the time. Much of what they do requires SEAR. But, not a lot of what they do requires environmental review for a project such as this or a site plan review. For some reason I feel in my mind that as Town Board members they won't give it the amount of scrutiny that maybe the Planning Board would. I don't know why I feel. That's not fair for them, but that is the way I feel. Mr. Kanter - I'm telling Cathy... Chairperson Wilcox - That's fine. You can tell Cathy. It's on the record. As I said, it is something we spend a lot of time doing. Maybe we would think of things that they wouldn't think of. Of course, maybe they will think of things that we won't think of. Mr. Kanter - And maybe together, you'll would think of things that neither of you would have thought of. Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah, I know. I just, gut feeling says that the Planning Board would be the best board to have as lead agency for environmental review. Will it receive less of a review under the Town Board as lead agency? It doesn't have to if staff does their job. Mr. Kanter - The bottom line is Mike and Sue will not let anything get by. E161 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Conneman - Your objection, Fred, is on principle? Chairperson Wilcox - I guess. It just seems to me that... Yes, there is a major amount of funding. Yes, there is the potential for bonding and everything else. This is essentially a site plan review and somebody putting up a couple million dollars. Do you need a SEAR to spend a couple million? Yeah. Mr. Walker - One of the mechanical things in the review process, because the Town Board is the owner, per se, they can't make a decision on approving a preliminary site plan until they do SEAR. You won't see an approved preliminary site plan until the Town Board approves it. So can you approve the SEQR before you know exactly what the Town Board is going to approve? That is the question. That is really where the lead agency question comes in. They have to decide this million and a half dollar project, how it is going to look before it comes. Now, there are a couple issues. We have a wash bay here. We don't have our final budget figures in yet. If we have to cut something out, the wash bay is going to go out the door for a while. It is something that can be cut off without hurting the rest of the project. Does that make a difference to you when you review the site plan? Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah. Mr. Walker - We did not want to bring... This is a sketch plan right now. We wanted to have an approved project... Chairperson Wilcox - A funded project. Mr. Walker - A funded project brought to you saying we are going to do this, this and this. we are going to put tar paper on the walls' . plan approval. That is basically why... We didn't want you to approve a site plan and with us Then the Town Board saying, "Oh, we can't afford that, Then have to come back again and get a revised site Chairperson Wilcox - On the other hand, I don't want it to come before the board then having it a done deal with the Town Board has already determined this is what it is going to be and they want us to rubber stamp it, you know? I don't want to sit here and rubber stamp their decisions. Mr. Walker - That is something that if the Town Board has approved a package and they know what the budget is and they say this is what we want to have done, comes before this board and you say no we want to have it green instead of pink. Not a problem. It does not make a cost difference, but if you say that you want the building turned ninety degrees... Chairperson Wilcox - We might add landscaping. Mr. Kanter - I think that is part of the purpose of tonight. Mr. Walker - The landscaping aspects, we are going to put that in. I don't see that as a big project breaker because we are going to be doing the landscaping with our own forces. We can usually 47 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED squeeze some budget out from some place else. We just dig up all the trees we planted at lacovelli Park and move them down here. Mr. Kanter - On the other hand, though, as you were I think alluding to Fred, is that staff isn't going to be able to do an adequate SEQR review for the Town Board unless we have all these things filled in well ahead of the scheduled Town Board meeting, which is scheduled for March 11th. I think that there are still quite a number of things that we would need to see to be able to do a full SEQR review, the drainage and stormwater analysis. So, there are questions that we will have to work with on between now and whatever date it is that the Town Board is going to make their SEQR determination to make sure it is done in a way that the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals will be satisfied when the plans get to them. To me it is not a question of who is going to do a SEQR review. As staff, we are going to have to make sure that all three boards at least and if there are any others, I don't think we've identified any other involved agencies accept maybe the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant. It has to improve the industrial discharge permit. Mr. Walker - That is an administrative permit. Mr. Kanter - But anyway, all those types of issues that we've been talking about really will need to have substantial information provided. Board Member Hoffmann - I was going to ask about that actually. I am assuming, based on what you said, the new drainage system where the waste would go out through the system, so to speak, rather than into the ditch is an improvement from an environmental point of view whether the wash bay gets built or not that is going to happen. Is my assumption correct? Mr. Walker - Yes. All the internal drainage system will be going into the sanitary sewer system for the appropriate treatment to remove any oil, grease and sediment. At the time of the original construction, the sanitary sewers were not available. We had a septic system for the sanitary waste. That is why the Town obtained a SPDES permit for the runoff from the garage area. Chairperson Wilcox - Do we need a motion to concur with the Town Board's designation as lead agency? Mr. Kanter - That would be helpful. Chairperson Wilcox - Would someone like to move the motion? So moved by Rod Howe. And seconded by? Board Member Conneman - I'll second it. Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by George Conneman. The motion is to concur with the Town of Ithaca Town Board as lead agency for SEQR review of this project. All those in favor? There are no abstentions. .- PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED RESOLUTION NO. 2002 44 - Lead Agency Designation, Expansion and Renovation of.the Town of Ithaca Public Works Facility, 106 Seven Mile Drive, Tax Parcel No. 33- 2 -6.1. MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by George Conneman RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby concurs with the designation of the Town of Ithaca Town Board as Lead Agency in the environmental review of the expansion and renovation of the Town of Ithaca Public Works Facility. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Board Member Hoffmann - I have another comments. With the plans we got a page with text. I don't know ... it doesn't have a date on it or a name on it as to who prepared it. I don't know if it was prepared by the architect or by the Town. I think we need that. Mr. Walker - I think that Fred wrote that. Mr. Noteboom - I wrote that for the newsletter. I attached it to the front. Mr. Walker - With the preliminary formal submission, we will have an actual engineer and architecture report that will be dated. Chairperson Wilcox - To wrap this up, I was out there Monday. They need a new facility. First time I had ever been out there. They truly do need some space out there. Yeah, there are some things about the site that I don't like because there are piles of stuff in the back. It's good because there is lots of mulch you can drive up and get and Christmas trees. There is a lot of stuff out in the back. It is a typical stockpile of stuff. Mr. Walker - It is a public works facility. Chairperson Wilcox - Right, it is. They need space. When you walk in you realize how cramped it is in there both for the employees and for the. equipment. Mr. Walker - Part of our problem on the site is limitations on the space. At sometime hopefully in the future, not to distant future, we may be ... we discussed obtaining some additional land adjacent to the site. We haven't talked to the owners of that property yet because we have not put it into our capital plan yet. One of the things that we do recognize is that things are really crammed together. We don't have a lot of opportunities to provide better screening from the adjoining properties. Right now, the deer don't seem too much when they eat the neighbor's corn. There is a residential area being developed across the street. There will be more traffic on Seven Mile Drive. We try to keep it clean. It is a lot neater now than it was ten years ago. .. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002- APPROVED Mr. Noteboom ? ?? Chairperson Wilcox - Any other questions, comments? Then we are all done gentlemen. Mr. Walker - Thank you for your time. So do you like the green? Board Member Hoffmann - It depends on what kind of green. It has to blend in. Board Member Thayer - It would be forest green. Mr. Walker - This is the existing shed in forest green. Thank you, Board Member Hoffmann - If you look at the grass and that, it is quite a different green. I don't know. Anyway probably a darker color is better than a lighter color because it would appear to be smaller. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 10:29 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES January 8, 2002 & February 5, 20026 Chairperson Wilcox - Motion to approve the minutes of January 8th and February 5th Board Member Thayer - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - So moved. Seconded by Rod Howe. With corrections, all in favor? Mr. Kanter - Wait, wait, wait. Did we mention that there were some quite substantial corrections? Board Member Hoffmann - Oh, I'm sorry. That was January 8th Chairperson Wilcox - You're slowing me down. Board Member Hoffmann - There were some problems in the text that ... some of the things that were supposedly said by Mr. Salm were actually said by Jon Kanter. They must have similar voices. Jonathan looked them over. He has made corrections to a set to help correct that. Mr. Kanter - I usually try not to read through these if I can avoid it, but because Eva called me, this particular section on College Circle seemed to be important. I really came up with quite a number of corrections, either people being attributed to saying things that they didn't or different statements that had words that weren't recognizable or out of context. I went through and revised it and gave Carrie a handwritten corrected version. In addition to whatever Eva normally has, this one has some additional revisions. 50 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Board Member Hoffmann - The other comment that I had about this that I wondered if we could do something about. Fred isn't here now, but there were a number of names of people who were here that don't appear in the list of also present. Ms. Whitmore - Okay. The difference is that Lori did these minutes. When I come, if they don't sign in, I see who is here and I jot them down. Since Tee -Ann was here and she didn't know who was sitting out in the audience. So I add them in myself because they don't sign in. Unless they are on the sign -in sheet, they don't know put them in. Board Member Hoffmann - Right. Exactly. That is what I suspected was the case. So what I was going to suggest was that when Fred starts the meeting with talking about the fire exits and so that he would ask everyone to please sign in and to print their names to make easier for the secretary to transcribe them into the minutes. When someone says their name, you don't know how it is spelled. It is very easy to make spelling mistakes with names that way. Board Member Talty - Is there a rule or regulation that the public has to do that? Do they have to sign in? Mr. Troy - No. I think you can show up and maintain your anonymity if you want to. Mr. Kanter - You can, but we usually try to show a record in the minutes of those attending. I don't think we can force them to do it. Some of them don't do it just because they don't notice or don't think about doing it. Board Member Hoffmann - I understand that people should be able to come and not sign in if they choose not to. Chairperson Wilcox - I had a motion and a second and then I was stopped. Mr. Kanter - With corrections. Chairperson Wilcox - With corrections. This is for both of them by the way. Board Member Hoffmann - Oh, okay. The second set I don't have any substantial comments. I just have some corrections to pass on. Chairperson Wilcox - All those in favor? All those opposed? The motion is passed. Thank you very much. RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -15 - Approval of Minutes - January 8, 2002 & February 5, 2002. MOTION by Larry Thayer, seconded by Rod Howe. RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the January 8, 2002 and February 5, 2002 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meeting as presented with corrections. 51 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED THERE being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS, Chairperson Wilcox - February 25th site visit to College Circle. Rod you mentioned that you would be out of town. Board Member Conneman - When were we going to meet? Chairperson Wilcox - Where are we going to meet? Mr. Kanter - On the circle. I guess that is right after the entrance drive. We'll just have to have parking spaces. Ms. Ritter - Who all can make it so we can look for you? Chairperson Wilcox - We have at least five. We don't know about Tracy. Then we have a couple of residents. Ms. Ritter - Conservation Board members as well. Chairperson Wilcox - Bill, what is your opinion of whether this should be noticed to the paper? Mr. Troy - I think if you basically have a quorum to go visit then you should. Chairperson Wilcox - I agree. Mr. Kanter - So do I. Mr. Troy - I would do it. Chairperson Wilcox - Your partner sometimes has a different opinion, I think. Mr. Troy - It's age. Chairperson Wilcox - I, too, think it should be noticed to the paper. Mr. Troy - I always think it is an abundance of caution, if you have any doubt, notice it. John could have a disagreement. He probably has more experience than I do. I would rather be careful. 52 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES FEBRUARY 19, 2002 APPROVED - MARCH 19, 2002 - APPROVED Chairperson Wilcox - I agree. Mr. Kanter - We typically do it even if John says we don't have to. Chairperson Wilcox - It seems to be Mike's job these days to get the notice to the paper. Mr. Kanter - Not necessarily, but we will do it. We will do it. We are also going to invite a couple of the neighbors. John Yntema is coming as an ERC representative. Pauline Layton is also coming. Chairperson Wilcox - Members of the IAD will be there and probably their engineers. Mr. Kanter - David Herrick. Chairperson Wilcox - Any other business? I have no other business other than our next meeting is going to be a doozey. It has College Circle and Linderman Creek. Mr. Kanter - Well, we could have had Precinct 9 athletic fields on it as well, but I think we decided it would be better to wait until the next meeting. Chairperson Wilcox - Lets save some controversy for the following meeting. Any other business? Mr. Kanter - I would like to thank Bill for spending his evening with us Chairperson Wilcox - I was looking forward to having Randy come while. Mr. Troy - He is on a plane heading for the Caribbean. Chairperson Wilcox - Can I have motion to adjourn? Board Member Conneman - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox - We are adjourned at 10:37 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT: It was great. We haven't seen Randy for a Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the February 19, 2002 meeting of Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10:37 p.m. Res ectfully submitted: Carrie Whitmore, Deputy Town Clerk/Deputy Receiver of Taxes 53