HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2003-04-15,
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
TUESDAY, APRIL 15, 2003
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, April 15, 2003,
in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson (7:35 p.m.); Eva Hoffmann, Vice Chairperson;
George Conneman, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member (arrived @ 7:05
p.m., excused @ 8:13 p.m.); Larry Thayer, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member;
Kevin Talty, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Peter. Grossman,
Attorney for the Town; Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering (7:13 p.m.); Michael
Smith, Environmental Planner; Christine Balestra, Planner (7:05 p.m.).
EXCUSED. Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning.
ALSO PRESENT: Nancy Wells, Cornell University; Tony Ingraffea, 309 Cayuga Heights
Rd; Robert Drake, 354 Sheffield Rd; Connie Cole, 125 Hopkins Rd; Carol Chaplin, 84
East Lake St; Dean Shea, Tompkins /Cortland Homebuilders Association; Brian Howell,
Cornell University.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann declared the meeting duly opened at 7:03 p.m., and
accepted for the record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of
Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on April 7, 2003 and April 9, 2003,
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 April 9, 2003,
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann 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,
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7 :03 p.m. With no
persons present to be heard, Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the
meeting at 7:04 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR, Determination — Palmer 2 -Lot Subdivision, 211 Hayts
Road,
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7:04 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I am assuming that everyone on the board had a chance
to read all the papers we were provided with and to go and look at the property so that
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
we all start with the same basic information. Is the applicant for this project here
tonight? This would be the agent, Mr. Thaler, Is Dick Thaler here or Ms. Palmer here?
Mr. Kanter — Anybody from Richard Thaler's office?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I guess they're not here yet. I guess we can talk about it
ourselves until they come. We usually ask the applicant to present the project and for
this particular segment we talk about if there are any environmental concerns that we
need to consider. We can do that ourselves with the help of staff. Personally, from
looking at the papers I don't see that there are any negative environmental impacts.
Board Member Thayer — I am very familiar with the paperwork because I have to
abstain from this vote because my son is the one who is buying the property.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I see. Yes, it's a good idea that you abstain.
Board Member Conneman — Jon, did you have any concerns?
Mr. Kanter — No. The only thing that we really mentioned in the environmental
assessment form is that this is within the agricultural district number 2, but the
subdivision of the house off of the property will not affect the future potential of the
vacant land to continue being farmed. That was really the only environmental possible
issue that we saw.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Right. In the information that you provided us with it says
that there is an agreement that the land will continue to be farmed for at least the next
five years and perhaps beyond that. I also understand from this information that the
buyer of the house parcel has the option to buy the 12.83 acres that we saw on the map
that was provided to us...the survey map, but that is not part of this application.
Mr. Kanter — Right.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The only thing that is part of this application is the
subdivision of the 1.95 +/- parcel, which has the house from the whole 257 -acre parcel
that is owned by Miriam Palmer. Nobody has come yet, it looks like. Well, do you on
the board who are able to talk about it have anything you want to say at this point before
we hear what the applicant has to say?
Board Member Howe — No. It seems straightforward.
Mr. Kanter — This is one of those situations where the applicant found out kind of after of
the fact that they needed to come through subdivision approval because the house had
been advertised on the market for some time and they finally did find a buyer and had
set up a closing and only found out by us contacting them because we knew about the
transaction that they did have to come through the Planning Board. It is a pretty pro-
2
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
forma kind of thing. I would recommend as staff that we just go ahead and do the
approvals even if the applicant doesn't show up, but that is up to the board.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes. I would be inclined to do that, too. I also don't see
any problem. I had one question about the house. Maybe you, Larry, know something
about the house. Is it an old one?
Board Member Thayer — I know a lot about the house.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It is a rather large house, but it looks as if it might be an
old one initially.
Board Member Thayer — It is an old, two houses. It was built in the 1860's. There were
two house put together. It is really quite unique in that perspective. I don't know if you
have noticed, but there are two front doors.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I didn't think of the two front doors, but I noticed it looked
like two.
Board Member Thayer — You can't see it in the picture. It is kind of unique. There is a
step up and a step down upstairs and in the attic, but not on the main floor. So, as you
enter the house there are two huge rooms on each room of the foyer and a beautiful
stairway that goes upstairs. It is real nice house.
Board Member Mitrano — When was it re -done on the inside?
Board Member Thayer — Just basically kept up with painting and such. Do you have
any other questions about the house?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Just about the age. I would call for a vote on the SEQR.
Board Member Mitrano — I will move the motion.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You're moving it. Is there a second?
Board Member Howe — Second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All in favor say aye.
Board (not Board Member Thayer) — Aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any abstentions?
Board Member Thayer — Yes.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The vote is carried. There is no opposition.
3
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the meeting at 7:09 p.m.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -021- SEAR: Preliminary and Final Subdivision
Approval, Palmer Two -Lot Subdivision, 211 Hayts Road, Tax Parcel No. 24 =5 -7.
MOTION made by Tracy Mitrano, seconded by Rod Howe.
WHEREAS:
1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No, 24 -5 -7, Agricultural and R -15 Residence Districts. The proposal is to
subdivide off a 1.95 +/ acre parcel, which contains an existing house and shed,
from the 257 +/- acre parcel. Miriam L. Palmer, Owner /Applicant; Richard B,
Thaler, Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with
respect to Subdivision Approval, and
3. The Planning Board on April 15, 2003, has reviewed and accepted as adequate
a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and
Part 11 prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Map of
Survey Lands To Be Conveyed By Miriam L. Palmer, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins
County, New York, ° prepared by Robert S. Russler, Jr., Licensed Land Surveyor,
dated March 1, 2003, and other application materials, and
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: Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Thayer.
The motion was declared to be carried.
Ell
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed two -lot subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 24 -5 -7, Agricultural and Residence R -15 Districts. The proposal is
to subdivide off a 1.95 +1- acre parcel, which contains an existing house and shed,
from the 257 +l- acre parcel. Miriam L. Palmer, Owner /Applicants Richard B.
Thaler, Agent.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You noticed when you read the proposed main resolution
that there is an item there about... emphasizing the fact that this approval is just for the
1.95 -acre subdivision. Is there any more discussion that we can have at this point
about this? I can open the public hearing now at 7:10 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.
Connie Cole, 125 Hopkins Road — I live right across the street from where the
subdivision and farm is going to be. If I was understanding correctly, the applicant
requests to or is planning on farming for the next the five years.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That is the information that we got.
Ms. Cole — Do we happen to know what they will be farming? We are on a well up there
and I would like to know if they are going to go for dairy farming or is it going to be more
vegetation. Do we have any idea what that would be at this point?
Board Member Mitrano - Is that because of a concern that the well will be depleted
or...?
Ms. Cole — That and perhaps chemical. Our well is fed through that land.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, the information we have is that the parcel is
classified as a cattle farm by the Tompkins County Assessment Office. It is being
leased to a local farmer to be farmed for at least the next five years. That is all we
know, unless staff has any more information.
Mr. Kanter — Well, the other thing that I know and Mike, I don't know if you know
anything more about that particular property, but that site has already been leased out
to another local farmer and it has been basically used as hay fields or basically not
heavy crop production and not dairy farming, although it is still classified as a dairy farm
in the assessment rolls. I would imagine in that five -year agreement with that local
farmer that they would continue doing what they have been doing. But, again, this in a
County agricultural district, which gives farmers basic... certain rights to be able to...not
only rights to continue farming, but protections from adjacent residents so that there
aren't undue pressures of people living nearby. It is expected there would be farming
on the property. From the Town's viewpoint, lets hope there would be continuing
farming on the property.
5
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 67 2003
Ms. Cole — So, there are no plans to bring water or sewer up to that area at this time?
Mr. Kanter — Well, Dan happens to walk in at just the right time. My answer would be
no. Dan may have other ideas.
Mr. Walker — Whereever you want it, give me the money and we will build it.
Ms. Cole — That is what the cable company told us.
Mr. Kanter — That is not an area planned for water extensions at this point.
Ms. Cole — Okay. Thank you very much.
Board Member Mitrano — Thank you.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — No more questions?
Ms. Cole — Not right now.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay, but this is the opportunity, though. So if you do
have more questions, it might be a good idea to ask them right now.
Ms. Cole — Actually, no. I was just concerned that it would be subdivided and there
would be housing up there. I knew the Town wasn't bringing up water. Would that affect
our well? Would the whatever the farm is going to be, would that be affecting our well
because it did run dry a couple of times during a drought. I think you pretty much
answered my questions. Thank you for your time.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is there anybody else who like to comment on this
proposal? I am wondering whether I should keep the public hearing open in case the
applicant walks in, in a minute or so.
Mr. Kanter — If you have specific questions that you wanted to ask the applicant, but if
not, maybe the board would be willing to just go ahead and vote on it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. Then I will close the public hearing at 7:14 p.m.
I will accept a motion from somebody on the proposed resolution.
Board Member Howe — I'll make the motion.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. Second?
Board Member Talty — Second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you. All in favor say aye.
an
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board (not Board Member Thayer) — Aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any abstentions? Larry abstains. Any objections? The
motion is passed.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -022 - Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval,
Palmer Two -Lot Subdivision, 211 Hayts Road, Tax Parcel No. 24 -5 -7.
MOTION made by Kevin Talty, seconded by Rod Howe.
WHEREAS:
1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 24 -5 -7, Agricultural and R -15 Residence Districts. The proposal is to
subdivide off a 1.95 +/- acre parcel, which contains an existing house and shed,
from the 257 +/- acre parcel. Miriam L. Palmer, Owner /Applicant; Richard B.
Thaler, Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
lead agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has
on April 15, 2003, made a negative determination of environmental significance,
after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 11 prepared by the
Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 15, 2003, has reviewed
and accepted as adequate a survey map entitled "Map of Survey Lands To Be
Conveyed By Miriam L. Palmer, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York,"
prepared by Robert S. Russler, Jr., Licensed Land Surveyor, dated March 1,
2003, and other application materials,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and
Final Subdivision Checklists, having determined from the materials presented
that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of
subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision
Approval for the proposed two -lot subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road in order
to subdivide off the 1.95 acre "House Parcel" from the 257 +/- acre parcel, as
shown on the survey map entitled "Map of Survey Lands To Be Conveyed By
Miriam L. Palmer, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York," prepared by
7
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Robert S. Russler, Jr., Licensed Land Surveyor, dated March 1, 2003, subject to
the following conditions:
a. This approval is only for subdividing off the 1.95 acre "House Parcel" from
Tax Parcel No. 24 -5 -7, and in no way is intended to imply approval for the
12.83 acre "Future Parcel" shown on the survey map, and
b. Submission of one original or mylar copy of the survey map to be recorded
and three dark -line prints of the survey map, all signed and sealed by the
licensed surveyor who prepared the survey with the required surveyor's
certificate (as specified in the Final Subdivision Plat Checklist), for signing
by the Planning Board Chair,
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board finds that there is no need for any park land reservation
created by this proposed subdivision, and hereby waives the requirement for any park
land reservation.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Thayer.
The motion was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination: Drake 2 -Lot Subdivision, Mecklenburg
Road.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7:15 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is Mr. Drake here? All right, if you would please step and
tell us what this is about? Please give us your name and address.
Robert Drake, 354 Sheffield Road.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Since you are quite soft spoken like I am, would you mind
turning the microphone very close to you so the equipment will pick you up? Please tell
us what you planning to do.
Mr. Drake — This parcel of land is a narrow strip on the upper side of the farm. It is quite
difficult to work with. It is wet and we are unable to drain it because the sister owns the
lot directly below it. There is no way that I can drain it across there to make it more
productive. The mother, which is an elderly person in Syracuse who recently sold her
home. The sister and brother are planning to build a house between the two of them.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
They don't want to put her into a nursing home, which I don't blame them for that. That
approached me about the strip below the house, which I said no because I'm working all
that. I said I have a grown up piece above their house that is difficult to work and
would consider selling that. They became interested in buying it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We got various maps here. I had a little trouble locating
1362. Is that the place called "Hub's Place "?
Mr. Drake — No. That is above it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. I think I see it.
Mr. Drake — There is a brick house, a large brick house just before you get to the lot on
the right hand side.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. Do you know of anything that would be of
environmental concern? You mention the drainage problem for farming purposes.
Mr. Drake — The drainage becomes a problem when you are planting early crops and
trying to get a decent yield. When you got a house put in there, you are not too worried
about the grass in the spring or the drainage. The drainage is good, but as far as top
lands, it is a narrow strip and with my equipment it is hard to work it. That is basically
why I decided it wasn't a too important part.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Does anyone else on the board have any questions?
Staff any comments?
Mr. Smith — Nothing to add. No.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, I guess we will go on to the SEQR resolution then.
Board Member Thayer — I'll move the SEAR.
Board Member Conneman — I'll second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Good. All in favor say aye.
Board — Aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any abstentions? Any opposition? Everyone is in favor.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -023: SEQR: Preliminary & Final Subdivision Approval,
Drake 2 -Lot Subdivision, Mecklenburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 274-15.2.
9
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by George Conneman.
WHEREAS.
1. This action involves consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed two -lot subdivision located on Mecklenburg Road to the west of
1362 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -15.2, Agricultural
District. The proposal is to subdivide off a 4.04 +A acre parcel from the 95.84 +A
acre parcel for a new residential lot. Robert A. Drake, Owner /Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with
respect to Subdivision Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, on April 15, 2003, has reviewed a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by
Town Planning staff, a map entitled, "Map of Survey Parcel of Land to be
Conveyed by Robert Drake'; prepared by Robert S. Russler Jr., L.S., dated
March 14, 2003, and other application materials, and
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: Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed two -lot subdivision located on Mecklenburg Road to the west of
1362 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -15.2, Agricultural
District. The proposal is to subdivide off a 4.04 +l- acre parcel from the 95.84 +l-
acre parcel for a new residential lot. Robert A. Drake, Owner /Applicant.
it$]
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We got an agricultural data statement for this, so we
know what is going to be growing here. We do have a public hearing on this matter,
which I will open at this point.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened the public hearing at 7:21 p.m., and asked if any
members of the public wished to be heard. With no persons present to be heard, Vice
Chairperson Hoffmann closed the public hearing at 7:22 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Are you ready to vote?
Board — Yes.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay. Lets have a motion.
Board Member Conneman — I'll move it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Thank you
Board Member Mitrano — I'll second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay
resolution? Okay. All in favor say aye.
Board — Aye.
And a second?
Any additions or changes to the proposed
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any abstention or opposition? None. Thank you. That
was passed. Thank you very much.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -024: Preliminary & Final Subdivision Approval, Drake
2 -Lot Subdivision, Mecklenburg Road, Tax Parcel No. 27- 145.2.
MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded Tracy Mitrano.
WHEREAS:
1. This action involves consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed two -lot subdivision located on Mecklenburg Road to the west of
1362 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -15.2, Agricultural
District. The proposal is to subdivide off a 4.04 +/- acre parcel from the 95.84 +/-
acre parcel for a new residential lot. Robert A. Drake, Owner /Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
lead agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has,
on April 15, 2003, made a negative determination of environmental significance,
after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
11
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part ll prepared by
Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board, has held a public hearing on April 15, 2003, and has
reviewed a plat entitled, "Map of Survey Parcel of Land to be Conveyed by
Robert Drake'; prepared by Robert S. Russler Jr., L.S., dated March 14, 2003)
and other application materials, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
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 significant alteration of the purpose of
subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board he)
Approval for the proposed 24ot
1 -15.2 located on Mecklenburg
Parcel of Land to be Conveyed
Jr., L. S., dated March 14, 2003)
�eby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision
subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27-
Road as shown on a map titled "Map of Survey
by Robert Drake'; prepared by Robert S. Russler
subject to the following conditions:
a. Submission of the Surveyor's Certificate, signed and sealed by a
registered land surveyor to the effect that (1) the plat represents a survey
made by him, (2) the plat is a correct representation of all exterior
boundaries of the land surveyed and the subdivision of it, (3) all
monuments indicated on the plat actually exist and their location, size, and
material are correctly shown, and (4) the requirements of these
regulations and New York State laws relating to subdividing and surveying
have been complied with, and
b. Submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an
original or mylar copy of the plat and three dark -lined prints, all signed and
sealed by the by the licensed surveyor who prepared the survey, prior to
filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt
of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
The Planning Board finds that there is no need for any park land reservation created by
this proposed subdivision, and hereby waives the requirement for any park land
reservation at this time.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
12
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of
Appeals regarding a sign variance to allow a 24 square foot (3' x 8') neighborhood
identification sign on the south side of East King Road to the east of the future
Southwoods Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 46=11A5.43, Residence District
R -30. Southwoods Associates, Owner /Applicant; Carol Chaplin, Agent.
Carol Chaplin, 84 East Lake Road — I am here as the applicant/agent for Southwood
Associates.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You have brought us pictures of signs other than the one
you are proposing.
Ms. Chaplin — Yes. I received a packet in the mail basically saying that Michael Smith,
the environmental planner, felt that the sign was too big. I just wanted to share some of
the thinking that went on as far as other signs in the same range on King Road for your
consideration.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I'm sure it's not just felt that it was too big; it is too big
according to the Town of Ithaca Law.
Ms. Chaplin — We were looking for something that was visually large enough so that
people driving by would see a nice sign to a development. We are open to what you
might consider as an alternative to that.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Please tell us what you are thinking... what you are
proposing.
Ms. Chaplin — I am still hoping it will be larger than the six square foot.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Do you want to tell us anything more about the handout
you gave us? See attachment #1.
Ms. Chaplin — Those were just..] was wondering... obviously it looks like some
precedence were set for three by eight foot signs. Those are on the same
road... residential on the first past. The second page is schools on King Road, but the
sign sizes were larger than the six square feet. I don't know, again, how those
decisions are made.
Mr. Kanter — I can clarify a little bit about that, if you will. Both of the signs on the front
page that you took are apartment developments and they are in what we call the
multiple residence district. In our regulated sign provision and the sign regulations, you
can have one identification sign not exceeding 24 square feet in area for a multiple
13
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
residence district. The Southwoods development is not in a multiple residence district.
It is in R -30 residence zone.
Board Member Mitrano — Why am I blanking on where Southwoods Drive is?
Mr. Kanter — It doesn't exist yet.
Ms. Chaplin — It will be between Troy and Coddington Roads on the south side.
Board Member Mitrano — What are you going to do with the power station?
Mr. Walker — It is on the other side of the road.
Board Member Mitrano — Thank you.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is the entrance planned to be more or less across from
the entrance to the power station?
Ms. Chaplin — No. It is further down closer to Coddington Road.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, we are not considering that. We are just
considering the sign tonight.
Board Member Mitrano — Can you bring it down to the size that conforms for this kind of
development?
Ms. Chaplin — Which would be...?
Board Member Thayer — Six square feet.
Ms. Chaplin — It brings it to two by three.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — And as I understand it, that is the actual lettering. The
structure that supports the sign is extra beyond that. Is that right or does that have to
be included?
Mr. Smith — The sign includes everything. The frame is included.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay.
Board Member Mitrano — Is that okay?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think that's what we would all like to probably see. I
haven't heard any other comments.
14
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Mr. Smith — There is one example on the sheets that were included in the packet. The
Chase Farm sign, if you look at just the yellow part of the sign, it is 3.6 square feet. But,
in the sign regulations, if you measured it according to those, you have to include the
whole stone structure because it is that one piece. Then, that brings it up to 19.5
square feet. It depends on what you are actually looking at for the sign.
Board Member Mitrano — Was there a variance given for that or did someone just...?
Oh, there was a variance.
Mr. Smith — I'm sure there was.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, all these signs have gone up at various times and I
think that we have learned from making decisions and seeing what the results look
like ... it also depends a lot on the coloring of the sign, I think. Something that is stark
white and lit, is much more objectionable, in my opinion anyway, than something that's
a little more subdued in coloring... like some of these signs that we see. The Deer Run
sign and the Chase Farms signs are stone and wood colored, and then they don't stick
in your eyes quite the same way.
Board Member Conneman — You want the sign large enough to sell lots, but not...
Ms. Chaplin — Not just sell lots, but people wanting to live there. This will be their
neighborhood sign. This is the entrance to their development, so we want it to be
aesthetically appealing as well.
Board Member Mitrano — What if the applicant came with a sign imbedded in a structure
like the Chase Farm one?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think we would have to see it before we could judge
whether its...
Board Member Thayer — If it were bigger, then they would have to get a variance.
Board Member Mitrano — Would that be more likely? It might be something she could
consider. I mean it is just down the road.
Board Member Talty — I think all your preparatory material is great. I think before,
maybe we could rule on anything... we' re kind of cemented in this two by three. I mean
if you were to come with a proposal of this is what the actual sign is going to look like,
then I think that would give more credence to our vote. So you could proceed with a
variance or something of that sort. Right now we see all these different things and it
looks as though they have received variances of some sort. I would hope they did. But,
looking at all the different dimensions, I would think it would follow suite for you to bring
in an example of what you are proposing.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I did...
15
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board Member Talty — Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see that in my packing.
Mr. Smith — I guess in the write up that I put together I didn't really have a problem with
the actual looks of the sign. The graphics looked rather attractive, it's just that it was
rather large.
Board Member Thayer — It is just the size. We can't control the graphics.
Ms. Chaplin — Is two by five in the ballpark? We are aesthetically trying to
look... aesthetically if it was still a rectangular shape more so than a square.
Board Member Conneman — You said there would be a possibility of making a different
sized sign. Instead of 24 square feet, the bottom sign is 8.25 square feet.
Board Member Mitrano — That is not terribly small.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That has some text above and below the Montessori
name. You have a rather longer word ... Southwoods. I could imagine the sign being
less high than two feet, and then it could be longer instead. If it is one or one and a half
feet high, it could be longer and still stay within the limit and have an attractive lettering
for such a long word.
Ms. Chaplin — So, what do you recommend?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I'm saying that it would be a good idea to look at different
formats for the sign. You said you would rather have a rectangular one than a squarish
one.
Ms. Chaplin — Which we have already. It is a matter of just sizing down this sign. I
didn't hear any objections to the design as much as the size.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That is right. I did have a couple of questions, if we can
switch for a moment to the short environmental assessment form. It says under point 5,
each lot includes water, sewer, electric, natural gas, and cable services. Is that true at
this point?
Board Member Mitrano — I have an even dumber question to ask.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, I would like to have an answer to this one first.
Ms. Chaplin — As far as I know, yes.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — It's there at present moment?
Mr. Walker — The utilities have to be constructed.
16
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — But is says, "includes ".
Mr. Walker — The approved subdivision plans and utility plans require those things to be
built. They have not built them yet, but they are planning to. That led into that
discussion we had about different sewer lines along Coddington Road a couple months
ago.
Board Member Mitrano — All right. I'm getting old and with every child more of my
memory disappears. When did we approve the Southwoods? I don't even recall.
Mr. Kanter — You don't remember?
Mr. Walker — 1989.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I have one more point for the SEQR form. On point 10, it
lists the different present land uses in the vicinity. Residential is check - marked, but I
think we should check mark park, forest and open space because it is adjacent to the
Eldridge Wilderness. I don't know what the electric substation would be classified
as ... commercial?
Mr. Kanter — Utility under other.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Maybe someone should checkmark other. I think it would
just make it more complete as an application form.
Board Member Mitrano — So when is this going in?
Ms. Chaplin— Soon, we hope.
Board Member Mitrano — And you have plans to develop all 43?
Ms. Chaplin — Yes.
Board Member Mitrano — And how far ... I know back to the sign, but bring me up to
speed here. So this goes from King ... will go adjacent to where Troy goes up?
Chairperson Fred Wilcox arrives.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, hello.
Board Member Mitrano — Check out the suit.
Mr. Kanter — What an honor.
Chairperson Wilcox — Sorry.
17
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board Member Talty — Fred Wilcox arrives.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — This is Fred Wilcox, who is our regular chairman, so I will
turn it over to him. ( Chairperson Wilcox indicates that he wishes Vice Chairperson
Hoffmann to continue.) Maybe I will finish this one, and then you can take over. How
about that? All right.
Board Member Mitrano — So where does this go?
Ms. Chaplin — If you pass NYSEG and then several hundred feet...
Board Member Mitrano — Does it go up paralleling Troy Road, behind that area there?
Is that correct?
Mr. Kanter — It is down the hill from Troy Road,
Ms. Balestra — Here's Coddington Road. There's Troy Road and East King
Road ... (comments not audible).
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Most of it is interior to the road.
Board Member Mitrano — Thank you, that was very helpful.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We have been asked to forward a recommendation to the
Zoning Board of Appeals and we have a proposed resolution in front of us. It asks us to
come up with some recommended square footage to insert here. I don't know.
Board Member Thayer — I say six square feet.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes, I'm inclined to do that actually.
Board Member Thayer — That is the way it is.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Since we haven't seen what it might look like in a smaller
format, I think that is the best way to handle it.
Board Member Thayer — Just put it on a post rather than in a stone foundation. It will be
a larger sign. In other words, if you put it on a stone like this one sign, then they have to
include the entire formation of the stone and everything.
Ms. Chaplin — So, don't do that?
Board Member Thayer — Don't do that.
Board Member Mitrano — May I throw a monkey wrench into that concept, Larry? I'm
sorry. I would be willing to consider out of fairness because it is on the same road for
im
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
something that was in a stone structure so long as the sign conformed, but then the rest
of it was just filler. That is not a guarantee and I'm the only voice on it. It sort of seems
fair that on the same darn road...
Mr. Kanter — Meaning the part that has the actual lettering in it?
Board Member Mitrano — Say that again, Jonathan?
Mr. Kanter —
Do you
mean that the part
that has the lettering
boxed
in
it would be no
more than six
square,
but that the rest of
it could be something
bigger,
to
be defined?
Board Member Mitrano — Yes. A nice, stone kind of structure.
Board Member Talty — I would follow suit with that.
Board Member Thayer — So, this Chase Farm one does not meet the code?
Mr. Smith — The way it would be measured is for the whole stone structure, even though
just the yellow area has the sign on it.
Board Member Thayer — It is actually 19.5 square feet.
Mr. Smith — Right.
Board Member Mitrano — I say that out of fairness, but I also say that out of ... I mean
that is a lot of investment to put up the stone. It is more than just a post in the ground.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The reason I think that might not work so well is the
Chase Farm sign can be accommodated on a fairly square sign. This one is elongated,
so the base might have to be fairly wide and then high enough to be seen. Maybe it is
not so practical. You could perhaps come up with a better solution. I'm sure staff will
be very helpful to you in telling you exactly how to configure it to get the right square
footage because they are experts.
Board Member Conneman — Tracy, you are suggesting that this is more sophisticated
than a small sign with something else around it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. Do you have anything more that you would like
to ask us or comment on?
Ms. Chaplin — Just clarification. The next step is a recommendation to the Zoning
Board for a six square foot sign?
Mr. Smith — Well, the six square feet meets the requirements.
Board Member Talty — If you went above that, you would have to go for a variance,
correct?
19
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Ms. Chaplin — Meaning if you wanted to something in addition to...
Board Member Mitrano — If it is just the sign itself in that amount, you are all set. You
don't need to come back, but if you want it in something...
Ms. Chaplin — But if we wanted to do something, we'd have to do that by next Monday,
which is the zoning meeting.
Mr. Smith — If you needed a variance for it, you would still have to come back to this
board to get a recommendation.
Board Member Mitrano — Like you are starting all over again.
Mr. Kanter — But, if you decided to go with a six square foot sign and not pursue a
variance, you could basically withdraw your Zoning Board application and then just
bring your design in to Andy Frost and he would issue a sign permit for that.
Board Member Conneman — Jonathan, she could go to the Zoning Board of Appeals...?
Mr. Kanter — You are giving a recommendation to the Zoning Board. If you recommend
against the variance and recommend that nothing larger than a six square foot sign be
allowed, the applicant can still go to the Zoning Board and pursue the variance and the
Zoning Board of their own deliberations could override your recommendation because
you are just giving a recommendation. Just so the applicant is aware of that, if you
wanted to pursue it and I don't think there is anything in the sign regulations that there
has to be a positive recommendation on the variance. So, the Zoning Board could act
on their own, overriding your recommendation. Just like we sometimes override the
County's recommendations to us.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, they could do that in any case, right?
Mr. Kanter —Yes.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — What is the board's desire at this point?
Board Member Thayer — It does say total sign area. That could be confusing.
Mr. Kanter — Well, that's the way...
Board Member Thayer — Well, when you look at the Chase Farm sign ... if the top of that
wasn't there, it wouldn't be a sign. So, to me, that is the sign area.
Board Member Mitrano — Oh, we are doing legislative interpretation.
20
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Mr. Kanter — The sign area is pretty well defined in the ordinance, although it is
complicated to figure it out. Basically, what it means that the full area that the lettering
is on.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I think you can hear that we would like to see a smaller
sign. It is really up to you to come in with a design, which is smaller. We can't design
something for you.
Ms. Chaplin — Can I ask about Deer Run, which is 14 square feet. That sign must have
gotten a variance.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any signs that are larger than the requirement, unless
they were built before we had a sign ordinance.
Mr. Kanter — They may have preceded this current ordinance.
Male Voice — Would the board consider if we kept exactly the same design and
decreased the area?
Board Member Mitrano — Sure, if that brings it down. It is not the content or the design
of the size, it is the size.
Male Voice — It is currently 24 square feet. So if we keep the same design, but reduce it
by 50 percent...
Chairperson Wilcox — No, if you shrink both dimensions by half, it makes it one -fourth
the size.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Twelve square feet. There is something about, this is my
personal opinion... there is something about the proportions of the drawing of the trees
above the letter, which maybe could be reduced somewhat to bring it down a little bit so
that that part of the design is not so big. That would reduce the size of the sign and you
would see the lettering just as well. Do you understand what I'm saying? That would
be my personal preference. It doesn't speak for the rest of the people on the board.
Male Voice — (not audible)
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — If is it twelve square feet, it is twice as large as what the
law permits.
Board Member Thayer — The area Southwoods, I think is okay without the trees around
it.
Board Member Mitrano — It is very symbolic.
Board Member Thayer — It is approximately one by six or two by six, whatever.
21
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The word itself says, "woods" and you have the trees
there. So, in some ways you don't need to have the drawing of the trees on the sign.
Board Member Conneman — You could plant trees behind it.
Male Voice — Actually, we were going to do that.
Board Member Conneman — That maybe more symbolic than anything else you could
have.
Male Voice — (not audible)
Board Member Conneman — I think that is a great idea, put the trees behind it, smaller
sign, trees behind it. A redwood sign can be very pretty.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Are we willing to put a number in there other than six
square feet based on what they have just suggested?
Board Member Talty — I'm all for that.
Board Member Howe — I guess I'm willing as well.
Board Member Conneman — You would go for a little bigger sign with trees in back.
Board Member Talty — No question. I think they have done all their homework. They
have a beautiful design. They have come prepared with other signs in the area that are
obviously bigger than two by three.
Board Member Mitrano — So, how big? Twelve? Ten? Eight?
Board Member Thayer — Well, Jonathan told us why those signs were bigger.
Board Member Talty — Well, that's true, but nonetheless ... I mean we are talking about
many units ... for somebody to drive pass that everyday and look at a two by three sign,
I'm not thrilled with that at all. That is my personal opinion.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Right, but it doesn't have to be two by three. It could be
one by six.
Board Member Talty — Six square feet is way too small for that type of facility. I'm not
saying we need a billboard out front, but I would be in favor of a slightly larger sign than
what is on the current...
Board Member Mitrano — Give me a number, Kevin.
040A,
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Board Member Thayer — That's the problem.
Board Member Talty — Well, just looking at the signs ... I don't see anything wrong with
Deer Run signs.
Board Member Howe — So, you would be willing to say twelve feet?
Board Member Talty — Yeah, I would be willing to double it, myself. I think larger than
that ... I think we need to meet somewhere half way. I think that that is a legitimate half
way.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Mike, do you have any comments?
Mr. Smith — Nothing to add. That is why I left it blank. I didn't have a specific number in
mind, either.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Jon?
Mr. Kanter — I think something in the range of the Deer Run sign is probably reasonable.
It is about fourteen or plus. Actually, it is kind of a similar shape.
Board Member Howe — I like his proposal, if they have it at twelve square feet.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. Lets put in twelve square feet.
Board Member Conneman — With trees behind it.
Chairperson Wilcox — I move the motion with twelve square feet.
Board Member Conneman — I'll second it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann 7- Any more discussion? All in favor say aye.
Board — Aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any abstentions or objections?
Board Member Talty — Now that we have done that particular twelve feet, do they have
to go for a variance?
Mr. Kanter —Yes.
Board Member Hoffmann — I forgot to open the public hearing on this matter. Is there
anybody here who wants to address us on this matter? I guess there wasn't.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. and closed the
public hearing at 7:51 p.m.
23
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 61 2003
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 =025: Recommendation to Town of Ithaca Zoning
Board of Appeals, Sign Variance - Southwood, East King Road (Southwoods
Drive).
MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by George Conneman.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
hereby finds that the proposed 24 square foot neighborhood identification sign appears
to be significantly larger than other similar signs in the Town and would be out of
character for the neighborhood and community, and it appears that the overall goal for
the proposed sign could be achieved with a smaller sign,
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board,
acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, recommends to the Zoning Board of
Appeals the request for a sign variance for a 24 square foot freestanding neighborhood
sign, where neighborhood identification signs in a residential district cannot exceed 6
square feet in size, be denied,
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board,
acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, recommends to the Zoning Board of
Appeals that a sign variance for a freestanding neighborhood identification sign on the
south side of East King Road to the east of the future Southwoods Drive, with an area
not to exceed 12 square feet, where neighborhood identification signs in a Residential
District cannot exceed 6 square feet in size, be approved, with the following conditions:
a. The proposed sign shall not exceed 12 square feet in total sign area, as defined
in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, and
b. The proposed sign shall not be illuminated, and
c. A revised sign detail drawing showing the new dimensions of the sign be
submitted for review and approval of the Director of Planning and Director of
Building and Zoning, prior to the issuance of a sign permit.
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.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann - Okay, Fred.
Chairperson Wilcox - Why don't I just stay here, then everybody has to shift down.
24
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right.
AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination: Lakeside Nursing Home Garden Addition,
1229 Trumansburg Road.
Board Member Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 7:53 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I was out there. It took me a while before I figured out
which wall was on the drawing, but I did it in the end. Well, we will start with the
environmental review. There are three of you there. Will you please introduce
yourselves, names and addresses?
Nancy Wells, Department of Design and Environmental Analysis at Cornell.
Dean Shea, President of the Tompkins Cortland Homeowners Association. I live in
Lansing.
Brian Howell, Cornell Public Service Center.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You are going to have to speak up and move the
microphone between you as you speak. Is there something that you need to tell us as
far as environmental problems? I can't imagine... it seems to me that this is a positive
thing environmentally.
Mr. Shea — The only problem is that there is a parking lot there now and residents of
Lakeside Nursing home have a view of the parking lot. That is the only environmental
factor that we are aware of that needs to be abated.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You know, as I was looking at these materials, I have a
vague memory that something like this was proposed earlier or maybe it was some little
bit of garden by the entrance that was done not too long ago that we looked at. Is that
possible?
Ms. Balestra — It is possible. Not in the specific loading area, but in the general vicinity.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — All right. I was trying to see if I had any comments on the
assessment form and I don't. Anybody else? Okay, are we ready to vote on the SEQR
resolution then?
Board Member Thayer — I'll move the SEAR.
Board Member Conneman — I'll second it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann - Thank you. All in favor say aye.
Board — Aye.
25
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — No abstentions or oppositions.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the meeting at 7:55 p.m.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -026: SEQR
Lakeside Nursing Home - Garden Project,
Tax Parcel No. 26 -4 -46.1.
Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval,
1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca
MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by George Conneman.
WHEREAS:
1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the
proposed conversion of a portion of the loading area into a garden at Lakeside
Nursing Home located at 1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 26 -4 -46.1, Residence District R -15. The proposed garden will be located on
the southeast side of the building and includes a walkway, sitting areas, a tool
shed, open lawn, and various plantings. Peregrine Companies, Owner; Dean
Shea, President, Tompkins County Builders and Remodelers Association,
Applicant/Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with
respect to Site Plan Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, on April 15, 2003, 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 plan entitled "Lakeside Nursing &
Rehabilitation Center, Garden Design 1," dated June, 2002, and prepared by
Mari Mitchell, and other application materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan 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, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
26
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 69 2003
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for
the proposed conversion of a portion of the loading dock area into a garden at
Lakeside Nursing Home located at 1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 264-46.1, Residence District RA 5. The proposed garden will be
located on the southeast side of the building and includes a walkway, sitting
areas, a tool shed, open lawn, and various plantings. Peregrine Companies,
Owners Dean Shea, President, Tompkins County Builders and Remodelers
Association, Applicant/Agent.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened the public hearing at 7:55 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Would you please tell us some more of what you are
planning to do?
Ms. Wells — I guess I could give you 30 seconds of history. The project started about
two years ago. It was the proposal of Avery? who is an undergrad at Cornell. She is
the co- director of the elderly partnership of the Cornell public service center. She
received the Robinson Apell Humanitarian Award for her proposal and she called this
project "Ithaca 9s Eden". Brian and I kind of picked up the baton from her. Brian
received a community partnership award grant for the project and I received a faculty,
fellows and service award for the project. We made a pitch to the Home Builders last
fall and proposed that they work with us to put together a blitz bill, essentially trying to
get the basic infrastructure in place, a tool shed, a trellis, window boxes and so forth.
So, Dean has been working with us for the last six months or so on that. Another
partner is Charlie Mazza, who is a horticulture cooperative extension associate in
horticulture. So he's kind of the plant guy.
Our proposal, hopefully, is fairly well described on your handout. The spaces at the
top ... the landscape plan was done by Marty Mitchell, a Cornell landscape graduate.
This initial plan that is on the front has been modified somewhat. So you see on the
back the same figure that is posted up here. It is a little less pretty, but a little more
accurate.
So, what we are proposing to do is to remove some asphalt in the current parking lot
space and it is actually not a legal parking area so we are not eliminating parking. That
is not an issue. So, we are removing asphalt in some spaces, erecting a tool shed, a
trellis, and window boxes below the residents' windows and putting up a fence, which
sort of divides the space.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Could I interrupt you and ask you to point out on the
drawing what you are doing? I know that creates a problem with microphone picking up
what you are saying. Maybe that mike could be pointed in her direction there. That way
27
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
we can see a little better because I had looked at the earlier plan and now I am seeing
something different. I would like to hear you explain it.
Ms. Wells — This wall corresponds to the wall that you see in this picture. This is
residents' room and this is the back wall. So it is this corner in the photograph that we
are talking about. So, there is a door here and a door here. The fence will come out
ten feet starting from the edge of this large window and then cut diagonally across the
space. Then cut in here. This area would remain asphalt and then this pathway would
be asphalt. The center here would be grass. Then plantings on this edge, a bench
here, and plantings on this edge. Raised beds would be up here in the asphalt space.
These are wheelchair accessible raised beds so the residents can participate in the
space. This is a trellis coming out from the large door.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — An overhead trellis, then?
Ms. Wells — Yes. This is more plantings under the large window.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — You mentioned a bench. Is there only one bench?
Ms. Wells — There is another bench, but I don't know where it is.
Mr. Shea — It is located under the trellis.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Isn't that a little short on benches for this population?
Ms. Wells — A lot of people are in wheelchairs.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Right, but if they have visitors coming to see them, which
I assume is how they would use this space in good weather.
Ms. Wells — It is possible that we will incorporate additional benches as we go. Those
are the two that we have planned for at this point.
Mr. Walker — The large door in the corner, the white door ... what is that used for now?
Ms. Wells — That is used for deliveries twice a week.
Mr. Walker — So, there will be deliveries through the garden then.
Ms. Wells — Right. There is a gate here. This remains asphalt. The delivery truck will
back up here and come through this gate to the same door. Then the other gate is at
this end.
Mr. Walker — You mean, the truck is not actually going to back up to the door, though.
He'll stop at the gate, basically.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Ms. Wells — Right. In the photograph he would back kind of diagonally along the fence.
Then walk through the gate.
Mr. Walker — What kind of deliveries are those?
Ms. Wells — I believe SYSCO.
Board Member Talty — Gloves.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — How often would deliveries come here?
Ms. Wells — Twice a week.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — During the day, or...?
Ms. Wells — Usually during the day.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So it wouldn't be too disturbing for the people using this
space. The earlier plan looked like the garden came all the way across the back wall up
to those doors that you indicated would be available to the truck.
Ms. Wells — The basic footprint was the same. The orientation is maybe confusing
because it is kind of backwards. This matches that. So this is wall is just past the
window.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, I see. I thought that there was some asphalt left to
the left of that for the trucks to come up to the door. The drawing from here.,Ahe tines
are very faint. It is a little hard to see.
Ms. Wells — The fence is here and the asphalt that is over here will remain. Nothing is
changing with that part.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — How would the fire access work with this new layout?
Mr. Shea — Well, we specifically sat down and talked with Ray Wheaton on fire access.
The only concern that he had and I spoke with him again this morning because I
thought that might be a concern that the board would have. The only issue for either
fire trucks or delivery is trying to get from the main entryway into this area here. The
delivery trucks will come down and then they will be able to back up, which they
currently do now. The fire truck, he wants to be able to nose in. So, they are going to
make a swing and come in here. I discussed this specifically with Ray and what do you
want to see. So we have a couple options there. We could look at putting in a specific
gate for the truck. We could look at making a couple of the sections removable. We
would still have a post to deal with. Our specific discussion down in the conference
room down at the fire station was he has guys with saws and he doesn't have any
problem with getting through a fence and some shrubs. So, if it comes down to it, he is
29
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
saying it is no problem for his guys to get out and cut things down in order to get in.
The background that he gave me that he gave us, during that discussion was this is a
sprinkled building.
Mr. Walker — And they don't usually get that close to the building anyhow.
Mr. Shea —Yeah. He's not worried about getting his truck up here. He's worried about
if the nose of my truck gets here, he might have to park on the fence. At that point, if
they have a working fire here, nobody is concerned about the fence or the plantings.
They can be replaced.
Ms. Wells — They liked the idea of having the shed closer to the building.
Mr. Shea — Yes. That was the other thing. When we did the actual physical layout on
the asphalt on Saturday to come with this new design, it seemed to work a little better in
the actual space there. The shed never really had a space and we were considering
putting it in the middle. At Ray's suggestion, we moved it in this direction so when they
pull that truck in; the shed is not here for them to bump into.
Ms. Balestra — Even though it is a different site plan somewhat, there was a letter that
you guys should have from Ray Wheaton telling you his concerns and non - concerns.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I still can't reconcile what you are saying about the
plantings being the same along that northern wall. To me, it looks like in this drawing
that we were provided with ... it looks like the doors of the buildings are here and the
plantings go all the way up to them.
Ms. Wells — What you just pointed out is a gate right here.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, I see. A gate into the garden area. Okay. Then it
works. Thank you.
Board Member Howe — It seems like a wonderful amenity and a neat partnership.
Board Member Thayer —Agreed.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any other suggestions?
Chairperson Wilcox — I am concerned about whether the drawings are fully detailed
enough. Are the drawings sufficient so we know where the plantings are going to go
and where the tool shed is going to go, where the benches are going to go?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — To me, this is a sketch rather than a drawing.
Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah. I'm looking at what is up there and I'm looking at these two
and I'm not exactly sure if we have a final plan or not that can be used by the Town.
30
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Board Member Mitrano — What does the Town think?
Ms. Balestra — There is a condition in the resolution that the applicant needs to submit
the revised plans showing the final location of the tool shed, but we could add a final
plan showing the location of the plantings as well.
Chairperson Wilcox — Benches, tool shed...
Ms. Balestra — For approval by the Director of
building permit. Is the board comfortable with that?
Board Member Mitrano — That is fine with me.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm also aware
student power is gone soon, correct?
Mr. Shea — Yes.
Planning prior to the issuance of a
that this came together pretty quickly. Your
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — How do you feel about the number of benches? Are two
benches enough?
Chairperson Wilcox — Two is better than zero.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Oh, yes. I would not approve something that had zero
benches for something like this.
Ms. Wells — It is partly not our ... who wants to donate benches since we have a very
limited budget. Right now we have two.
Mr. Kanter — Benches are the kind of thing that could be added without having to come
back to the board.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I just want to be sure that there is an understanding that it
is something that is desirable to have. If the residents are to enjoy it, I think there has to
be places to sit. It is not just to look at from the inside.
Board Member Talty — How concerned are the applicants that this facility will continue to
operate?
Mr. Kanter — As a nursing home you mean?
Board Member Talty — Yes.
Board Member Mitrano — I don't imagine these folks are in control of that.
31
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board Member Talty — I don't think they are in control of it, but you are going to go
through a lot of work and time and money. I just thought I would ask that question
before we vote. Obviously, you can follow what has been transpiring with Lakeside
through the court.
Ms. Wells — We're definitely aware of it. We have invested a lot of time in this project
and we feel that it would improve the quality of life for the residents so we'll just do what
we can do and hope it has a long -term impact and not a short-term impact.
Board Member Talty — Good.
Board Member Thayer — Super.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Yes. I hereby close the public hearing at 8:09 p.m. Does
anybody want to suggest the wording to add to the resolution?
Mr. Kanter — We have that already.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I can read that actually. It says under point 2a,
"submission of a revised plan showing the final location of the tool shed, benches,
trellis, and plantings for approval by the Director of Planning prior to the issuance of a
building permit ". Do I have a motion?
Board Member Howe — I'll make the motion.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Okay, thank you. A second?
Board Member Talty — Second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any more discussion? Any more comments from staff?
Do you have anything more you want to add?
Mr. Shea — We would just like this thing to go ahead.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So would I. It sounds nice. Okay.
Ms. Wells — Just so we know what timeframe we are working on, what is the turn
around time? Do we need to get this to you tomorrow to build on the 26tnq
Ms. Balestra — The sooner the better, for us. It is not really so much us; it is the timeline
of the Building Department and for them to issue permits. They are kind of backed up a
little bit.
Mr. Shea — We have spoken with Andy.
Ms. Balestra — Then you may not have too much of a problem.
0
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — The motion has been moved and seconded. All in favor
say aye.
Board — Aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — No abstentions and no opposition it looks like.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -027: Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval, Lakeside
Nursing Home - Garden Project, 1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 26 -4 -46.1.
MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Kevin Talty.
WHEREAS:
1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the
proposed conversion of a portion of the loading area into a garden at Lakeside
Nursing Home located at 1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 26-4 -46.1, Residence District R -15. The proposed garden will be located on
the southeast side of the building and includes a walkway, sitting areas, a tool
shed, open lawn, and various plantings. Peregrine Companies, Owner, Dean
Shea, President, Tompkins County Builders and Remodelers Association,
Applicant/Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
lead agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, has, on
April 15, 2003, made a negative determination of environmental significance,
after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part l/ prepared by
Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 15, 2003, has reviewed
and accepted as adequate a plan entitled "Lakeside Nursing & Rehabilitation
Center, Garden Design 1, "dated June, 2002, and prepared by Mari Mitchell, and
other application materials, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final
Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such
waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan
control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
33
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site
Plan Approval for the proposed conversion of a portion of the loading dock area
into a garden at Lakeside Nursing Home located at 1229 Trumansburg Road, as
shown on a plan entitled "Lakeside Nursing & Rehabilitation Center, Garden
Design 1, dated June, 2002, and prepared by Mari Mitchell, subject to the
following condition:
a. submission of a revised plan showing the final location of the tool shed,
benches, trellis, and plantings, for approval by the Director of Planning
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
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.
AGENDA ITEM: Discussion of Future Projects Related to the Town's Water
Service Improvements on West Hill, Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann opened this segment of the meeting at 8:12 p.m.
Presentation attached, please see Attachment #2.
Mr. Walker — Basically, we have a fairly aggressive program
system in 2003. We have a number of projects going, plus the
is sponsoring. I thought I better introduce the board to some
get in a little further down the line in the next month or so and
give you a little introduction on the system. I will try to explain
in our planning process for the last year and a half or so.
WEST HILL
for improving our water
project that Bolton Point
)f the aspects before we
site specific areas. I will
what has been going on
Board Member Hoffmann — What do the colored lines mean? (Ms. Hoffmann is referring
to the colored lines on the maps shown in the presentation.)
Mr. Walker — The blue is the service area that we have currently. We have adequate to
the east of the line to serve customers. Any questions so far?
Board Member Talty — What is the life span of a tank?
Mr. Walker — The lifespan of a steel tank can be 100 years or more as long as you
maintain it. We are a little concerned about the Trumansburg Road Tank.
34
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Board Member Thayer — Is that the one on Hopkins Road you are talking rather than
Hopkins?
Mr. Walker — It is called the Trumansburg Road tank, but it is below Hopkins.
Board Member Thayer — With the soldier on the side as my grandson calls it.
Mr. Walker — Yes. I think the painting job they did was worse than the original graffiti.
That was the last painting that tank had and that was back in 1989.
Board Member Thayer — Yeah, the soldier has been there a long time.
Mr. Walker — If a steel tank is maintained well, it could last 100 years without any
difficulty. If you don't keep them painted and maintained... we had a kenotic protective
system that we have installed in all of our tanks.
Board Member Thayer — You can't paint it with water in it? Is that what you are saying?
Mr. Walker — On the inside.
Board Member Thayer — Well, yeah, obviously.
Mr. Walker — It is difficult on the outside because of the water temperature. It is critical.
PROPOSED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
Chairperson Wilcox — There is already a tank on Hungerford Hill.
Mr. Walker — This tank would be at a lower elevation. It would match the Hungerford
Hill Tank. The Hungerford Hill Tank serves a higher - pressure zone. Basically, at every
200 feet elevation you need to have another pressure zone.
INLET VALLEY STORAGE TANK
Chairperson Wilcox — Dan, what is the reason for bringing the water over there?
Mr. Walker — It is to increase the pressure. Right now we have some minimal fire flow
situations.
Chairperson Wilcox — It is also to get them on Town water instead of City.
Mr. Walker — Right. It is getting them on Town water instead of City water.
INLET VALLEY TO WEST HILL PUMP STATION
35
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Mr. Walker — The residents of Glenside are dead set against the pump station being
there.
Chairperson Wilcox — Because?
Mr. Walker — Because they will be able to see it, maybe. It is the same thing that we
had with Woolf Lane ... not in my backyard, basically.
Chairperson Wilcox — Remember this board did not have any problem with the one on
Woolf Lane.
Mr. Walker — I understand that. This is similar. This lot used to be called the old school
house lot because there was an old school house. We are looking at some architectural
treatment that might make the pump station kind of resemble the old one room
schoolhouse.
Board Member Talty — Would that pump station increase their pressure in that
neighborhood?
Mr. Walker — It will improve the pressure, yes. Right
it will move it up here. These houses will now have
has been fielding a lot of questions from the residents
on trying to answer people's questions.
STORAGE FOR WEST HILL SERVICE AREA
now the pressure limit is here and
adequate pressure. Will Burbank
. We have been working together
Chairperson Wilcox — A 500,000 gallon tank is a visual blithe. A million gallon tank?
Mr. Walker — That is what we have Burdick Hill. Burdick Hill Road runs from Lake
Shore Drive up to Triphammer Road. There is an upscale subdivision right there and
then this big, green lab. That is a million and a half gallon tank.
WEST HILL TANK SITE SELECTION
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is either one of those areas wooded in any way?
Mr. Walker — Along this property line there is a hedgerow. The hedgerow used to go
across where the road is. We would be putting it behind the hedgerow. That is the
other advantage to having it on the west side. It would be screened by the hedgerow to
the east. It would be totally hidden from the South Hill. You might be able to see it in
the winter when all the leaves are off.
Board Member Conneman — What are the opinions?
Mr. Walker — One person did not want to be able to see any part of the tank at all. A
couple people were concerned about the visibility of it from the buildings down in here.
36
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board Member Thayer — They would not get any benefit as far as water service out of it,
right?
Mr. Walker — There would not be any direct benefit of water service because it is not
high enough to provide domestic pressure. There would be some tangible benefit
because by putting the tank at this location, this line is basically the minimum 20 psi
pressure. It raises the pressure at their pump station. It will reduce their pumping effort
a little bit because there will be high summing pressure.
Board Member Thayer — And add a hydrant.
Mr. Walker — Right.
Board Member Thayer — Does it increase the service area north of there at all?
Mr. Walker — Basically, it does not. The contour line is higher, but we have a control
building at this point. Unfortunately, your side of the line will still be on the Trumansburg
Road tank pressure. You're probably okay because you're down in this area.
Board Member Thayer — I was thinking about the Hopkins Road area.
Mr. Walker — It won't affect them. The problem I have there is this all one pressure grid.
At the bottom of the hill on Trumansburg Road by Frank Ligouri's house, they are
exceeding 175 pounds now. If I raise the pressure 30 pounds, it increases theirs to
over 200 and that is a little sketching especially when I've got 90 year old pipe down
here. It will improve the fire flow. I'd have to build another pressure zone further out to
help increase that pressure and I don't think that is going to happen.
SITE SELECTION PROCESS
Mr. Walker — The site selection process is in process now. I will be taking a report to
the Town Board at the May meeting to recommend final sites. The three sites that are
basically above ground are on the West Hill, the Mecklenburg Road Tank, the Bostwick
Road Tank and the pump station at Coy Glen. The Bostwick Road Tank is about the
same configuration as the tank behind Deer Run. There is a big hedgerow that we are
going to be above. It will be screened. I don't see that as being a big visual impact in
that area. It will be about a 30 -foot high tank. We are working on mitigating the visual
impact on the bigger tank by burying it and putting it behind the hedgerow. The pump
house has to be above ground. We are going to try to mitigate that by making it blend
into whichever neighborhood it ends up in whether it is Coy Glen school memorial or
cemetery mausoleum.
The other one we have is the East Hill Tank. We want to build that this year. That will
be on Hungerford Hill above Baker Institute. It will be a concrete tank, a million and a
half gallons. It will be approximately 30 feet high and about 80 feet in diameter. We are
37
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
looking at also partially burying that into the hillside. We are working with Cornell on
land rights there. Those are the visual issues.
Chairperson Wilcox — Will Bolton Point be coming to this board?
Mr. Walker — I will be bringing it to this board. The Town is designing it.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I like the idea of the buried tanks. Is it more expensive to
do it that way because you have to dig down?
Mr. Walker — Yeah, it is a little more expensive. It requires us to use a reinforced
concrete tank because you cannot bury the steel tank. On the site on Hungerford Hill...
Board Member Conneman — How much more expensive?
Mr. Walker — It is probably 10 to 15% increase in cost. We are looking at a million dollar
project. An above ground tank is about $500,000 to $600,000 and we are looking about
$700,000 for the extra earthwork. The site at Cornell ... we may not ... this hillside at
Baker Institute is about a 7 or 8% slope. We are looking at having the upper part almost
totally buried and the lower part exposed about 15 feet. It would make it a little bit more
on the northern exposure. We can tuck it into the hillside and plant around it. The tanks
that Cornell has across the road ... they have the elevated tank, but then they have the
semi - buried concrete tank. It will be similar to that with birming around it so we can
make it look like a hillside again.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Are there some advantages with the buried tanks?
Mr. Walker — It reduces the ice build up in tanks. Generally, we have enough fluctuation
in our tanks so that the water stays warm enough so we don't have a lot of ice build up.
This tank here will be designed basically as a million and half - gallon tank, but there will
be a million of gallons of water going in and million gallons going out every day. So it
will have a real good turn over in that. It does provide some protection for it. The visual
impact is reduced significantly.
Mr. Kanter — And you also say it is less expensive to maintain them long term.
Mr. Walker — Concrete tanks are basically maintenance free as long as you don't have
people shooting at them. Steel tanks need to be repainted every 10 to 15 years. The
other planning impact is on the West Hill is the slight raising of the service area to
include a little bit more of the parcel that Eddy's own. Again, it is right against the
multiple residences area now. I think the Eddy's have expressed the acceptance of the
idea of maybe a one house per three -acre type buffer zone for that parcel. The upper
side of that parcel, which is the more visible part, is crossed by the power lines so it is
not as attractive of a building area. There are some limitations up there.
What... basically any development on that site would probably cluster at the lower end of
it anyhow. That is the main planning issue on the West Hill. My feeling is that it is
KN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan showing higher density development. All of
the rezoning that is proposed is to eliminate the high density residential... it is
consistent...
Mr. Kanter — Right. The current zoning proposal goes a little into the Eddy property.
The proposed zoning just brought the ag. district all the way back to the property
boundary. Codes and Ordinances is going to be looking at a new transitional zone.
Now that we know what the water plans are, this is the time to take another look at that
whole area.
Mr. Walker — The main purpose of this is to improve the service to our existing service
areas, not to extend them tremendously.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Does anybody have questions?
Mr. Walker — If anybody thinks of something later on, feel free to give me a call. I've
already got a group of very concerned citizens in the Inlet so we will be talking to them.
There will probably be a neighborhood meeting in the Coy Glen area in the very near
future, so if anyone is interested in attending that I can let you know when that is. Will
Burbank has taken the lead on that as a Town Board Member. The Town Board is
going to be talking about approving the final locations and funding the project at the May
meeting. Then the site designs will be coming in front of this board. The biggest think I
want to get under construction right away is the water line down the hill from Danby
Road to Spencer Road. We are going through the wooded area outside the developed
area outside the Emerson Electric site. If people are familiar with that portion of Danby
Road there is a wide load right -of -way area that we have sewer line in that is just before
the Digicom. It is about 50 yards before you get to that building. We are proposing to
shoot straight down the railroad grade. I walked the site Friday. There isn't a standing
tree on that site that is more than about 10 inches in diameter. There is about 18 inches
of topsoil and then it is rock. We will be opening a strip of about 20 feet through there.
Board Member Thayer — How deep does the water line have to be?
Mr. Walker — The waterline has to be 5 feet deep.
Board Member Thayer — So do you have to blast?
Mr. Walker — I don't think we are going to have to blast. I think it is shale. Generally,
we have not been blasting too much. It is not ledge rock. Most of the contractors have
big jackhammers on an excavator and that breaks it up quite well. It is shale. Originally
we were going to try to run it down the driveway that belongs to Emerson, but there is a
lot of fill in that and they don't know what is buried there.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — That was very useful to hear. Thank you very much.
39
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Mr. Walker — Does anybody have any major concerns that they see now? Visual
impacts?
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Well, that is always a big concern.
Mr. Walker — Right. We are trying to address that to bring it down. On Bostwick Road,
we would probably be purchasing the land. We are talking with the landowner, Mr.
Young. There would be about a 1 -acre lot subdivided off for the water tank on that site.
It will come before this board as subdivision approval. There will probably be a
subdivision either on the cemetery or Glenside parcel.
Mr. Kanter — We are working on an environmental review. We haven't quite figured out
how we are going to do that. There are a number of pieces of it ... whether it would be
easier as one review for all the pieces or if each one is going to get a separate review.
We don't know yet. It will be done one way or another.
Mr. Walker — Right now, I think, I'm planning to put the waterline down from Danby
Road, the pump station and the Bostwick Road Tank into one contract. That would be
one project. We could take the water tank out and make that a separate contract. I'll be
putting that together and giving it to the Planning Department for environmental review.
The Town Board is lead agency on all of it as the funding agency.
Mr. Kanter — I think the waterline is the easiest of the pieces in terms of the
environmental review because it is mostly on that railroad grade.
Mr. Walker — The East Hill ... we still need to get approval from Cornell on that. It doesn't
sound like a problem, but we haven't dealt directly with the legal department yet. The
biggest problem with Cornell is Real Estate understands the benefit to Cornell because
it will improve fire flow to the East Hill Plaza area and the Precinct 7 area. The problem
is Baker Institute has many claimants to the real estate up there. Cornell Real Estate
technically owns it, but there are multiple departments that utilize the fields and spaces
up there. They are not even sure who they need to talk to at this point.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Is there anything that we need to do until...
Mr. Walker — Your input has been good. I know the visual impact will be a concern.
The impact on the agricultural zone on that one parcel is the only other major one.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — So, we will wait to hear from you when it comes to
environmental review.
Mr. Walker — The goal is to give that to the Town Board at the May meeting.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann closed this segment of the meeting at 9:08 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES — APRIL 1, 2003
all
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 6, 2003
Chairperson Wilcox — I move approval of the minutes of April 1, 20030
Board Member Talty — I second.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Good
Board — Aye.
Board Member Thayer — I abstain.
All in favor say aye.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — One abstention. Any objections? All right.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2003 -028: Approval of Minutes — April 1, 2003.
MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty.
RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the April 1, 2003
minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said
meetings as presented with corrections.
THERE being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Howe, Tally,
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Thayer.
ABSENT: Mitrano.
The motion was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any other business?
Mr. Kanter — I have a couple of things over here, but we'll let the board members go
first.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — Any board members have any business? All right. It's
your turn, Jon.
Mr. Kanter — The first thing is we have a site visit to the Auble property scheduled with
the Environmental Review Committee of the Conservation Board for Wednesday, April
16 at 2:00 p.m. The subdivision will be coming in to this board May 6th for preliminary
site plan and subdivision approval. If anybody is interested in joining us on that site visit
you can either just meet us at the site, I think there is some room to pull over right off of
Danby Road or you could come here. Some of us will be driving up from this building.
41
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
If you want to come here, maybe the best thing to do would be to let us know so that we
know to wait. We would probably be leaving here at about 1:45 p.m.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I won't be able to come.
Board Member Thayer — I can't either.
Board Member Conneman — I'll come.
Chairperson Wilcox — I can't make it.
Mr. Kanter - Fred, we didn't even know that you would be back from your trip. That was
a surprise.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — We had a handout here about police patrolling.
Board Member Talty — Is that generating revenue for the Town?
Board Member Conneman — No.
Mr. Kanter — That is not at all what the reason was for doing it was. It was an idea of
the Transportation Committee, which George is on along with Bill Lesser, Tom
Niederkorn, Sue and myself. The main reason for it was in some of the early
Transportation Committee work, which involved collecting accident data as well as
volume data and speed data, it was clear that there were certain areas of the Town
where speeding was prevalent. Some of it was going through neighborhoods and
residential areas. Some of those areas for instance, Pine Tree Road, Snyder Hill Road,
generally in the east side of Town we started some discussion with the Sheriff's Office
first of all and they were very interested in working with us. They do normally provide
patrolling services in the Town, but they have limited Sheriff's and Deputies for doing
that. The idea was that we work with them on getting enhanced patrolling and
enforcement in certain areas of the Town if we could identify where those would be.
Meanwhile they have some funds through a federal or state for basically safe driving
and changing people's driving habits.
Board Member Talty — It is a state program.
Mr. Kanter — Then we also started talking with the State Police who actually obtained
some special funding for that same purpose and so we are going to have a combined
effort. The State Troopers are going to mainly focus on state roads. They will be able
to provide some additional back up enforcement on some of the other local roads that
we are talking about. Meanwhile the sheriffs are going to be going from spot to spot on
some of the areas that were identified to do some patrolling. We will be collecting some
additional speed and volume data to see how this is going...to see if we can observe
any changes over a short period of time. Then go back to areas again later in the year
and see how it goes.
42
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES OF APRIL 15, 2003
APPROVED MAY 612003
Board Member Conneman — They also want ... (not audible).
Board Member Talty — What I
is less monetary penalty and
the State, the Troopers are pr
are not going to nab you. The
Then they go to the courses.
see what happens,
would like to see happening if you have any input on that
more community service penalty. I know driving across
etty lenient on the roads. If you are going 61 in a 55 they
problem is that a lot of people are just paying these fines.
If they go out and pick up garbage for about 8 hours and
Board Member Conneman — We will convey that. There is a meeting Thursday.
Board Member Talty — They will be less apt to speed when all the cards are going by
and they are picking up garbage. That is from my criminal justice degree days. That is
very true. People do not have a value on the money; they have a value on their time.
There are kangaroo courts across the State that pack them in and they are guilty, guilty,
guilty and all of a sudden it is $150 every fine. It is a revenue generator. I don't think
that in no way prohibits or reduces unsafe driving.
Mr. Kanter — Obviously there is a difference between a long range driver taking a trip
who doesn't go over and over and over again versus the commuter type the same hours
everyday. This is really what this is about.
Board Member Conneman — (comments not audible)
Board Member Talty — It is all word of mouth. If you were to enact a community service
penalty, word would get out like wildfire. Nobody wants to ruin their Saturday.
Board Member Conneman — I will convey your message.
Mr. Kanter — Anyway, that was something to be aware of. Again, not that you would
necessarily get calls, but if you hear from people about it we have put announcements
in the local media.
Vice Chairperson Hoffmann — I guess if there is no other business, we are adjourned.
AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT.
Upon MOTION by Board Member Thayer, Vice Chairperson Hoffmann declared
the April 15, 2003 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:18
p.m.
RespectfulIX Submitted,
Carrie Whitmore,
Deputy Town Clerk
:X:
43
3,x8.
ca,s+
(,24 5j. 4.
3' x 8'
ATTACHMENT #1 4/15/03 PLANNING BOARD
i� .
N
O
O
W
I�
O
C IrD
CD
ATTACHMENT #2 PLANNING BOARD 4/15/03
CD
C�
l 1
CD
H
0
C
n
CD
o
ol
CD
A:
rA
,,;�'"'P
s�-
I
i
i
� .
.�
',,
s
�� °�,
d
'�
', � ��
.Y►
• •
CD CD
CD
CD
�F" •
O � �
� � O
V r+
CD
•
AW
_lq
MEOW
ami.
ti
•
A
0
V 1
O
O
J
u
0
0
0
0
Cf4
n
Imo-+ •
Pt
W
CD
•
V 1
r
IM
owmak
O.+ .•
D
r-L
O
n
r
Wi
F=".
cn
O
a
i
'Ii
•
O
O
O
O
O
ii
M� •
P7'
•
(D
UG
N
n
b
rMod
IM
LA
O
i�
•
N
O
O
O
O
O
Cl�
lot
c�
O
I�
•
CD
O
r
I�
4
cn
cn
4
W
a
h
rA
• • • • •
O ►-� V� o O
C
OmmmA
Pd����o�
CL
CD
Q
O
O
O
O
d
r-
CL
r�
d
CD
0
e--r
O
C
R
0
CD
0
C�
r
n
i_
C/1
O
Mi
�v
I
M�
w�
l
UP (m)
IM M„r .
CL�
bd
0
CD
0
°o
0
0
°o
0
m
cn
c
4
0 CD
cn
CD
°o
0
0
°o
0
1•
ICJ
C�
O
O
0
0
m 1 -
c
CD
ors
c�
CL
CD
•
Cl�
O
O
0
cn
H
7d
0
n
O
0
0
0
0
_,
cn
i
cr
r
In
IM
0
0
n
0
x
0
0
• •
O �
v j-rl
O
CD
CD
CD
� O O
� o �
C w
� N
O
CD
G 4k
ME
a as
an so
..
aft
� J
,f
,•..
!r
sle
1..
MIFW an
do . .
'
•
.
• .
Li • .
. 6
�••
•'
•0
r
. /
r
;• r
'�
FIN
.
.
I�
`
y. 1
J
N
i -
a'
. �
, .
v
ti '
EM
•
TA
kw
P1
ice-+ .
r"r
V 1
CD
I-�
H�
•
CA
F• •
P'r
CD
•
V
0
CD
V)
r
0
0
n
r
W
•
�Di
Fes+ •
P'r
0
hM• •
cn
Mme-+ •
L/1
CD
V 1
• •
CD
� o
CD
n o
CD
� o �
a
N N
n
p7m
F�
I=" .
•
n
(D
�•
cn
0
v
0
CD
c�
ow
ow
0
y
0
•
KIP:
CD
n
CD
c�
O
O
O
•
O
0
r
r
O
n
O
n
n
•
O
O
cn
r
OEW•
OEMW
OEMW
C
C
5'
c
N
�C
cn
r
IMO
•
O
C
lot
O
•
O
C
SM
CD
cn
cn
O
CD
C
c�
cP
L
C
E
0
cr
O
0
n
OEW 0
OMW
C
(D
C
O
CD
p
u
O
C
CD
I
r_w
a
CD
p
CL
Mme+ •
•
O
C
CD
W
1
•
c�
r
p
•
•
ow
ow
0
0
�s
l7J
0
CAD
.-A
C
CD
O
CD
�...+ •
b
dp
•
N
O
O
O
O
CD
O
CD
•
U
H
M M" •
n
1--+ •
d
O
CD
r-r-
CD
LLA
CA
r+
O
CI'4
CD
�y . ..q
I t'. ^
f`bL'
F-+
N
0
C
Z
cm �
`° C
CD
'~
H
O
d
cr
k"C
0
a
i
0
0
CD
1--+
N
O
d
P
O
D
m
a
CD
C�
r
O
CD
th
O
O
n
• I
�
E
fit
r
r
Ytt
!
it
t
33:
# F
)
S
tk
i
`aF
t
It
}
r
1
�
i
1
1
a
1t
r
J
i r"
it
#
n
-
4
I
It
1
�
\
a
It
t
Y
f
• I
�
E
fit
r
r
Ytt
!
it
t
33:
# F
)
S
tk
i
`aF
t
It
}
r
1
�
i
1
1
a
1t
r
J
i r"
it
#
n
-
• I
S l(�
s ti E 3. 7
Ij
�
fit
r
r
Ytt
!
it
t
33:
tk
It
}
r
1
�
i
it
n
-
4
1
�
\
a
It
t
Y
,
a
\
`4
s #
,
S l(�
s ti E 3. 7
Ij
�
fit
r
r
Ytt
!
it
S l(�
s ti E 3. 7
Ij
�
fit
r
r
!
t
33:
tk
It
}
r
1
�
i
it
n
-
S l(�
s ti E 3. 7
Ij
i # �
t'.
± i
r
t
F {�
13 rr�`' 1 rt Fr t,r 1 r
E
s
1_
k �
�
j
r
r
!
t
tk
It
r
1
�
i
n
-
4
i # �
t'.
± i
r
t
F {�
13 rr�`' 1 rt Fr t,r 1 r
E
s
1_
k �
�
r
r
r
1
�
i
i # �
t'.
± i
r
t
F {�
13 rr�`' 1 rt Fr t,r 1 r
E
s
1_
k �
*# i
1
�
1
�
\
a
It
t
Y
,
a
\
`4
*# i
COmni �
CD
I`
F~
CD
O
CD
cn
C4
CD
O
cr
CD
O
CA
CD
C
CD
CD
rw
C!1
N
O
CD
U4
C1�
CD
�C
C.
O
n
CD
0
O
n
n
CD
C
CD
d
CD
0
CD
cra
a
CD
CD
CD
CD
CD
0
G�
CD
0
I
CD
A�
C�
CAD
O
CIA
0
•
Ia
O
C7
CD
l 1
CD
C
CD
CD
C
CD
cn
r
kC
n
r
C�
CAD
O
Fm
69
CD
cn
r+
MEW •
OMEW
OMEW
a
a
P
ME
ME
a
drwpq .
MEMPENS
XMINNEW f
CD
cn
CD
CD
n�
CAD
CD
C ~�
CD �
CD CAD
N
0
o �
c �
C
o �
� o
CD
p
�t
W
O
C
0
0
CD
CD
CD
Ob
C
CAD
O
CD
0
CD
cn
�o
O
O
O
�C
0
n
C
0
c�
y
OW 0
ONEW
OMW
OEW •
C
•
4 so 0600 0
w.
■
m �
►,
,J
3
i
f
No
............ -.,
ry
r ..
w N
...
5 mom* °.
bp
Ll
�5
r 3
r £
j _ M
\
J w
J
r r
� P
^ n
••
fe
Ov • f »
S
2 F
• _
pV4� •••••• <:.t.
r
_ I ri J� d•.
...vim
v
i
i
A
•
4 so 0600 0
w.
■
m �
►,
,J
3
i
f
No
............ -.,
ry
r ..
w N
...
5 mom* °.
bp
Ll
�5
r 3
r £
j _ M
\
J w
J
r r
� P
^ n
••
fe
Ov • f »
S
2 F
• _
pV4� •••••• <:.t.
r
_ I ri J� d•.
...vim
® 4p
i
as
r
I
! f
f i
•
i
F
:r'
r.m
r
P:
® 4p
i
as
r
I
! f
f i
•
i
b
C.
U4
he
CD
C
bd
C14
CD
cn
cn
c.
CD
O
a
CD
CD
z
V �1
n
0
C
ft4 CD
d C
n
.
O
n
CD
z
C
cn
A�M.L
�4
0
CD
CD
p
l J
CD
r
0
c
0
0
.
�J
Omni •
r
tz
cn
CD
C
0
0
tt
cn
5
CA
l J
CD
0
0
r
CD
C
0
0
CD
cn
I
I
I
I
I
I
�I
I
CA
i'D
I .
I
I
I
I
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
AGENDA
7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes).
7:04 P.M. SEQR Determination: Palmer 2 -Lot Subdivision, 211 Hayts Road.
7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-
5-7, Agricultural and Residence R -15 Districts. The proposal is to subdivide off a 1.95 +/-
acre parcel, which contains an existing house and shed, from the 257 +/- acre parcel. Miriam
L. Palmer, Owner /Applicant; Richard B. Thaler, Agent,
7:09 P.M. SEQR Determination: Drake 2 -Lot Subdivision, Mecklenburg Road.
7:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located on Mecklenburg Road to the west of 1362
Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -15.2, Agricultural District. The
proposal is to subdivide off a 4.04 +/- acre parcel from the 95.84 +/- acre parcel for a new
residential lot. Robert A. Drake, Owner /Applicant.
7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding a sign variance to allow a 24 square foot (3' x 8') neighborhood identification sign
on the south side of East King Road to the east of the future Southwoods Drive, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 46 -1- 15.43, Residence District R -30. Southwoods Associates,
Owner /Applicant; Carol Chaplin, Agent.
7:25 P.M. SEQR Determination: Lakeside Nursing Home Garden Addition, 1229 Trumansburg Road.
7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the
proposed conversion of a portion of the loading dock area into a garden at Lakeside Nursing
Home located at 1229 Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 26 -4 -46.1,
Residence District R -15. The proposed garden will be located on the southeast side of the
building and includes a walkway, sitting areas, a tool shed, open lawn, and various plantings.
Peregrine Companies, Owner; Dean Shea, President, Tompkins County Builders and
Remodelers Association, Applicant/Agent,
7:40 P.M. Discussion of future projects related to the Town's water service improvements on West
Hill, Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering.
100 Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary).
11. Approval of Minutes: April 1, 2003,
12. Other Business.
13, Adjournment.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE
AT 273 -1747.
(A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.)
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, Apri 1.15, 2003
By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will .
be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, April 15, 2003, at 215 North Tioga Street,
Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters:
7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot
subdivision located at 211 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -5 -7, Agricultural
and Residence R -15 Districts. The proposal is to subdivide off a 1.95 +/- acre parcel, which
contains an existing house and shed, from the 257 +/- acre parcel. Miriam L. Palmer,
Owner /Applicant; Richard B. Thaler, Agent.
7:10 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot
subdivision located on Mecklenburg Road to the west of 1362 Mecklenburg Road, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -15.2, Agricultural District. The proposal is to subdivide off a
4.04 +/- acre parcel from the 95.84 +/- acre parcel for a new residential lot. Robert A.
Drake, Owner /Applicant,
7:15 P.M. Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding a sign
variance to allow a 24 square foot (3' x 8') neighborhood identification sign on the south
side of East King Road to the east of the future Southwoods Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 46- 1- 15.43, Residence District R -30. Southwoods Associates, Owner /Applicant;
Carol Chaplin, Agent.
Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections
thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or
other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must
make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
Dated: Monday, April 7, 2003
Publish: Wednesday, April 9, 2003
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARING
Tuesday, April 15, 2003
By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will
be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, April 15, 2003, at 215 North Tioga Street,
Ithaca, N.Y., at the following time and on the following matter:
7:30 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed conversion of a
portion of the loading dock area into a garden at Lakeside Nursing Home located at 1229
Trumansburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 26 -4 -46.1, Residence District R -15. The
proposed garden will be located on the southeast side of the building and includes a
walkway, sitting areas, a tool shed, open lawn, and various plantings. Peregrine Companies,
Owner; Dean Shea, President, Tompkins County Builders and Remodelers Association,
Applicant /Agent.
Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matter or objections
thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or
other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must
make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
Dated: Tuesday, April 8, 2003
Publish: Wednesday, April 9, 2003
(Supplement to Public Hearing Notice Dated April 7, 2003)
::= ruwrurs� oaiwKV; ...
;. NOTICE OF'°
PUBUCHEAR1Nti5'.';
rue '..:: .. ^I
Msdayr . p
2003
Ideration ;!
nd final
ngncunuraII
'Rl`5 Disc
7osaf>'IS ` t0
:.!1:95
cii: contains'
liand'sfied;:}
.acre pacr
l;�`!Palmers
t ;=°Richiird
5sideration
and' Final
ovollfor the'
.... w:wr yrrwnnm
73-1747
r.
(Dated Monday April T,
.2003
��HprII,Y,
d.
• 1
t'
f
and on•
iderfition
inol.site<
tfie�pro -,
IT W pon
ig -;dock
atAc °
located
on
tlie,
-Own e %' 'Dean
ident; Tompkins'
Builders': -' and
Association;
lgent. -
assistance ,must :inake`.
a'.request� not less-Abri
ours,piior.to the'tiine,of
ublic hearing.
sthan Kaater; .-AICP
DirddW.7of Planninngg
173-1747
y
id id:. Tuesday;-, April 8,
fame. •+ Wednesday, -
9,'2003
ilement to:Public -Hear-
yotice Datid`'April 7,-
TOWN OF ITHACA
PLANNING BOARD
SIGN -IN SHEET
DATE: April 15, 2003
(PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINT ADDRESS /AFFILIATION
�cs fi �Lt"v ev1 vv� S
>>
r
>>
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Sandra Polce being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign
board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper,
The Ithaca Journal.
Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca
Town Hall 215 North Tiol;a Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday, April 15, 2003 commencing
at 7:00 P.M., as per attached.
Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio ag Street.
Date of Posting
Date of Publication:
April 7, 2003
April 9, 2003
Sandra Polce, Senior Typist
Town of Ithaca.
STATE OF NEW YORK) SS:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 9th day of April 2003.
r
Notary Public
CONNIE F. CLARK
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01 CL6052878
Oualified in Tompkins County
Commission Expires December 26, 20, ' G