Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2004-07-06FILE DATE TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, JULY 69 2004 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, July 6, 2004, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning (7:19 p.m.); Dan Walker, Director of Engineering (7:09 p.m.); John Barney, Attorney for the Town (7:13 p.m.); Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Nicole Tedesco, Planning Intern, EXCUSED: Larry Thayer, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner; Christine Balestra, Planner. OTHERS: Larry Fabbroni, 127 Warren Rd; Don Rakow, 422 Chestnut St; Regina Fabbroni, 127 Warren Rd; Michael Faber, 180 German Cross Rd; Christine Arstensen, Cornell University; Richard DuPuis, Ithaca Journal; Mayla and Richard Park, 101 Allison St; Hal Marton, 92 Collins Rd, Freeville; Lee Washesky, 81 Layen Rd, Danby; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf; Tony Ingraham, 368 Stone Quarry Rd; Dave Auble, 111 King Rd W; Jenn Terpening, 207 King Rd W; Christiann Dean, 330 King Rd W; Harry Ellsworth, 152 Honness Ln; Joel Harlan, Newfield; Margot Chiuten, Trowbridge & Wolf; Cheryl Botts, 971 Comfort Rd. Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:04 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 June 28, 2004 and June 30, 2004, 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 June 30, 2004, Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:04 p.m. With no persons present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment. of the meeting at 7:05 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination: Leonardo 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1132 Danby Road Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:05 p.m. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox - Larry, name and address... Mr. Fabbroni - My name is Larry Fabbroni, I live at 127 Warren Road, and I'm representing the Leonardos. The story is pretty short, Mrs. Leonardo, Clara Leonardo, passed away and before the homestead is sold, the daughter who lives directly in back of the property would like to acquire an additional little trapezoidal area and add it to their lot. You should all have a copy of a map that looks like this and if you see the little trapezoid area that's shown there, that's what's being added to Richard and Mary Lee Park's property under this proposal. Chairperson Wilcox - Outside, I kiddingly concerns with regard to this parcel. Mr. Fabbroni - Not that we're aware of. asked you if there was any environmental Chairperson Wilcox - Comments? For the record, Ladies and Gentlemen, this is a proposal to subdivide seven hundredths of an acre of land and consolidate it with a neighboring parcel. Would someone like to move the SEQR motion? SO moved by Kevin Talty, Seconded? Seconded by George Conneman. I'm not sure if it saves the tree or just moves the tree from one parcel to the other. All those in favor please signify by saying aye. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:07 p.m. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -067: SEQR, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Leonardo 2 -Lot Subdivision, Danby Road and Allison Drive, Tax Parcel 37-1 -20.11 MOTION made by Kevin Talty, seconded by George Conneman. WHEREAS: 1. This action is the consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot subdivision on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 374-20.11 located at 1132 Danby Road, from which approximately 0.07 acres will be subdivided from the western boundary of the parcel for future consolidation with Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 37 -1- 20.10, located at 10 Allison Drive. Estate of Clara Leonardo, Owner; Richard Leonardo, 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 July 6, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a 2 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Part 11, prepared by Town Planning Staff, a plat entitled, "Revised Subdivision Plat Leonardo Lands, "prepared by L. Fabbroni, L.L.S., dated May 24, 2004 and revised June 27, 2004, 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: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1132 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, Medium Density Residential zone. The proposal includes subdividing a +/- 0.07 -acre strip from the western boundary of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, to be consolidated with Tax Parcel No. 37- 1 -20.10 (10 Allison Drive). Estate of Clara Leonardo, Owner; Richard Leonardo, Applicant. Chairperson Wilcox Opens this segment of the meeting at 7:07 p.m. With no persons wishing to speak, Chairperson Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. Board Member Howe - I'll move the motion. Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by Rod Howe. Board Member Hoffmann - Second. Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by Eva Hoffmann. Any changes? Ms. Ritter - Nothing. Chairperson Wilcox - Very good. There being no further discussion, all those in favor please signify by saying aye. 3 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -068: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Leonardo 2 -Lot Subdivision, Danby Road and Allison Drive, Tax Parcel 37- 1-20.11 MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Eva Hoffmann. WHEREAS: 1. This action is the consideration: of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of +/- 0.07 from the western boundary of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 37.4-20.11 located at 1132 Danby Road, zoned Medium Density Residential. Estate of Clara Leonardo, Owner; Richard Leonardo, 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 6 July 2004, 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 ll prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a public hearing on July 6, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a plat entitled, "Revised Subdivision Plat Leonardo Lands," prepared by L. Fabbroni, L.L.S., dated May 24, 2004 and revised June 27, 2004, and other application materials. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of +/- 0/07 acres from the western boundary of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 37 -1 -20.11 for future consolidation with Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 37 -1- 20.11, located at 10 Allison Drive, as shown on the plat entitled, "Revised Subdivision Plat Leonardo Lands," prepared by L. Fabbroni, L.L.S., dated May 24,. 2004, revised June 27, 2004, subject to the following conditions: a. Submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the plat and three dark -lined prints containing the required surveyor's certificate, seal, and signature of the surveyor who created the plat, 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 b. Within six months of this approval, consolidation of subdivided parcel of +/- 0.07 acres with Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 37- 1- 20.10, as shown on the survey plat; and submission to the Town of Ithaca Planning 19 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Department of a copy of the request to the Tompkins County Assessment Office for consolidation of said parcels. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination: Facility, Forest Home Drive. Cornell Plantations Plant Production Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 7:09 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Don, if you would, name and professional address for us... Don Rakow — Don Rakow, I'm the director of Cornell Plantations, I reside at 422 Chestnut St. in Ithaca, Cornell Plantations is located at 1 Plantations Rd. Chairperson Wilcox - Floor is yours. Mr. Rakow - Thank you. I have a short PowerPoint presentation. Pause. We are seeking preliminary and final site plan approval for the project known as the plantation plant production facilities. These facilities are intended to replace existing and aged facilities in the Cornell Plantations Botanical Garden. By moving these programs from the Botanical Gardens to the area that has traditionally been called the Test Gardens, we will be able to open space in the Botanical Garden for the development of additional collections and exhibits. The new site will also be far more efficient, in that it will allow us to consolidate all of our plant production in one site rather than have it scattered in two or three as it is currently. The new facilities will also be much more energy efficient and environmentally appropriate than the existing aged facilities. The program includes a 3270 square foot production greenhouse which will have four chambers within it, a 1200 square foot head house. By the way, a head house, despite than glorious name is where all of the dirty, work goes on associated with the greenhouse, all of the seeding and transplanting et cetera. A 7550 Square foot Lath house, which is for holding and evaluating plants, and finally a 2000 square foot storage structure. To locate the facility, it is in this northeast corner of this area managed by Cornell Plantations, on the insert map, this rectangle represents most of the contiguous land managed by plantations and the plant production facilities would be right where the pointer is immediately off of Forest Home drive across from what is traditionally known as Flat Rocks. Here is an aerial view of the site for consideration, and most of the development will be in this quadrant and this quadrant as is shown in the next slide. Board Member Hoffmann - Can I ask you a question before you move from that slide? 5 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 67 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Rakow - Yes. Board Member Hoffmann - Where is the Cornell Water treatment plant? Is it visible on this photo here? Mr. Rakow - No it's actually not visible on this view, Eva, the Cornell Water treatment plant is located off of Caldwell Road which is to the west of this site It's actually right next to a building that we renovated a couple of years ago that is now known as the plantations horticultural center. Here is an actual site plan that is in your package. The major components are this greenhouse and this head house. The Lath house which is here and storage structure, and then what is dark in this drawing represents a small new area of asphalt. In this initial elevation, we can see three different views of the greenhouse and the head house in the top or south elevation, you can see that we've gone with this ridge and furrow construction partly to keep the height of the greenhouse to the lowest point possible. In the middle view looking from the North you can see the head house which will be faced in brick to have it blend from a design standpoint with the existing test garden's building. And finally in the lowest view you can see a side view of the greenhouse and associated head house. Here are technical drawings again showing elevations as is indicated in your package, the height of the head house is 11 and a half feet of the greenhouse is a maximum to the top of the peaks of 17 feet, and both of these compare to the existing test gardens building which has a height of 15 feet. So, both structures or both parts of the structure are very much in keeping with the heights of the existing building. Here is an elevation of the proposed Lath house. A Lath house is a very important facility for a Botanical Garden /Arboretum in that it is where we grow plants on both to evaluate them and also to get them of a size so that they're ready to put out in the landscape. It's a relatively large structure, but it's one that has a completely open roof, open sides and a gravel floor, so it is not an enclosed . structure, but rather just a protective one for growing plants. The siding on the Lath house is intended to conform to the lap structure on the side of the existing test gardens building. Here is another elevation of the proposed Lath house which has a maximum height of 16 feet 6 inches. The final component of this project is a extension of the sanitary sewer along forest home drive so that these new facilities will be tied into the town's sewage system. This has been designed for Cornell by PG Miller and Dan, I believe you have had a chance to look at it. The house at which it will connect or next to which it will connect is at 340 Forest Home Drive, the Extension is a total of 1840 feet and part of it would go on existing Cornell Property and part of it would go actually in Forest Home Drive which would cause a temporary disruption of traffic, but as indicated in your package, at least one lane would be open at all time. And here we can see where it will actually connect to the town system. And at this point I would be happy to answer any questions. Chairperson Wilcox - Who would like to go first? Why does Cornell Plantations deem it necessary to connect to the sewer system? Mr. Rakow - We had initially explored other options including having some type of in place holding and it was determined that there is going to be a great enough volume of PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 sewage that an in place system would not work and that it would work better to tie into the town system. That was the evaluation from the Cornell Office of... Thank you. Hal Martin, facilities manager for Cornell Plantations. That was the evaluation by the Office of.environmental compliance. Chairperson Wilcox - Dan, any comments with regard to extending the sewer? Mr. Walker - No, The design meets all our standards. PG Miller has done the design of many other sewers. The only thing because this would be considered, not really an industrial facility, but there will be using some chemicals, there will .be some industrial pre- treatment requirements before_ we discharge to the sewer, so it doesn't harm the system. Chairperson Wilcox - They're not residential therefore — right? It's not that they're commercial... Mr. Walker - Well, it's not... it's just that they're going to be using some chemicals in the building for fertilizers and things possibly. Mr. Rakow - If I may address that. Cornell Plantations prescribes to a very strict integrated pest management and greenhouse best practices approach. We keep the use of chemical pesticides to an absolute minimum and keep the use of chemical fertilizers also to a minimum necessary to grow the plants. So it will not be like a commercial greenhouse range that has a much greater concentration of chemicals. Chairperson Wilcox - I'm all set, Eva? Board Member Hoffmann - Yes, I just had some questions about the drainage of the water that is to collect in the shallow area next to these buildings, and the possibility of them going through the ground, hitting the same bedrock that is in the creek, the Flat Rock, and then just creeping along that bedrock surface into the creek. Have you done any testing of what there is underneath this rather permeable soil? It's a well- drained soil, so water would easily go through it. Mr. Rakow - Yes, it's a well- drained and deep soil. There is not a shallow fragipan or bedrock layer, and it was the determination again of the office of environmental compliance at Cornell that the soil would provide sufficient filtering of any chemicals going into the soil prior to any ingress into the creek. Furthermore, there will be drainage basins in the greenhouses themselves that will connect with the sewage system, so there should be minimal if any chemicals actually leaching into the soil. We also don't fertilize our turf. Board Member Hoffmann - Well, I am still somewhat concerned, because even if there is not very much of these herbicides and pesticides and whatever other chemicals that you might be using even if they get filtered in the soil maybe over a short period of time, 7 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 maybe over a long period of time could the soil not get saturated with these substances? Mr. Rakow - Well, again any chemicals we would be using would be in the greenhouse where the liquids would go into the drainage system and then into the sewage system, so in an exterior setting I actually cannot imagine occasions when we would be using chemicals except perhaps for a dormant oil on the trees which is considered inert. Board Member Hoffmann - So in the Lath house you wont be using any of these? Mr. Rakow - No, we've had an existing Lath house in the Botanical Garden area, for at least 20+ years that I'm aware of, and I can't think of any instances when we've used any chemicals there. Board Member Hoffmann - My concern as always with these things is whenever there's a possibility of it going into the creek, it will eventually go into the lake, and that is where we get our drinking water. And it's important to think about what one can do to keep that water as clean as possible. Mr. Rakow - I agree, and feel that this is an important concern and if there is one driving force at plantations, I would say it's our concern for environmental quality. I would say it's something we take very, very seriously. Chairperson Wilcox - George, do you have any questions? Comments? Ms. Ritter - I just have a correction on the SEQR form. Chairperson Wilcox - OK. Ms. Ritter - It will be on part 2, page 13, number 5. Chairperson Wilcox - Part 2, page 13, number 5. Ms. Ritter - Yeah, where it says that there's a dot up by proposed action will adversely affect groundwater: That was not supposed to be there, that dot, under potential large impacts. See that ?. Board Member Hoffmann - I was wondering about that. Ms. Ritter - Yeah, that was just an error. They're PDF files and you can usually just plug in dots, but... Chairperson Wilcox - Any other questions or comments with regard to the environmental review? Would someone like to move the SEQR motion then? So moved by George Conneman. Seconded by the chair? Seconded by the chair. There 8 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 being no further discussion with regards to environmental review, please signal by saying aye. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:24 p.m. PB RESOLUTION NO, 2004 -069: SEQR, Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit, Cornell University Plantation Plant Production Facility, Forest Home Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65 -1 -5.2 MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Fred Wilcox.. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves construction of a 3,270 +/- square foot greenhouse with an attached +/- 1,200 square foot head -house (support space), a 7,550 +A square foot lath house, and a +/- 2,000 square foot storage structure. The project also involves installation of approximately 1,840 feet of sanitary sewer line along Forest Home Drive to serve the new facility and an existing adjacent building on the site. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Hal Martin, Agent and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review has accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part Il, prepared by the Town Planning Department, and has on July 6, 2004, made a negative determination of environmental significance, and 3. The Planning Board, on July 6, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning Staff, drawings titled "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C101), "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C102), "Sanitary Sewer Main Details" (C103), all dated 517104 and "Site Plan" (0328- L101), "Greenhouse and Head House Elevations" (0328 -201), and Lath House Elevations" (0328 -206) all dated 513104, and "Greenhouse and Head house Building Sections" (0328 -202A) and "Lath House and Storage Building — Building Sections" (0328 -205A) dated 06128104, all prepared by Egner Architectural Associates LLC., and other application material, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval and Special Permit; D PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 69 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 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, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive at the Arboretum Test Gardens, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential zone. The project involves the construction of a 3,270 +l- square foot greenhouse with an attached +l- 11200 square foot head -house (support space), a 7,550 +I= square foot open -air lath house, and a +/- 2,000 square foot storage structure. The project also involves installation of approximately 1,840 feet of sanitary sewer line along Forest Home Drive for this new facility and the existing neighboring building. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Hal Martin, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox opens the public hearing at 7:25 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Any questions with regard to the site plan? There being none, Don, is there anything you'd like to say at this point? Mr. Rakow - I would just like to make one very brief statement, which is that we are very sincere when we talk about our commitment to environmental quality. This is a sensitive site, it is near a creek, and we are confident that it will not have. a negative environmental impact on the creek or area. Board Member Hoffmann - Will you do some testing of the soil or water in the creek below this at intervals? Mr. Rakow - We certainly could, Eva. Board Member Hoffmann - That might not be a bad idea. Does the university have the capacity to test water for the kind of things that you are using? Mr. Rakow - It does, through the office of environmental compliance. 10 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann - Can we put in an item in the resolution about some intervals at which you might do such testing. Chairperson Wilcox - The purpose of the testing would be to see...? Board Member Hoffmann. - To make sure that there isn't anything that reaches Fall Creek from the site. Since the soil is so well drained, and since there is likely to be a shelf of solid rock underneath, the site just like there is in the creek, so the water would just flow over it. Chairperson Wilcox - And the testing, I'm just trying to flesh this out, testing would be done on the perimeter of their property? Board Member Hoffmann- No I imagine testing would be done both of the soil, right west of these new buildings where you said the water collects, drains through, as well as water in the creek just below the site, just downstream from this site. Mr. Rakow - While I'm not opposed to this idea, I would be concerned that the testing in the creek, whatever might be found may or not be associated with the proposed facility. Board Member Hoffmann - Yes, I understand that, but chances are if you found traces of it in the soil and in the creek, that there might be a connection there. And if the lab is sophisticated enough, it might be able to tell particular chemicals that you use that maybe other farmers and such don't use. Chairperson Wilcox - Can we require them to go off -site, which would be into the... Mr. Barney - Probably not, actually, but I... but I guess the question I have is that testing can mean a lot of things to a lot of people. The cost of a single soil sample test is something like $4 -500 if you get it done, and depending on what you're testing for... if you're getting a fairly sophisticated thing, it gets to be somewhat more. And I'm not sure what we gain with the test in one location. I mean to really do the testing, you're talking about doing it across the whole series of area to get more than one soil sample. And then the next question I have is who the test report gets - reported to because we're not really in the business of enforcing environmental rules — that's the department of environmental conservation. So, and I would suggest that the discharge into the creek is illegal anyway, whether it's tested for or not, if someone feels that that's happening, it's the DEC's responsibility to check on it and Cornell's responsibility to report if they have anything... so I'm not quite sure if that's a role that we really want the town to play in terms of trying to enforce these rather extensive and sophisticated rules, and if we are, then I think we need to better define what we mean by testing: how frequently, how many tests, who they're going to report to, and that sort of thing. Board Member Hoffmann - Well, as I think of it, I think it would be in the University's interest to do it too, because the University takes drinking water from Fall Creek, and 11 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 69 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 the water treatment plant is downstream from this, and I would assume there is some water testing going on there already. Mr. Rakow - I assume that they are testing the quality of the water for potability on a regular basis. Chairperson Wilcox - Anything else at this point? Don, do you want to take a seat? Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:29 p.m. With no persons wishing to address the board, Chairperson Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:30 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - How are you feeling right now? Board Member Hoffmann - I still like the idea, I still like the idea of having the testing assured, but if it's not practical for legal reasons or other reasons, I have no idea how to go about putting it in the resolution in a way that it's enforceable and makes sense. Chairperson Wilcox - That is supporting. Mr. Barney - Well you folks are the policy folks and if you wanted, we could probably devise some language but I guess the question I would ask of you is what are we testing for, how frequently are we testing, where exactly we are testing, where we want the results to go, and what are we going to do with the results that come in. I'm not sure where we're headed with this. In theory it makes some sense, but I'm not sure in a practical pragmatic sense... Board Member Hoffmann - Well, have we ever done this with anything else, any other... Mr. Barney - The only thing we did, was Cornell Lake Source cooling, we had a negotiated arrangement with them where there was some, actually they did the testing and we did the reviewing of it, but that was testing was also being done in order to comply with the permit from the.DEC. Board Member Howe - I don't think it's necessary because I think their practices ensure the environmental health and since the water treatment plant is downstream and they do testing anyway, I personally don't know if it's a necessary step. Board Member Hoffmann - I don't know if they do testing there. It's just an assumption on my part. Mr. Walker - The water, the primary intake for the water treatment plant is just above upstream of this site, or it's upgrade, and I'm sure because that,. On that aerial photo its above that Flat Rock area there. You see up in the upper right hand corner there's a weird, a little. dab, that's the primary intake point for the water treatment plant. They do have a secondary intake below the upstream bridge in forest home there's a intake structure on the site that the water treatment plant is on, near the parking lot that is for 12 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 the arboretum. They do do raw water samples, actually this is basically an agricultural type project, it's agricultural, I think you'd find that there is probably a much higher contamination of the water or incidents of things that would be generated by this site from the many farming activities that occur in the watershed in Fall Creek. In fact that is one of the major concerns about water quality for the Cornell reservoir is the amount of farming that is in those streams. Based on the fact that the primary use of any chemicals, not that they're using very many, will be in the greenhouse, and that will be isolated by containing it in the sanitary sewer system, I don't believe there will be... other than an accidental spill from a truck or something that there would not be potential contamination. And I do know that Cornell Environmental services, or the environmental health people are very strict. There's worse than anything else I've seen in terms of monitoring, so I think they'll be on top of it. Board Member Hoffmann. - I guess I have another question that just occurred to me now. This situation is probably different from some other research labs where there's plant research going on and research on insecticides and so on. Do you use any experimental chemicals at all at the plantations? Mr. Rakow - The only experimental chemicals we use and actually they're not experimental are what are referred to as biologicals that is basically insects that eat other insects, and this is part of our integrated pest management approach. Board Member Hoffmann - But that wouldn't be something that would affect the water or the soil? Mr. Rakow - No it is not. 1 1. Inaudible statement from the public. Chairperson Wilcox - Please be quiet, sit down, sit down please. More inaudible statements. Chairperson Wilcox Please sit down, please. Don, have you finished answering the question? Mr. Rakow - I have. Chairperson Wilcox - OK. Do you have any other questions? Board Member Hoffmann - No that was it. Chairperson Wilcox - Ma'am, I did open the public hearing, I gave everyone a chance to speak, and I closed the public hearing. Is there something you'd like to add ?. Is there something you'd like to say? If there is, you may come up to the microphone: 13 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Christiann Dean, W. King Road — I'm Christiann Dean, I live at West King Road. I chair the Town of Ithaca agricultural committee, and I came here not to speak to this but to speak to something later on, but I wanted to offer to you, Eva, my knowledge about agricultural practices. I share your concerns, in general. What this gentleman has just described to me gives me complete confidence because he said he only uses biological methods. What he's describing is not going to contaminate the soil or the water. Board Member Hoffmann - No, not if it's insects. I understand that, but other biological methods might be a problem. Ms. Dean - I share your concerns, Eva, over the whole Town of Ithaca, but the methods that this gentleman is describing is much more heartening to me than what is going on in the rest of the Town of Ithaca. Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you. Any discussion, comments? Board members indicate "no" Chairperson Wilcox - OK, any other questions, comments, concerns? Would someone like to move the draft resolution? So moved by Rod Howe, seconded by Kevin Talty. We're all set in terms of the draft? Ms. Ritter = OK by me. Chairperson Wilcox - OK, Don if I may, have you seen the draft resolution that was presented to us? Mr. Rakow - I have Chairperson Wilcox - I guess your aware, the most important thing is the revised site plan with what's called engineering notes having to do with the road sedimentation control. Mr. Rakow - Yes. Chairperson Wilcox OK, so you're all set with that. You understand what's being asked for? Mr. Barney - Could we ask just a questions that's troubled me? Chairperson Wilcox - Absolutely. Mr. Barney - What's a head house? Chairperson Wilcox Oh, he mentioned that. 14 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 62 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Rakow - John, a head house is where all the dirty work goes on for the greenhouse, it's where the seeding is done, and the transplanting and the mixing of soil, and I don't know the derivation of the word, but it is the universal term for where you do the work for a greenhouse. Mr. Barney - Interesting that they picked the head as the anatomy for that, I could think of some other possibilities. Mr. Rakow - Well, we don't take responsibility for the etymology of the word. Laughter. Chairperson Wilcox - I have a motion and a second, there being no further discussion, all those in favor please signify by saying "aye ". PB RESOLUTION NO 2004 -070: Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit, Cornell University Plantation Plant Production Facility, Forest Home Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65 -1 -5.2 MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Kevin Talty. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell University Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential Zone. The project involves construction of a 3,270 +/- square foot greenhouse with an attached +/- 1,200 square foot head -house (support space), a 7,550 +/- square foot lath house, and a +/- 2,000 square foot storage structure. The project also involves installation of approximately 1,840 feet of sanitary sewer line along Forest Home Drive to serve the new facility and an existing adjacent building on the site. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Hal Martin, 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 and Special Permit, has, on July 6, 2004, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part 11, prepared by the Town Planning Department, and 3. The Planning Board, on July 6, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning Staff, and drawings titled "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C101), "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C102), "Sanitary Sewer Main Details" (C103), all dated 517104 and "Site Plan" (0328 -L 101), 15 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 "Greenhouse and Head House Elevations" (0328 -201), and Lath House Elevations" (0328 -206) all dated 513104, and "Greenhouse and Head house Building Sections" (0328 -202A) and "Lath House and Storage Building — Building Sections" (0328 -205A) dated 06128104, all prepared by Egner Architectural Associates LLC., and other application material, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Permit for construction of the Cornell University Plantations Plant Production Facility, finding that the standards of Section 2405, Subsections 1 -12, of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, have been met. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive, Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, as shown on drawings titled "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C101), "Sanitary Sewer Main Plan & Profile" (C102), "Sanitary Sewer Main Details" (C103), all dated 517104 and "Site Plan" (0328 -L 101), "Greenhouse and Head House Elevations" (0328 -201), and Lath House Elevations (0328 -206) all dated 513104, and "Greenhouse and Head house Building Sections" (0328 -202A) and "Lath House and Storage Building - Building Sections" (0328 -205A) dated 06128104, all prepared by Egner Architectural Associates LLC., subject to the following conditions: a. submission of a revised site plan that includes engineering notes stating that erosion and sedimentation control measures will be implemented as needed on the site, that the grass filter area will be maintained for erosion control, and that on -site inspections by a Cornell University Certified Stormwater and Erosion Control inspector will be regularly conducted, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and b. submission of an original final site plan on mylar, vellum or paper, to .be retained by the Town of Ithaca, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and c. submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and /or federal agencies, including the County Health Department and Intermunicipal Sewer Plant, if necessary, and d. application and approval of a Highway Work Permit from the Town of Ithaca Highway Superintendent, prior to construction of the sewer line extension. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: 16 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of a revised Sketch Plan for the proposed Country Inn & Suites hotel located at the southwestern corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C ". The proposal includes subdividing off a +/- 2.95 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre parcel for the construction of a two -story (reduced from three= stories), 67 -room hotel at the intersection. The proposal also includes approximately 70 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J. Trowbridge, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 7:41 p.m. and invites the public to change seats to see the presentation. Chairperson Wilcox points out that this is not a public hearing, but invites members of the public to address the planning board after the presentation if time allows. Mr. Trowbridge - Peter. Trowbridge, we're the landscape architects representing the developer, and this is Annette Marsha -Sow who works in our firm as project manager for this project as well. I think we would like to start by making a couple of statements. We listened carefully to the planning board last time and have tried to respond to a number of issues that were raised, and we did summarize all of the a -mails and correspondence that came in through the planning office, and we'd like to respond to a number of issues, primarily the board's issues as we understood them last time. I'll just summarize them briefly and then we'll go back and discuss those in some detail. We heard the planning board concern about building massing as one of the issues. A second issue was lot size and distribution of the program, making sure that the building parking, other facilities were easily and perhaps graciously accommodated on the site. Continued concern about traffic, which we'll look at this evening in some detail. And also the quality of the demand study that was provided last time. The board was also interested in knowing if there was a country inn suites nearby. As you know there is one in the Horseheads area, one in Cortland. We've provided a photograph, and we'll discuss how this project is. different form the ones you might see within a thirty minute driving distance. We did look at also other comments that came in from the public that had to do with farming, size and scale, the encouragement of strip development, whether this was compliant with zoning, traffic, infrastructure and need. Since last time, as you know, the team is TG miller and ourselves, Jkar Sharma, FRS associates for traffic. We also added Andrew Dixon. Andrew has worked on other projects that we have been associated with and has been a long term prior to his going out on his own, a long -time employee of Mac Travis and has done a lot of marketing studies for major project, primarily in the city, associated with other projects. So, we're happy to get Andrew on board. 17 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 The First thing we'd like to address is Building massing. And one thing as you all know is that we've reduced the building from three stories to two stories. We've also reduced the type of room. While there are 67 rooms, eight of the 67 are standard hotel rooms, with the remainder 59 as suites. I know there have been some conversations in the public at large about couldn't this be all rooms and reduce the overall size. As you look at the demand study, the interest is clearly in suites type hotels. So we need to balance how many suites versus how many standard rooms. So in looking at the overall mass of the building, we've looked at some percentage of smaller rooms, but at the same time, as I just said, we'd like to keep the majority of the rooms as suites, because that is really what distinguishes this facility. The size of the lot has been increased since the last time we were here. There was some concern, I think on the board's part, that the program looked tight, that we needed retaining walls for instance, to retain grade. We've eliminated all the retaining wall requirements, the grades work very easily on the site. We've added .21 acres, and we were able to redistribute the parking, so that there is no parking as there was not last time, on the west side of the hotel, between the Holly Creek development and the hotel. And we've significantly reduced the parking on the north side, near west King Road. You're probably looking at that as a slight enlargement. Last time we did have retaining walls in a couple different locations, and the site adding additional acreage has allowed us very easily to grade the hotel and parking into the site without the requirement of retaining walls. We're still keeping the hotel relatively low on the site, so that the overall appearance, despite the fact that we've reduced it to two stories, we also are cognizant of the fact that we want to reduce the overall appearance on the road so that we retain the hotel at a lower gradient than Danby Road, to keep it lower in profile. We have been working with the DOT since we talked to you last time, and because we haven't made a formal application, we have submitted plans, we have had multiple conversations with DOT, and I'd like to turn it over to Annette Marsha -Sow to talk about those conversations. They're reluctant at this point to give us a letter until we have a formal application, but they have reviewed the setback of the combined curb cut with the retail development to the south and have a response to the site plan as you see it now. I'll let Annette talk about the conversations with DOT. Ms, Marsha Chiuten - I spoke with a gentleman named Keith Van Gorder, who was in the I think it was region six, it was our region of the DOT, and I explained as Peter mentioned we have not submitted any drawings to DOT because this was still in sketch plan and it was still in a state of flux, but we wanted to get their sense of whether they thought is was even reasonable to put a curb cut where we were proposing. So I explained the project to him: the distance, the setback between our proposed curb cut and the west king road intersection about 550 feet, and he was familiar with the site. The DOT has this photo archive that they can go online and sort of drive down the road with photographs and sort of see where they're at, and so he did that. He did not, since he's not actually working on the project, he did not physically come down, but he has done other work in the area, is familiar with the area,_ and went on this photo archive, and his sense, knowing we were setting it back about 550 feet, his sense was that there was no problem whatsoever. Now, he's hesitant to say anything in writing until he's in PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 seen the drawings, which is understandable, but given the amount of information that he has at this point, doesn't see a problem with the site distances or with the setback away from the West King Road intersection. Mr. Trowbridge - The other issues that have come up with traffic, and we've subsequently talked to SRF since our last meeting, and I think the board could appreciate this that given the retail, the zoning for neighborhood retail and commercial in the area, that a hotel would generate, relative to other possible uses, very very low traffic volumes, turnover, relative to neighborhood office or restaurant or other kinds of retail use. Given the kind of traffic in and out of a hotel. So relative to. other possible traffic generating uses in this site, that are allowed within the zone, hotel would generate probably the smallest number of trip generation that you could expect for development on this parcel. Chairperson Wilcox - Peter, if I may interrupt. Mr. Trowbridge - Yes Chairperson Wilcox - Getting some information from SRF associates which supports that would be a good idea. Mr. Trowbridge - I think we did provide letter two meetings ago, we should probably continue to carry those, I think they state that in their letter. But that was at the very first sketch plan which was at the... Chairperson Wilcox - For example, we have the, in the materials in front of us for this meeting, we have the trip generation numbers of peak volumes, but to provide something for other allowed uses, and allowed sizes of uses. Mr. Trowbridge - We'll do that. We'll certainly do that. The other issue as you know is there is quite a bit of concern over the quality of the demand study last time, so we have asked Andrew Dixon to begin that process, and he has solicited information which is a part of the appendices in the report that you have that has discussed with a number of people in town the need for such a facility, the use of such a facility, its consistency, and the need at the local level. One thing I would like to talk about relative. to the size of this hotel, there are certain amenities which Andrew has been discussing locally like a pool /exercise room, etc. and while Country Inn Suites does have smaller hotels, the smaller hotels don't also carry those amenities. So the issue is whether at some scale, there is the ability to carry things like pool /exercise room, other kinds of small conference facilities that this hotel has, so some of the hotels that have 10 rooms less for instance, or 12 rooms less, for the most part , at least from out understanding, going to the website, don't have the same level of facilities that this hotel has. So, as you can imagine, in terms of covering those costs, that there is a critical mass that is necessary to have those amenities as well, because there is a number of rooms that is necessary to cover those. And lastly, we did take a photograph, or actually we took a number of photographs, but we looked at the Country Inn in Cortland that has 81 rooms, we 19 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 adjusted that building to be very similar to the scale and the number of rooms that we would be looking at in this particular site, as 67 rooms, and so the two photographs that we are showing, one with 81 rooms, and we've again, we're not trying to do a site simulation, we're really just trying to give the board a sense of what that building would look like at the scale in the mass that's provided for the site plan that we're showing. I think that covers most of the issues. Again, I know there were a number of comments that were made via e-mail and letter, and I think we've tried to address the site scale, the zone issues, the traffic to the extent which we can at this point, need, and there are other issues that we're really in some cases not able to address. Chairperson Wilcox - You all set? George? Board Member Conneman - Peter, I have a question about the picture, the last time you gave us a front forward picture, this time you gave us a side forward picture. That's a little strange isn't it? I mean if you want me to compare a two story with a three story you've got to give me the same picture that you gave me the. last time. Mr. Trowbridge - Well, we tried to stand across the street, and we couldn't get the, I our viewfinder, we couldn't get the exact same image. In this case, because I think the board was asking us, is there a hotel nearby that we could look at, and that's really the genesis of this study, we're trying to show you one of the two hotels nearby, but if we just showed you the picture on top, which is exactly the picture in Cortland, that's an 81 room hotel, there isn't a comparable hotel with 65 -67 rooms within driving distance, so what we've provided, again I'm not suggesting this is a visual simulation of the site, all we're trying to give you is a photo image that is comparable to the photo above it with fewer rooms that approximated a 67 room hotel. We're not trying to compare it to the photo simulation we did last time. Board Member Conneman - You had said last time that you would produce the photo simulation, and I thought... maybe I misunderstood. Mr. Trowbridge - No, we were asked to do, if we were going to do a photo simulation, that we make corrections to it, it's, the site context itself — it seemed to me there were no questions about the site last time from the photo simulation, other than some of the corrections, where was the guardrail ?, what we're providing here is trying to have two photos, one of the hotel as we saw it in Cortland, and that same view of that hotel at the same number of rooms that we'd be providing here in Ithaca. Board Member Conneman Mass is that same, as I understand the word mass, but it's just spread out is that right? Mr. Trowbridge - No, we also have some smaller rooms -as I said, so all the rooms this time around are not suites. We've reduced both the height and the mass by taking eight of the rooms and making those singles rather than suites. Chairperson Wilcox - Floor is yours. NEI PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Board Member Conneman - No I want some other questions, I think she had some questions. Chairperson Wilcox - OK. Eva? Board Member Hoffmann - To continue on that topic, I understand that it, the whole building is set down about 5 feet into the ground, you had that proposed last time? Mr. Trowbridge - Yes. Board Member Hoffmann - That's still there, but the building has a larger footprint it seems to me, how much longer and how much deeper is this building? Mr. Trowbridge - It's not any deeper, it's the same depth as the building, the thickness of the building... Chairperson Wilcox - There's a new term, Peter. Mr. Trowbridge - The thickness of the building is the same thickness as we showed it last time. Board Member Hoffmann - OK. Mr. Trowbridge - It's relatively you last time. I know there's it's 67 feet which is probably of this room. So, maybe it's dealing with a building that's time, because we've reduced f, it's 67 feet relatively longer, than the building we showed been some discussion of twice as big, it's not twice as big, not that much different, a little bit different than the length 15 feet longer than the length of this room. So, we're not significantly longer than the building we showed you Iasi some of the sized of some of the rooms as well. Board Member Hoffmann - And what is the total length of the building now? Mr. Trowbridge - Umm, let me just grab a scale. I know I should know this off the top of my head, but like some many things... It's just in excess of 25 feet, no, yes. Yes. Board Member Hoffmann - And the look of the facade is not.at all like what you have in the photo there I assume? Mr. Trowbridge - It's very much like the photo we have. It's not dramatically different than what we're showing in the photograph. Which is the same material which we showed last time which was clapboard, a clapboard structure. Board Member Hoffmann - Just by looking at the outline of the facade on the drawing, 101 -A and 101 -A, it doesn't look to me like it would look like that photograph. 21 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Trowbridge - But it's the exact same hotel n Cortland. It has all the same amenities in terms of pool and exercise room. Board Member Hoffmann - No, I'm talking about the look of it, the fagade of it that faces route 96. In that photograph looks like it would be different from the possible fagade of the building on the drawing, L101 -A. The ins and outs of things Mr. Trowbridge - It's very very similar. Board Member Hoffmann - Really? Mr. Trowbridge - Again, it's not exact, because we wanted to give you a building you could go visit, which was the board's request last time, about going to a hotel, so it is not exact in terms of the ins and the outs, but it is very similar. So we wanted to give you a building you could go look at, understanding that it would be a story shorter. It's not intended to be an exact architectural duplication. There isn't a hotel within driving distance that is identical to this, but it would be very very similar. Board Member Conneman - You said that these other hotels have, don't have as many suites. What do you consider a suite? I've been to lots of hotels, but the variability of what a suite is makes a lot of difference. Mr. Trowbridge - Well in this particular building, it has a separate bedroom, a separate living room, where you can sleep people in both the bedroom and the living room with a.., there's a door that separates them. And there is like a kitchenette that has a refrigerator, microwave, food preparation counters, you know, dish storages, cupboards. So it has a small, it's really like a studio apartment. Board Member Conneman - It is a kitchenette then. Mr. Trowbridge - Yeah, there's a separate kitchen. So it's probably, slightly more than, each suite is twice as big as a standard hotel room. And again, in this marketplace as Andrew Dixon has pointed out, the need is based really on, in part, on the kind of hotel that this represents. As an extended stay hotel that has those kinds of facilities. So some of the much smaller Country Inn Suites are not suites at all, they're singles. And as I said, the smallest of those typically don't have any other amenity except just rooms. Board Member Howe - I wasn't at the May 18 meeting, so I don't want you to cover things ,you already covered then, and as I read the minutes Fred, I think this was an issue you had a lot of questions about. I think we all saw this as more meeting the needs of local residents with neighborhood commercial, so we're talking about old zoning /new zoning, and it's an allowable use, yes there has to be special provision given for more than 30. rooms as I understand, so have we as a board already determined that if we can get it to the scale and what not, that we think this use makes sense. I mean is that even an issue that is still on the table for discussion? And again, I don't want to revisit, if you already decided that as a board. WX PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann - I don't remember that we did. Chairperson Wilcox- We haven't. I don't think we explicitly talked about that. I thin the issue for discussion amongst this board is that. Cell phone rings. Chairperson Wilcox - Sir, turn it off. I think the issue for this board is to understand and potentially discuss the fact that what was the zoning provisions in this area before April first. Understand the transition provisions that were included in the new zoning, which Mr. Auble took advantage of, which is not a loophole, it was put there for reason, so the projects currently being worked on by an applicant have the opportunity. So given the existing zoning which was there before, before April first, which allows a hotel, a bigger hotel than might be allowed today under the new zoning. I think the question before this board really boils down to... Mr. Auble can build a hotel there, that right comes with the land, the zoning allows that. The question is, what's a reasonable sized hotel given the neighborhood, the existing buildings that are there, the environmental impacts. Sort of like if you, I don't have it in front of me, but if we pulled out the old zoning and we went through the special approval considerations. Mr. Kanter - We can do that if you like. Chairperson Wilcox - There are those 8 or 9 or 10 conditions which we must review in order to make a recommendation to the zoning board, which they must review, about impact on the neighborhood and property values in there and some of those other ones. So, I have not really addressed your question directly, but... Board Member Howe - Wel in with the best use, even questions we can address, there can be a hotel there say? , it's still a question on whether we would view this as fitting though it's allowed under the former zoning, there are still so it's not a foregone conclusion that we've said that yes, and we just have to decide what size hotel. Is that fair to Mr. Barney - The old ordinance allowed for a 30 room hotel, anything beyond that required action by this board, so you are in a sense, looking at the size because if you're saying it's less than 30 rooms or 30 rooms of less, they may not even have to be here, bit if you're willing to entertain something larger then... Board Member Howe - But I thought we had the ability to think about neighborhood, and impact on neighborhood and some other considerations, even with an allowable, allowable... Chairperson Wilcox - It all requires.:. Mr. Barney - Well I can't remember... 23 PLANNINGIBOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Kanter - Special approval. Mr. Barney - Special approval. Mr. Kanter - So this needs to go to the zoning board and this board needs to make a recommendation to the zoning board for the special; approval, and that's where the questions about is there a need for this proposal at this site comes in, and what is the effect on the neighborhood and all those questions. Board Member Howe - So I'm still stuck, not even at the size issue, to me it just doesn't make sense, with the kind of neighborhood that should be developed and the support services and what not, so... Mr. Barney - I'm not sure, the 30 rooms or less don't require a special approval. In excess of 30 rooms you have to get a special approval form the BZA. Mr. Kanter - But 30 rooms does require a site plan approval, so they would have had to come here. Mr. Barney -Site plan, that's right. Anything within a business district would require a site plan. Chairperson Wilcox - So under the zoning in effect at the time the plan was submitted by the applicant, a hotel is allowed, upon review by the planning board, and a hotel with more than 30 rooms requires special approval from the zoning board as well. Now, the fact that the town board has set the zoning, which allows a hotel, doesn't preclude us from reviewing the plan in front of us and making a determination whether the plan provided to us is appropriate given the site. I think of the Burger King for example is the one that comes to my mind, where the fact that something is allowed by right, doesn't mean the particular plan that is presented to us needs to be approved, based upon the criteria outlined in the site plan review ordinances and in the zoning that govern our decision- making. Are you about ready to read...? Mr. Barney - Unless you want to read 10 criteria, I... Chairperson Wilcox - Proposed use, in the proposed location... Mr. Barney - Adequacy range and the location of vehicular access and circulation, location of pedestrian bicycle traffic access, control of intersections with vehicular traffic, adequate location, and arrangement, size, design and general site compatibility of buildings... I could go on and on. Chairperson Wilcox - So the applicant could come in with a 30 room hotel, but if in this board's collective judgment, they don't meet the criteria, then we can turn it down. Where I am right now, and I'm not sure whether we want to continue to ask questions of 24 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Peter or the other people that are here. Where I am right now is trying to get this down to something that I think is appropriate given the site, or the size of the site. Board Member Talty - Which may or may not be a hotel, is that right? Chairperson Wilcox - Potentially, potentially. I mean I still have problems with the size of this structure. The applicant has attempted to address my concerns by taking it from three stories down to two, but they haven't reduced the number of rooms. It's still up in the mid to upper sixties. Board Member Conneman - Peter, I just can't believe that I have, I don't know Mr. Ingram, Tony Ingram, but you got his letter that. I can't believe that a hotel in Atlanta or Madison, Wisconsin or so forth, do not have some amenities to them, because these people are not... dumb. They have conferences in Minnesota and Atlanta and so on and so forth. I did go to the web and look at a few of these hotels, and the one difference between them is most of them are one or two story and most of them have a front yard, I mean a big front yard, they're set back, they're more like La Tourelle, you see they're set back from the road, as I looked at the pictures they have on the web. And I didn't look at them all, I looked at some of them. Mr. Trowbridge - Just to respond to some of the landscape issues, given the site, there are some limitations for any retail commercial development because of it's adjacency to another zone, a residential zone which is Holly Creek, we have a buffer on both the West King Road Side and all along the Holly Creek side, so that the current site plan has 56% of it is in landscape. Over 50% of the site, this is not parking, this is not building. And again zone allows 30% building coverage, the current building is 17. So I understand the. board's conversation and I appreciate the conversation, but when I look, at sort of the number crunching, when we come down to it's an allowable use in the zone and then how much less dense... it's very difficult, as you can imagine to do retail development with having over 55% of the site as landscape, as attributed to landscape, which is the case here, and that's going to be true with the, not just this project but the neighborhood retail, any neighborhood retail that would happen here because of the adjacency to a zone and the buffer requirements and the setback requirements. So when you look at the overall, say, coverage, and maybe we should have rendered it green, but the site is quite large relative and a lot of green -space relative to the overall site plan. And when you look at other retail development in other areas, even East Hill and places that you think of as somewhat suburban, I think you'd find that there's large percentage of said coverage that's in landscape and a very low site coverage despite the fact I think there is this perception about building size, that It's really only 17% of total site. Board Member Conneman - Burger King does have a front lawn, I just wanted to remind you of that. Mr. Trowbridge - Well, this has a big front lawn too. 25 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Board Member Conneman - No, but look, I went back and read the minutes from the approval of Holly Creek and I think Holly Creek is fine, I mean we all voted for that, I think unanimously we voted for it, but that I think was hinged in my view on the fact that there was going to be some commercial development which would serve not only the people in Holly creek but the people in the neighborhood. Instead of going downtown, they were going to go into Mr. Auble's commercial development, which would probably have a grocery store or whatever I don't know what, because we didn't specify that, but that was the feeling that I had when they made their proposal. Mr. Trowbridge- George, there's still allowable 8,000 square feet of retail. This is not the only, so we're showing another building, the allowable coverage, adjacent to this as you see, that would be the amount of additional retail that is allowable on the site, so this is not the only building that is possible. Chairperson Wilcox — We all set for now? Board Member Conneman that that's part of the issue particularly a huge hotel is around the area. All you g( down and the Danby line is to me that you are going to the Town of Ithaca. . I have other questions, but that's all right. It seems to me here. What can you do here? My problem with the hotel, that it is just going to increase in the sprawl that we see )t to do between that sign that says the trucks have to slow nine- tenths of a mile. I measured it the other day. It seems push a lot of sprawl over into Danby as well as the rest of Mr. Trowbridge — I think the question then that the board has to help us with is, is a hotel allowable at all. Because it seems to me that's what seems to be swirling around the room and it is allowable by zone clearly, but I'm also hearing the board say even if you brought a small hotel back in, we might not allow it. So I don't know how to respond at this point. I don't know how to come back to you. If I came back with a 30 -room hotel, if that acceptable. Typically I can ... I try to ... we try very hard to listen carefully and respond, I think which is why we are back here for the third time. Each time we've listened. We try to respond and if the bottom line, and you need to tell us right now, if the bottom line is a hotel is not acceptable then we should hear that because it is a lot of time and money and effort and there needs to be a clear sort of understanding because it is not clear and I think, Rod, that your question is a good one. What is acceptable at this point? Board Member Conneman — Well, Mr. Auble said initially that a small hotel was not economically viable. That is what he said and I think some of us said, okay ... gee, this is a big chain why don't we get on the internet and find out what they do that is the great thing about the internet...you can find out all kinds of things you could not find out before. You can send to get a brochure. There are obviously smaller hotels that do it. So if you came back with the 30, 1 assume he would say it is economically not viable. Chairperson Wilcox — Let me jump in here. If you came in with a 30 -room hotel or a smaller hotel, many members of this board would probably crack a small smile. As f' • PLANNING BOARD. MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 chairman of this board, I must remember and I will council. members of the Planning Board that the applicant has the right to build a hotel here because of the zoning in existence at the time the application was submitted. If this board collectively says we don't want a hotel there, we're not going to approve any application fora hotel we set ourselves up for a potential lawsuit and I would council members of the Planning Board and I think Mr. Barney would council them as well is that we don't have that right to do that. The Town Board has set the zoning. Our job, as you know Peter, our job is to ensure that the application in front of us is reasonable given the site and the other considerations. I can't sit here and say I'm going to vote against a hotel. I have to operate under the rules and regulations under which I have agreed to operate under, therefore, if you come in with a plan that I like and that any environmental issues either can be mitigated or in some way have a small impacts and we can talk about the traffic and for example compare the traffic of a hotel generation versus the traffic of other allowed uses, then I don't. have a problem. We'll talk about the landscaping; we'll talk about the lighting and we'll talk about access and egress from the site or what we can do to minimize the traffic down the side roads, etc., etc. I can't sit here and say no you can't build a hotel when the zoning says that you can. I can't go there. It's not my job. Would I like to see a 30 -35 -room hotel? Absolutely. I'm not going to sit here and say naughty words again that Roger can put on the front page of the paper and that Mr. Ingraham can put in his emails and on his websites, but I clearly would prefer something smaller. Because I look at the Sam Peter that is there. I look at the Italian Carry Out that is there. I look at the Ziebart that is there. I look at the Big AI's sitting up on that hill unfortunately and I want something that is comparable in scale and you are talking 250 feet long, roughly 50 feet deep, 60 feet deep. It is a big building. I'm not sure that it's in the scale. I think a well designed, with some nice architectural features and there are some reasonable architectural features to this particular building in terms of the pitched roofs. Bring this down to 30, 35, 40...1 don't know what the magic number is. But then. again, a representation was made l think at the first sketch plan that if you don't have 65 rooms then you can't get a major chain or you can't get the appropriate loans from a bank, etc., etc. Now its we need suites and not standard bedrooms because that's the amenity that people want and they only they get a pool and a exercise room is to have ... I want something smaller. I've worked with you. I've worked with your firm. I've worked with the other firms involved here and generally we've been able to work through the issues, whether its grading or its lighting whether it is landscaping whether its traffic and work through these issues and come up with something that works for the applicant and works for the board. Anybody else? I think I've said enough. I've said too much. Board Member Hoffmann — Just to answer a point. You question was ... I don't have on principle anything against a hotel on this corner, but I do think what has been proposed so far is too large and out of scale with this site. A hotel as big as this, even maybe a four -story might fit in somewhere else and be very good to have. But if we have to answer the question, which I believe we do when we refer to the Zoning Board, which goes something like is there is a need for this particular structure and this particular hotel in this particular site, I couldn't say that. I don't think there is. Also, when I look at ... you were talking about the coverage of the land; the expanded lot and I see that the 27 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 parking on the south of the building is in the creek. It means you are going to fill up the creek to put the parking in there with drainage pipes under it. I think it would be much better to have it smaller so that you wouldn't have to do that and you could fit in the parking some other way. In general, the coverage you said, the building coverage was much smaller than it needed to be according to regulations. Did you figure in the parking areas and the road in that, too? Mr. Trowbridge — Well, we do with the landscape coverage. As you know, the 56% that is in landscape means that the remainder is either in building or parking. So 17% is the building and the remainder of the percentage would be other surfaces. The last time I did ask the board because there was a ... again I was trying to be very clear about ... the board said why can't we get more real estate and I said the only way to do that is go to the south and it really isn't a creek. I think it's worth taking a peek at it. We did have a conversation about culvertizing that stretch because in order to make the lot larger to make it more gracious I did ask the board would that be acceptable and I think everyone said yes if you make that determination that would be a good way to expand the site. So I think I tried to cover some of the issues. Board Member Hoffmann — Maybe I didn't touch that. Anyway, a lot of what is on the site in green space has to be there because of setback regulations and things like that. Also, some of it is fairly steep because of grading you had to do. So you wouldn't perhaps be able to put much more building or parking in there anyway. My main ... what I wanted to say to you in main is that I don't have an objection to a hotel as such, since you asked that question. Mr. Kanter — I was just wondering if any of the board members had noticed or had any concerns with the change in the lots sizes. This kind of relates to what George was saying, I think, in terms of other neighborhood retail uses that might be able to be put on the site. Is there any concern that the remaining 1.87 acres would have sufficient room for reasonable uses that would serve the surrounding neighborhood if in fact the hotel were built on the 2.95 -acre site? Board Member Howe — I think it goes back to what Fred was saying. I would be more in favor of a smaller hotel if there was more space for services that would meet the local neighborhood. Board Member Hoffmann — Right. I feel the same way. Board Member Conneman — I mean... Chairperson Wilcox — Hold. Let me ask you a question. I just want to get this out on the record. Why are you in favor of a smaller hotel? PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Board Member Howe — Because of what John just suggested that there might be more opportunities for more smaller shops if you can give more land back to that part of this development. Chairperson Wilcox — I just want to hear that part of it and get it on the record. Board Member Hoffmann — I also think that there is more of a need for the other kind of services in this location than there is for the hotel. Board Member Conneman — I was going to say that I read .all the letters in the market demand study. Jean McPheeters, who we all know, says as president of Tompkins County Chamber of Commerce I would like to give support for the construction of Country Inn Suites property in Tompkins County. She didn't say on this site or anything else and that is equally true with other references in here. My mother would say that was a non - enthusiastic letter... Is that the right place for a hotel anyway even if it's full? don't know. Chairperson Wilcox — You know what? Speaking honestly, I don't think it's the right place for a hotel. But you know what? I didn't set the zoning. Board Member Conneman — I didn't set it either. Chairperson Wilcox — The zoning was set and my job as a member of this board is to interpret the zoning regulations and the other regulations that have been given to me by the Town Board. I don't want a hotel there, frankly, but I have to understand that a hotel is allowed there and I have to separate... Board Member Conneman — One of the issues that we have to look at is the character of the neighborhood. Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely and I think that might play into the size of the hotel and the traffic generated and noise and other things like that. Board Member Conneman — We heard in the beginning that a small hotel was not economically viable. Chairperson Wilcox — I know. Board Member Conneman — Those are powerful terms, Fred. Chairperson Wilcox — That's right. You know what? If they come back with something smaller. I don't know. Peter, something else you wanted say or I didn't let you speak. Mr. Trowbridge — No. I just want to get a final opinion appreciate the board's comments and reactions which is w want a hotel maybe they will I interrupted you. Is there of the board. Again, I do by we .came back for sketch 29 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 plan again and not preliminary. However, we had started to begin on preliminary submission. It sounds like what the board is saying ... I just want to make sure that we are clear. I think I've heard the board members say, not everyone to a person, that a hotel is allowable not just in the previous zoning, but in the current zoning for a neighborhood retail. I think the public needs to understand that as well because I think there is a misunderstanding that with the change of zone hotel was eliminated and it wasn't. So it is still allowed even since April 1St, but my understanding of the board is I hear you is that if we came back with a smaller hotel, again I'm not asking you to approve it tonight, but what I need to get is some direction so I can go back to the developer and give them sort of a clear, honest opinion... professional opinion about how to proceed. What I'm hearing and if I could just get an affirmation, that if the hotel were smaller it would be something that the board would, I'm not asking you to say anything about, but you would be more favorably inclined to look at. Chairperson Wilcox — I would agree with that statement. I've got four nods and a shoulder shrug. Board Member Howe — It is a balance issue where right now there is more weight given to the hotel and we would like to see ... I would like to see more weight given to the neighborhood commercial services. Mr. Trowbridge — Just one last question, Rod. If the issue is and I'm guessing trying to get at what all the issues are, if you want more acreage for retail would you go back and think about a smaller three -story hotel that took up much less acreage? Chairperson Wilcox — No. Mr. Trowbridge — So you want smaller, smaller, smaller? Chairperson Wilcox — We want smaller, smaller. Board Member Talty — That's a good question. Chairperson Wilcox— It's a fine question. Board Member Talty — I would just like to say this. I service the hospitality industry and there is at least one chain that I am aware of that you can put a 51 room /suite on a one - acre parcel of land. I won't mention who it is, but there is at least one. Board Member Howe — How many stories is it? Board Member Talty -- Two to three, but it is 51 and it's smaller and it's a smaller footprint. I know that for a fact because I looked into. The second thing I would like to say just pointing out. I would love to go to traffic engineer's school because I am a sales rep and I travel and I know exactly what its like checking in and I have stayed at these facilities and there is no way, no way that the peak amount of travel or the amount all a cars checking into a 69 -room hotel is 21. There is no v every 5.5 minutes. No way. I'm here to tell you I stand don't know with all due respect to Amy Dake, I would like some time because as I see it right here and the other minimum of 70% occupancy to have a profit. So at 70% think these statistics are skewed somehow. Attorney Barney — Well, its peak hour. Chairperson Wilcox — Remember it is peak. Attorney. Barney — Peak hour is not the total cars. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 67 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 ✓ay. That equates to one car in line when I check in. So I to go out in the field with her thing is you have to have a that would be 46 cars. So Board Member Talty — I understand, but they have a standard deviation of zero. So if I'm averaging one car every 5.5 minutes between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. when most people check in and you have a standard deviation of zero, I gotta tell ya I think their statistics are skewed because most people check in between 4 and 6 and actually the other statistics that are in here that I think are skewed is the amount of money spent in the area, $341 a night? No way. No way. As I look through, lodging I agree because I make up my expense reports weekly and I am a single traveling sales person and I understand this is more generated towards family and suites, but they are spending $341 a day average? Does that mean there is a $200, there's a $400? 1 gotta tell ya I highly doubt. So any way, I would just say when you put together these packets lets make sure that this data is definitely accurate, especially with regards to traffic studies because if they are going to have a 70% occupancy rate it skews the data right there. So that is the only thing that I would like to have taken under consideration is to make sure that when these statistics are put in front of us they are a lot more accurate because this board member takes traffic more serious, if you remember some of the previous projects that have come in front of us and I think there is no way that the amount of traffic is going to be what is exercised in this. Board Member Conneman — Peter, my view is that I look at things entirely and I read them and you know that. My view would be that maybe it would be more economically viable to have a neighborhood center there that has various kinds of services that would serve the neighborhood than it would be to have a hotel. I don't know because I don't know anything about commercial areas, but there are people on west hill who I think, excuse me, people on south hill who would like to have a facility where they could buy some things and do some things without coming downtown. Mr. Trowbridge — Um, it's not my call. Board Member Conneman — It's not my call either, but I'm just saying that the fact ... YOU talk about something being economically viable. I understand that. I understand business. I understand that you have to make money. 31 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox — If I may make one more comment. Many hotel chains and Kevin you may have experienced this, but you probably stay at luxury suites... things like I'm talking about the value hotels that don't offer food service other than the complimentary breakfasts like Holiday Inn Express, for example. Many of those have restaurants next door and one of my concerns here is that retail space next door and the impact of a restaurant there. That is not part of this proposal. I understand that. If the hotel should get built no matter what size it is, we may eventually see a proposal for some sort of dining establishment next door. That has a whole other set of issues with principal traffic and things like that far different than the traffic generated by a hotel. But should it get to that that would certainly be a concern of mine. We could likely see some sort of a restaurant go there. That may. or may not be a good thing. It depends on the type of restaurant. It could be something nice to service the hotel and the neighborhood and the community of south hill, but that is beyond this. By the way ladies and gentlemen, you are being quiet and patient. We will give you an opportunity .to express your thoughts as well. Board Member Hoffmann — I want to add something. I think maybe in the earlier stages we may have sounded as if the emphasis was on the bulk of the building, the size of the building, but I think that is it obvious now that it is also the number of rooms that we are concerned about. Mr. Trowbridge - Yeah, I appreciate that because I'm not sure I fully understood that last time. I think the specific quote was that it really was talking about bulk. We tried our best; in fact, we looked at various site plans. One thing you are going to find whatever comes back on this site I can just tell you from the site plan perspective that because it is a long lineal site, we looked at trying to make the hotel a. "v" because you had suggested, Eva, maybe you could break it up. But when we go back and look at that, it needs to be contiguous for elevator purposes. We need to have all the parts. There can't be three separate parts otherwise you have elevator shafts in every one. Given that there is a parking requirement in the building requirement that even With a thinner building it is going to be extremely difficult with front yard setbacks and buffer to get anything other than a long, bar building. We did try to move it around and you either cut off the parking as through parking as required. So we did look at "v "s and moving the building around: The site does have implicit characteristics about being sort of long and lineal. Anyway, just to reiterate, we thought last time when people were talking about bulk, which is why I asked these questions. I'm not just being arbitrary. I do try to get a sense of what the board's feeling is. Chairperson Wilcox — I passed a County Inn Suites. I was actually on my way to Perry, New York, which is in Wyoming County so I had gone up on 390 and I think I had got off on 36 and went by one which was in a "u" shape. On the road it presented a two- story ... it presented that center section and probably not more than 50 feet wide because the rooms were behind it if you will, which will be potentially a wonderful way but your site won't accommodate it. That's up to you and the people you represent to realize that a 40 or 50 or 60 room hotel may not. be appropriate given the site that you have to work with. Anybody else? I want to give the public a chance. 32 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Trowbridge — Sure. Chairperson Wilcox — I don't know what they have to say at this point. Ladies and gentlemen, you have been sitting here patiently and I appreciate it. Raise your hand and I'll call on you. Come up to the microphone. Mr. Auble, you can speak any time that you want. In fact, I will let you go first because you are a member of the team. You can speak at any time and we will get your comments on the record. Dave Auble, 111 King Rd W David Auble, the property owner. I live at 111 W. King Road. I want to submit a petition (attachment #1) from the nearby residents that are not opposed to this hotel, first of all. I just want to give you a little quick recap. Most of the board members are familiar with the site because we reviewed it with the townhouses and single - family development at the Holly Creek subdivision. I think a little history here and somehow it seems like these things are forgotten a little too quickly. Obviously, you are all aware of the fact that I sold off a major portion of this site, close to 33 acres out of 47, at a very substantially reduced price relative to its market value with the feeling that it was a good gesture. I have always appreciated the State Park and have felt that the Town and various boards, politicians would appreciate. And I felt that by rezoning a good strip, a sizable of the remaining land which was zoned commercial rezoning it to low density residential along the border of the new parkland area and by transition ing into a what I feel would be a fairly low density two - bedroom townhouse type of unit in the next line of buildings. And then with the remainder zoned commercial and I have always felt from the day that I acquired this property, which has been about 14 years that a hotel, a small hotel with 67 rooms that most people in the hotel industry are familiar with 67 rooms is. relatively small and quite small as a matter of fact that having been a coach at Ithaca College for a number of years and having been a coach for 40 years all over the country at different universities, I have always felt that one of the things that has been missing in that location, in that area in relation to Ithaca College is a reasonably sized hotel. Particularly one that has a colonial look, front porch. You walk in its hardwood floors a fireplace. It has the look of the types of townhouses that I hope to produce. Actually the structure is probably relatively similar in size to the townhouses. I just feel that the concern about size is a little bit unwarranted, especially in respect to the fact that you have a 750 - bedroom student rental operation about 3 blocks away that was approved fairly recently. And to me, 750 bedrooms is a heck of a lot more than a 67 -unit hotel which might be translated into say 100 bedrooms and is occupied say 70% of the time as Kevin has mentioned, which is about average for the industry to be viable. As far as researching the industry to find smaller hotels, we can find smaller hotels. No one knows whether they are economically viable, whether they are functioning, whether they are going to survive. My hotel developer feels that this 'is a viable number for him. His financing sources feel this is a viable number minimum for his operation. Now whether he can RX] PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 reduce that and take that risk, I think you are putting ... you are creating more risk.for him by requiring a smaller hotel than if you left it at the economically viable number. He is taking a bigger risk by reducing the size of the hotel and we are leading him into the trap of, failure by requiring him to do something that is a higher risk situation. That is just my..0and Mr. Conneman I think you are an economics professor at Cornell and I don't think I ever took one of your courses in my six years there as an economics major and undergrad and mba, but I did learn to count while I was there an I can understand some of these terminologies of this business. I feel that the concern about the size and the three -story aspect of it. If you go across the street and stand in Sam Peter's parking lot or the Exxon and you look at the tree lines, it is not going to be ... a three -story would really be a much better looking building, colonial style, a steep pitched roof, a better looking structure and I guess I fail to see who would be concerned about the size of this structure other than you folks. Obviously, you are the ones that count so the point is I haven't had one person other than the few of the people that have stood up and spoken against everything that I have tried to do on the site that live more than a mile away from the site and are concerned about the size. I don't see a question of concern about the size of this. How can you imagine in your view that this is going to be an outlandishly large structure? I have a hard time getting it. It looks to me ... I don't know. I just get the feeling that we are being pushed into a box here of either failure or being turned down on a site where something really nice could be produced as opposed to what it was zoned for going back to the history aspect of it. It was zoned for a gas station. I turned down gas station / carwash combinations. I had people here, Mrs. Terpening, who is one of the people who had been trying to fight our townhouse and residential use on our commercial site who wants a carwash in that site. Well, to me a carwash is an ugly use and not a good use for that site. That's just my feeling. I have had probably four people approach me to do carwash / gas stations and I think its an ugly environment... a poor environmentally or its an environmentally insensitive use as opposed to a use that is a very low traffic generating operation. Now maybe the statistics aren't accurate, but. we all know that hotels don't generate the kind of traffic that a gas station or a retail site generates. So I am asking for a little bit of reasonable approach here on some of these issues. I just feel that there is a lack of consideration for what has been given up here. I have given up a gas station zoning. It was the only gas station zone in the Town of Ithaca. Now that's big. That as a valuable zoning that I gave up. I guess I feel a little bit let down by the staff and by the board. I just feel there hasn't been consideration and I think it could have been brought up or reiterated. This was zoned for a gas station. Is that what you would like to see there? Do I have to come back and fight for my zoning again? That is a question that I have. I mean really. I feel a little bit undermine here as a taxpayer and as a resident. I just feel that it is unfairness here. Now, the other aspect is the site was zoned for 151,000 square foot shopping center. Now a shopping center requiring 300 parking spaces, some large number of parking spaces. We gave that up. It was zoned for 312 apartment units, 25 single - family homes. These are big numbers. We are down to minuscule coverage of that site 34 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 and use of that site relative to what could have been fought for there and maybe we would not have gotten all of it, but if we got half of it, it would be a heck of a lot more than what we are asking for. I feel that I am trying to be very sensitive to the neighbors and my neighbors have responded by signing these petitions. The people that are immediately affected by this are not opposed to this. I feel that that should be considered. I don't get a sense that that is being considered. That their feelings are being taken into consideration. The only people being considered are the people who live a mile away who come in and gripe about everything that is being done in that location. I mean, if they want to buy the site and pay my taxes that I paid for the last 15 years, then maybe we could sit down and discuss the situation, but I don't see any of them stepping forward to do that. So just feel that we are being put in a little bit of a box here and I hate to be emotional about it, but that's just a factor of having been a competitor all my life and being able to deal with things a little more straightforward and not on a political basis. I appreciate you listening to this. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you, Mr. Auble. In the back, Mr. Ingraham you had your hand up first. Tony Ingraham, 368 Stone Quarry Road Tony Ingraham, 368 Stone Quarry Road, one - quarter mile from the site or less. I am not opposed to having a hotel there. I think it might be nice to have a small hotel there. This thing is enormous, 250 feet, think about a football field. That is just 50 feet longer, a football field. So that's the scale we are thinking on here. I appreciate ... I was very happy to...when I had heard that Mr. Auble had sold the land to the State park. That is not the issue here. I am going to say something about these diagrams here. I think the top picture to the second picture is simply taking the top picture and slicing off the bottom floor and extending out the bottom a little bit. I don't see a whole lot of difference. I think that was really sort of thrown together pretty quickly. I wasn't even impressed by it. When I looked at the sketch plan, the new sketch plan, and I compared it to the previous sketch plan; it sure looked to me like the footprint of this place was approximately twice the area of the previous one. Now, I've done a little research about Country Inn and Suites. I have their directory of accommodations for 2004. I've gone to their website. I've called a number of the hotels. Although some of the Country Inn and Suites are just country.inns and have just hotel rooms, it is a very small minority. I think that's the way they started out. They started out as Country Inns and most likely expanded to Country Inn and Suites. The vast majority of them are combinations. There maybe some others that are all suites. I don't know which ones they are, but I know there are many, many that are combinations. And the combination ratio is different than what is being proposed here is just the opposite. For instance, the one in Cortland, which is 81 rooms total, has 26 suites. I think the one I put in the website, Corbin, KY, 44 rooms including 8 suites.. Seeing as the vast majority of Country Inn & Suites hotels are combinations apparently, that seems to be the most successful formula. So I would suggest even 35 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 67 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 with the kind of economy that we have around here with schools and so forth, I would suggest that a specialized facility like this that is almost all suites might be more viable in a larger urban area where you have a larger pool of people looking for that kind of facility because now with some new hotels like the big Hampton Inn downtown, the big hotel that is going in downtown, right downtown. There are going to be times when not all the hotels in town are filled. There are going to be a lot of times when not all the hotels are filled. The market is going to be for a lot of people where can I get the cheapest hotel room and its not going to be a suite. So if you are going to be, except for those that must have a suite, if you are in these times when they are low occupancy this might not be as competitive. Country Inn & Suites has, I found 46 hotels they've built in their guide here nationwide that have between 38 and 55 rooms. There are more than 46 that are smaller than this facility, but I just chose the cutoff of 55 rooms. If they've built that many and some of them have been built recently like the Corbin, KY one was built two years ago according to their staff then I wonder why they get this thing that its not viable. I don't see this driven by data, I see this driven by opinion and I don't buy it yet. Also, the point about amenities is simply not true. Page 47 here is a Country Inn & Suites stop in Illinois and have 40 rooms and has a pool. Wisconsin, 38 rooms that their smallest hotel has a pool. Winocki, WI, which is just outside of Madison. Good size town, similar to ours, 38 rooms have a pool. So I don't think that is true that you can't have those amenities in a small hotel. I would like to give this, by the way, to anybody on the board who would like to look at it because it has all this information about these hotels. There are other options here and I don't think Country Inn & Suites has come forward with them. It is pretty much what I want to say. One other question, when you get further down the road after they do come back if they do come back or whatever happens here, a hotel gets built, I'm real concerned about lights and light pollution in the neighborhood, but that would be later in the process I guess. Mike Kelly, 1002 Danby Rd My name is Mike Kelly. I am an attorney. I live at 1002 Danby Road and have for the last 63 years to be specific and I deal with facts in my life. The fact that you have in front of.you is possibly that that building is 250 feet long. That is what a fact is. Another fact is that it is on the corner of King Road and 9613. That is what a fact is. I've listened to what I call speculation, assumption, all those things, and I've listened to the board and I would like to tell you one or two of the things that is at least of interest to me very directly. Ithacare just happens to front in the back of my yard and I know in a very short period of time he is going to be asking to put another building for about 90 people in my back yard again. I am listening to the people on this board talking about traffic and talking about what it does. You are talking about what it is like to live on Danby Road. I can tell you there are times since I've been there where maybe one car at about 7:30 in the morning goes by once every couple of minutes. Now, at 7:30 in the morning with what this board has approved and that would include Campus Circle, that would include the various places up the road, that would certainly include. Ithacare with buses now that m PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 when you talk about what the traffic density is going to be or.what that hotel will be, it is okay, but what is going to happen when Ithacare, which they are starting to do, says we want to put another 90 rooms right down the street. When you were talking about a creek, well Ithacare covered a creek. When you are talking about environmental impacts, there was a duck fly that was about 100 yards from my house and didn't make a difference. It didn't and it means that the ducks are no longer there, Ithacare is there. And I am very clear when you are talking about need. There may have been a great need for Ithacare, I'm sure there was, but when another person is trying to use his land and there are things called should it be 46 room or 53 room, and if you looked at it and you would bet your life on whether that is a fact or not or whether it is needed or not, and I was wondering what about my rights. I worry about the next time this board gets ready to say well we can put a 90 facility Ithacare right in my back yard, about 100 yards from my house and somebody comes up and says what about the traffic that is going to cause. What about the lights and when I listen to the gentleman right behind me, well you ought to take a look at Ithacare at night. It lights up the sky. It's a wonder a 747 doesn't land there. In addition to that, when you take a look at when you start putting the next.facility down there that is right contiguous to his property. I have been using quarry for only about since 1956. My only request is when this board is looking at things they ask themselves is it a fact. Could you do worse than. that? Possibly. Do you think that they will come back with something that they will put in front of you? Probably. So one would look to see whether ... and very clear again about the use and the need. Do you need it there? Well, that's speculated. If they put it there and it worked, they needed it. And if it goes down, then you were right. Its like Ithacare, if nobody went to Ithacare and you put Ithacare there, then it would be there and it would work and you'd be right and if it didn't you'd be wrong. The only thing I would request is that if you stick to real facts and you stick to somebody who is going to trying hopefully reduce my tax base a little bit by putting a piece of property up there like that, that's it. Lastly, when you are taking a look at looks, if I looked at that and I looked at Big AI's and I looked at Zebra's and by the way I want to acknowledge, you Fred that you acknowledged all those, and I look at the Exxon station and I was saying what in God's name are you thinking of that versus that. But I'm clear that there is also the issue of density and need and the rest of it. I just want to be sure that I put that forward to you because I have had both the privilege and experience of living on Danby Road since 1941 and it has been a very amazing experience to watch what traffic actually means and what actually cars going by actually mean and it is still a wonderful place to live. Thanks. Chairperson Wilcox — Are you a disinterested party in this whole... just to make sure? Mr. Kelly Oh, sure. I am very disinterested. I've justlived there all my life. Chairperson Wilcox — Before you start, this is not a public hearing. I can cut you off any time I want and put you back in your seat. 37 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Joel Harlan, Newfield My name is Joel Harlan and I'm from Newfield. I've been to many meetings and it's the same thing all over again. They are not happy with anything in your backyards or anything around your neighborhood. Anywhere in this County. Well what I got to say to these developers is just like what I told the representatives of Target, if you're not happy with it, move it elsewhere. Go to Lansing. They'll accommodate ya and look what happened, Target went to Lansing and they're happy. This is what these developers are going to have to do. Move it somewhere else in a different township. I feel sorry for this man who wants to put townhouses on his land. Good luck because you are going to face the same thing. They are going to cut you down. If you can't build a hotel, townhouses are a lot worse and traffic and rotating back and forth than just this. So I gotta tell ya, you're gonna have a tough battle to get anything in where you want it. That's the townhouses and that hotel. You best move it to Lansing or any other township to see what you can get down. Maybe Lansing might take you up like all the other things because it is booming up there. You've got the college kids coming up from the airport and big shots and they may need more room up there and that's a booming place going on up there because everyone is going up there. Everybody is chasing everybody out. Where are you going to go? Lansing. They've already made plans. They've accepted and I don't know why these guys are just stalling around on a dead heat when they can go do something different elsewhere in another area of the County. They are just wasting time on this board and I have been to many of these meetings and we just go through... aren't you guys going through a lawsuit now because of the same thing about that affordable housing up there by the hospital...? Chairperson Wilcox — Joel... Mr. Harlan — That's all I got to say. Cheryl Botts, 971 Comfort Rd I appreciate that the sprawl has been addressed. I think there were a lot of very important points about traffic, but where I want to make my point is I operate a very small B &B outside of my home and I have been seeing a lot of hotels being built. I am not against having competition, but it is a very small operation and I fill up when the hotels fill and I can't be a bigger place because it's my small B &B. A hotel like this would definitely kill my business. I also think that it is very important that we look at these numbers that I think haven't addressed ... I think it is very interesting that a hotel would not have a lot of traffic or as much traffic as stores. I think that needs to be looked into and also the number of dollars spent. And are really .this number of suites needed in this area. I think that really needs to be looked at, too. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Next? Christiann Dean, 330 King Rd W Good evening. I am Christiann Dean. I live the Town of Ithaca Agriculture Committee. revised some of what I wrote in that letter input and also hearing what some of the otr about to say you read in my letter, but some PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 at 330 West King Road. I am also chair of sent you a letter. I have refined and even after seeing these plans and hearing your ier people have said. So some of what I'm of it you might be surprised in. The Country Inn hotel proposed for the corner of 96B and West King Road would undermine the planning goals so carefully worked out in the Town's Comprehensive Plan. You, Town Planning staff, and Town Committees including agriculture and Codes and Ordinances worked long and hard to determine the appropriate use of this corner. Wisely concluding that neighborhood commercial like Sam Peter's Furniture store was appropriate for this location in part because the Town designated most of West King Road as an agricultural zone. The Town recognized the need to protect this neighborhood that contains 1,085 acres of farmland, more than one -sixth of the Town's agricultural land. I listened with great interest to the gentleman who has already left who said that he has lived for more than 40 years on Danby Road and listened to what other people had to say about large developments on Danby Road and comparing this proposed development to that. I want to point out that this parcel is not only on Danby Road, but it's also on West King Road and West King Road is a very different Ecosystem, a very different place than Danby Road. Particularly because of the agricultural nature of West King Road. You are faced with a proposal Whose developer... sir you have given some very helpful clarification this evening about the zoning and I appreciate that. As chair of the Town's Agriculture Committee, I believe that if you allow this hotel complex to be built in this location, that soon there will be no more farms on West King Road. As owner of a farm on this road, I cannot imagine farming in the shadow of the proposed hotel complex's traffic, nighttime lights, noise, litter and pesticide drift from landscape maintenance and water pollution, water pollution from parking as well as landscape maintenance. Let me just ... someone has brought up Holly Creek and questioned if this is really even a creek. Let me just briefly trace where Holly Creek originates and where it goes. Holly Creek, although it is small much of the year, it's the headwater for our gorge. Our gorge goes into Buttermilk Creek, which goes into Cayuga Lake. So any pesticides or herbicides or other pollution from building materials such as most buildings are built with pressure treated wood and the runoff from pressure treated wood lasts for decades and so this is high up on the site. This is high up on a slope of a hill that then slopes down into Holly Creek. Holly Creek then runs down into our gorge, our gorge runs into Buttermilk Creek ... so you see. Mr. Auble's staff is apparently unable to make any cogent response or really any response at all to the affects that this hotel will have on neighboring agriculture. This 96;J PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 has not been addressed at all. The presentation addressed most of the concerns that were raised by you and by other speakers at the previous meeting, but they simply cannot address that because it's bigger. It's such a big issue that they don't have a cogent response to it. They cannot. Although the proposed design is now two stories high not three, the newly proposed footprint is much larger and still contains 67 suites with massive parking for cars and buses. And once built, no matter once happens, once built it would prevent this land from being used for small -scale commercial enterprise that would actually help the neighborhood. The developer's marketing survey shows no convincing evidence of a need for this massive hotel in Ithaca or in this location. No doubt there are visitors to Ithaca who would pay to have a kitchenette and a sitting room in their hotel room, but 67 pairs of them 365 nights a year? Hotel fades come and go as do particular developers, yet if you make unwise decisions that undermine farming the ill- affects will, last forever... farmers give up and sell out. Those farms will never again be farmed. West King Road's farmland provides one -sixth of the agricultural green space so crucial to Ithaca's quality of live and to the local tourist industry by retaining a pastoral view. Farms and massive hotels cannot exist so close by. If you approved this massive hotel just one mile away, you are choosing unnecessary commercial development over the farmland that I believe you are sincere about wanting to protect. I hope you have the wisdom to make the choice that would benefit all of the Town of Ithaca's people, not just one developer. This is bigger. This is different from Big AI's or other developments on Danby Road because it is also no West King Road. Farmland cannot speak for itself so it is our job to speak up for it. This proposal is the, antithesis of the land use vision you adopted in the form of the Comprehensive Plan. Please vote no on the Country Inn and Suites proposal and please do not send it forward to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Keep in mind that because of the potential negative impact on agriculture, if you do allow this proposed complex to proceed further, the environmental impact review must by law be sent to the Agriculture Committee, Tompkins County Farmland Protection Board, and the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets along with this letter. And if you do allow this development to proceed, I hope you will agree to attend a meeting of the Agriculture Committee to explain your puzzling actions to us. We want to work with you. If on the hand you have the courage to vote no, your wisdom will be widely appreciated and applauded. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — Any body else? Yes, sir. Marty Nichols, 610 Coddington Rd I'm Marty Nichols. I live at 610 Coddington Road. I work at the college and I have heard about the 67 -room Country Inn and Suites. I've stayed at them. I recruit a lot of athletes,. a lot of students to the campus and I've talked to many people in the admissions office, a lot of people that I know, a lot of coaches that type of thing on VA e, PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 campus and they think it would be an awesome thing to have. They were hoping it would be bigger, honestly. We have people come to town almost every weekend. You know, Friday, Saturday, Sunday... Thursday to Sunday, and it is so difficult to find places for these people to stay when they come to town. They'll stay two or three days. We have people staying in Cortland. We have people staying in Horseheads... constantly, almost all of the time. All that business seems to be going to Cortland and all that business and all the business goes to Horseheads and we have an opportunity right here to have a nice looking hotel, which I've stayed at lots of hotels and I'm sure all of you have, and a lot of hotels are just a box and that's it. There's not too much pizzazz or anything with them. I think this is one of the better - looking hotels that you could possibly have. Just speaking with a lot of the people at the college, students and everything else ... YOU know it would be an awesome thing to have up there on South Hill. I live on South Hill as well. I know that there are a lot of other things that could be put on a commercial site, retail stores, gas stations, that type of thing. If something like this isn't approved, what other things would be approved I guess my question would be that would have low impact traffic patterns. Hotels I know that when we stay at hotels we are there at between 6 and 10 at night and we leave between 6 and 10 in the morning and that's it. You aren't running around back and forth all day in and out all day getting something from the store, getting some gas, getting some whatever it might be constantly. Those people are gone. Those people went home or wherever they are going. And if you have a suite there, a lot of the events and things that I personally bring on the campus, those are the places that people want to stay. There is no other place in Ithaca like that. There is nothing where people can actually stay for two or three days, have some food in their hotel and stay there. This is a unique concept, which Ithaca is supposed to be unique in many different ways and we don't have this in town. And I know from, like I said, recruiting and traveling different places, these are the types of places that we stay at mostly. It is a lot easier for groups of people that come into town and a lot of people that come to Ithaca come in groups. In the summer time they come in groups to the State Parks. They come in groups to camps and everything else. I think it is a very appropriate plan. I think the plan, the actual ... the photo of it is something that is attractive as compared to some of those other things that are up on South Hill that I've seen and go by everyday. Just hearing some of the other things. Seventeen percent of the site is a building on it... the other 83% percent ... 51 or 53% of that is landscaping. I would say that is a considerable amount of landscaping and trees and that type of thing as compared to the site which is only 17% and I don't know what the percentage is that you are allowed to have I mean are you allowed to have more than 17% 1 don't know ... 30 % or 40 %...I mean it seems like something even bigger could be put on that site. But 67 rooms to me does not seem like it's a huge place. That's all I have. Thanks. Chairperson Wilcox — Before you leave, are you representing Ithaca College in your views? !ail PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Nichols — My self. Chairperson Wilcox — Just yourself? Thank you very much. Anyone else? All right. Thank you all very much. Any comments here from what we just heard? Board Member Talty — Yes. First of all that I would like to state that I appreciate Mr. Auble coming up and articulating his points with a lot of passion. I like to hear that from people who come in front of the board. I think that is lacking sometimes, so hats off. With regards to the brochure with all the different listings across the country. I'd like to state that I don't think it is as black and white as all that. Price per square foot to build in Tompkins County is extremely high. I don't know what it is in Madison, Wisconsin but I'd be willing to be that different areas of the country have different raw material costs and labor costs. So I think when we look at these types of things, though well articulated with the book, I don't think it is truly black and white and that a hotel that is put up in Tompkins County may be more expensive than Madison, Wisconsin just like if you put one up in New York City in Manhattan. So I thing we have to keep these variable also what are the taxes that are in Tompkins County and they are continually rising at double digit figures. Pressure treated wood is not utilized. My best friend builds houses and hotels all the time. Pressure treated wood is a thing of the past. I think that most builders would back me up on that. I just wanted to make that on the record. And the ecological impact of the hotel, I don't know.for sure, but I'd be willing to bet that the impact would be much smaller compared to convenience stores, laundry mats, car washes, especially with regards to wildlife in the area and trash, which everyone seems to overlook. That's my own particular feeling. I don't have any data to back that up, but traveling around it always seems as though restaurants, car washes, gasoline stations, things of that sort always seem to have a lot more impact on the environment than hotels. That's all I want to say with regards to the points that were brought up earlier. Board Member Conneman — Could I ask Marty a question? Marty, why do you think people stay in Horseheads and Cortland ordinarily? Mr. Nichols — Because they don't have a choice. Board Member Conneman — Because it's cheaper. Mr. Nichols — Why is it cheaper? Board Member Conneman — Because the hotels charge less. Mr. Nichols — Because they are all full here. All the hotels are full here so they can charge any price that they want here because they get them filled up easily. Board Member Conneman — So when they're filled up people go to Cortland and it's cheaper and if its not they stay there even when the hotels are not filled here because it's cheaper. IA% PLANNING BOARD MINUTES .JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Nichols — Very, very rarely. Never. Not any of the people that I've ever known. Not if they are doing any kind of business in Ithaca they generally will stay in Ithaca when most ... I'm telling you almost every time ... I'd say 100% of the times that we've had anybody go to Horseheads and Cortland its because they are full, almost 100% of the times they are full. They are always looking at bed and breakfasts. I refer them to a lot of bed and breakfasts in town and our last resort is Cortland and Horseheads. That's my own personal. Board Member Talty — If you're done, I want to comment on both comments and that is that there are tremendous peaks and valleys in Tompkins County with regards to occupancy rates. You can shoot off a cannon at the Best Western and not hit anybody most nights and there are other times when there are weddings, there's Cornell events, there's Ithaca College events, etc. that you have to book a year in advance depending on the weekend or the week. Secondly, I think there is a need for this particular thing because of what you articulated before with regards to suites. People do not want to be boxed in with a king size bed or two twins. But with regards with why they stay, George, it is not always price and it is not always high occupancy. It is convenience. Many times where this particular type of hotel there is nothing really in this area except maybe Comfort downtown, which isn't exactly the same type of room, architectural plan, whatever you want to say. It is different. These particular suites are more on the line of a residence inn where people want to feel more at home with a kitchen, a refrigerator, and a fireplace, whatever. Comfort Suites downtown doesn't really offer that. So with regards to why do they stay there. The people that are going to stay at these particular or this particular hotel, there really is no other option in this area and that is why they stay down there because you are actually targeting a different market. You are not targeting... just like Microtel targets a different market. Marriott's target a different market. This is targeting a different mark and I think it is needed in that particular area. I don't know about the size or occupancy rate or how many rooms you would have to build to make sure you cover yours costs for taxes and things of that sort. So when I'm traveling, I know people who stay in Syracuse. They stay in Cortland. They stay in Elmira because Route 17 happens to be there or on a particular event they can't get a room because it is sold out. I do have questions on whether or not all these hotels are needed in this area because I took a survey..) drove around. I looked and most of the hotels except for Holiday Inn and Ramada, which are full service hotels, are full on a daily basis. Hampton Inn, the new one downtown, the Best Western, the Marriott, the Super 8 and the Comfort Suites are often below 30 to 40% occupancy. I think what they do is share the loss throughout the chain, but that's their business. Mr. Nichols — I don't know about that. Chairperson Wilcox — I don't want to get into a debate. You're all set. Thank you about that. Mr. Kanter — Just a suggestion to the board, we've had sort of two attempts at I don't know what you would call them, needs studies, markets studies, feasibility studies, but 43 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 none of them are getting to these kinds of issues that we are talking about. I think we need that. Chairperson Wilcox — You are absolutely right and I will hold that. I want to see if there are any other comments that members of the board want to make. There being none and I don't want to make any at this point either. I agree that with the two market studies that ... they're independent okay. Actually if you and the people you represent are going to come back with another proposal, you really need something that kind of blends the two. I mean the other one had some facts and figures; it just had other mistakes, which at least caused me some issues with regard to the credibility of other facts. There were just some errors in it, but at lease presented occupancy rates and a lot of facts and information that would go to justify the need for this particular location and this hotel and this size and this location. The second one doesn't have that, the one we have today. The company that I work for is included in there, Claritas, the VP of HR is included in there. She talks about how we have a person who is being relocated from Atlanta and is coming to Ithaca about every week and staying four days and flying back home for the weekend. That is one person for one room for four nights. That's not a whole lot of demand and we are up by the airport. To be honest, it is convenient to them someplace close to us than on South Hill. So I'm not sure that adds to what we are I given. The first one was probably a lot closer to a real market study than the second one, but.it had errors. Ms. Dean, you are very passionate in your argument. I'm not sure I understand your argument at this point. Now having said that, I think it is prudent to this board just because time I think to see if they come back.. .If they come back and they come back with something smaller and we get into serious consideration of it, then I want you up here because I need to understand your theory behind commercial development at that corner and what I will potentially, improperly refer to as a domino affect on the agriculture land. I don't understand your argument. I want to try to, but lets do it if and when we get to the point if that's okay with you. Ms. Dean — inaudible comment Chairperson Wilcox (to Mr. Trowbridge) — You have more work to do. Right? Peter? Do you need anything else from us? Mr. Auble? Yes. Mr. Auble — Actually, I was going to ask you to just poll the people here as far as their feelings. Would everybody that is not opposed to this hotel please stand up? Let me just:.. Chairperson Wilcox — Mr. Auble. Ladies and gentlemen, don't stand up. Mr. Auble — I feel that the board needs to listen to the public. I thought that this was why they are here and not everyone speaks up. I'd just like to see the people that are not opposed stand up. I . Chairperson Wilcox — First of all, I gave everybody the opportunity to speak. Second of all, this board does not make its decisions based on popularity and other things. I M1 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 remember the dueling petitions for Burger King. You know what? A petition has no impact on my decision. I am not here to make friends. I'm not here as a politician. I'm not here to win votes. I'm here as an appointed member of this board. It is my job to make the best decision that I can, not to please the majority of the residents. That's not my purpose. All I hope is that when I'm done doing this they respect me. I don't hope that they necessarily like me. That's all I can ask. So I'm not going to poll them. It's not important to me. You all set? Board Member Talty — I have a question. My question is, is there clear marching orders? Do you know exactly what you are doing? That is what you were asking of this board leaving here tonight. Do understand exactly or do you need some kind of straw vote, which we do take on occasion? I'm not clear that you're clear. Mr. Trowbridge — It sounds like we need some clarification of a demand study and I'm not apologizing for Andrew, but we did give him like 48 hours to put his report -together. We were making this submission and he didn't have a lot of time, so I'm not apologizing, but he would certainly put together a better report for you given some additional time. So that is something that I heard. I heard the board say that we won't use the term mass, we'll just say fewer rooms as something that you are looking for. And I think that SRF Associates really just wrote an assessment letter. Again, we've, as you can all imagine, we're trying not to spend people's money frivolously without getting very clear direction from the board. So everyone. has done a little bit of work and I'm not apologizing for anyone, but I think you can appreciate when this team is fully engaged in this project you would get much different results. as you have had in the past. So those are two issues. There's a demand study. Looking at the size of the hotel and clearly there will be additional traffic information and that will need to get provided with New York State DOT. And we haven't talked about other environmental issues, but TG Miller's as you all know, will reconsider all the hydrologic study that was previously done for Holly Creek as well as all the other civil work that would clearly be a part of any environmental review as we come in for the SEQR review process. I think those are the high points. Chairperson Wilcox — I think that's it. Mr. Trowbridge — I appreciate the board and all your time once again on this project. Again, we could have come back for some other kind of determination, but we felt with staff that we wanted to have an open dialog about this one more time before we looked at it seriously. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 9:35 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES — June 1, 2004 and June 15, 2004 PB RESOLUTION NO, 2004 =071: Approval of Minutes —June 1, 2004 and June 15, 2004 45 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 612004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by George Conneman. RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the June 1, 2004 and June 15, 2004 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meetings as presented. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Hoffmann. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS The board discussed the possibility of canceling the July 20, 2004 Planning Board Meeting. After discussion it was concluded that it would be appropriate to hold the July 20, 2004 meeting and there was a possibility of canceling the August 3, 2004 Planning Board due to a lack of quorum. 1. The Town Picnic is scheduled for Friday, August 6, 2004, Board Member Hoffmann - I have two things having to do with some thoughts about the Ithaca College communication tower. I was on a car trip to Tennessee this last week and saw a lot of different communications towers both the lattice ones and the monopoles. The monopoles really stood out and very often they are made of galvanized steel, like the one presented to us. They had turned very dark. In the beginning they are maybe a little lighter and reflective, but lots of these were very, very dark and really stood out against the sky. So I think if they come back with a study of how you can use paint to hide them that would be very interesting to see. I also remember seeing a water tower that I kept saying to the others in the car do see that water tower, it is almost impossible to see. And every time I kept looking back to find it, I had trouble finding it against the sky. It was sort of a pale almost sky blue and aqua with a little bit a gray in it and it was reflective. It was incredible how it disappeared. Board Member Howe — Was it sunny? Board Member Hoffmann — It was overcast a little bit. The other thing is, as I got back I saw in the newspaper something about the fact that the reason there had been some trouble with these communication systems had to do with downtown construction and it made me wonder whether we need to look back at this. Maybe they don't really need to have such a big tower or maybe they didn't need what they were asking for because maybe the problem is entirely different than they thought. EEO PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JULY 61 2004 APPROVED July 20, 2004 Mr. Kanter —Well, I think the current system is not a digital system. It is the other one. To convert to an entirely new system, they need a tower. Now whether they need that tower in that place, that's another question. Board Member Hoffmann— Maybe they don't need such a high tower. Mr. Kanter — Well, I think that will be something that you'll need to consider. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I just wanted to tell you what I had seen because it was striking. Board Member Talty = There's all different types, but I think it all comes back to line of site with regards to communication towers. So I think that often the heights often depends on the natural landscape, if I'm not mistaken. Chairperson Wilcox — I was at the fireworks Thursday night and I was on a part of the property where I was farther away. from the existing tower and if you happen to look up and look in that direction you see it and its not pretty but its there. I could walk 150 feet and the angle of it was such that the tower was totally obscured by the trees in the area. was much closer to it. Board Member Conneman — It depends where you are what you see. Chairperson Wilcox — I have seen a lot of lattice ones for example on 86 sort of as you head towards Erie for example. I looked at them and they kind of go up and they are level or flat at the top. I always thought maybe they didn't finish constructing them, but that's the way they look. Board Member Conneman — Where they look the best is on the Cornell water tower. Chairperson Wilcox — Or on some farmers silo. Absolutely. Anything else from board members? All set. AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the July 6, 2004 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, /V W I �' Carrie Coates W itmore Deputy Town Clerk 47 7:00 P.M 7:04 P.M TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street . Ithaca, New York 14850 . Tuesday, July 6, 2004 AGENDA Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). SEQR Determination: Leonardo 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1132 Danby Road. 7 :05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1132 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, Medium Density Residential zone. The proposal includes subdividing a +/- 0.07 -acre strip from the western boundary of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, to be consolidated with Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.10 (10 Allison Drive). Estate of Clara Leonardo, Owner; Richard Leonardo, Applicant. 7:10 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell Plantations Plant Production Facility, Forest Horne Drive. 7 :20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive at the Arboretum Test Gardens, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 =5.2, Low Density Residential zone. The project involves the construction of a 3,270 +/- square foot greenhouse with an attached +/- 1,200 square foot head -house (support space), a 7,550 +/- square foot open- air lath house, and a +/- 2,000 square foot storage structure. The project also involves installation of approximately 1,840 feet of sanitary sewer line along Forest Home Drive for this new facility and the existing neighboring building. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Hal Martin, Agent. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of a revised Sketch Plan for the proposed Country Inn & Suites hotel located at the southwestern corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C ". The proposal includes subdividing off a +/- 2.95 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre parcel for the construction of a two -story (reduced from three- stories), 67 -room hotel at the intersection. The proposal also includes approximately 70 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J. Trowbridge, Agent. 7. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 8. Approval of Minutes: June 1, 2004 and June 15, 2004. 9. Other Business: 10. 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.) / /6 7: of JAI //, r, l� 17. 71all,o or '/ TOWN OF ITHACA RESIDENTS NOT OPPOSED TO THE COUNTRY INN AT NYS 96B & KING RD. A'PI'P_CF-llUI I' #1 �9 a�. ,.30 a�. do �l i ITHACA AREA RESIDENTS NOT OPPOSED TO THE COUNTRY INN AT NYS 96B & KING RD. NAME AnDRFRq TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, July 6, 2004 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, July 6, 2004, 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 2 -lot subdivision located at 1132 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1- 20.11, Medium Density Residential zone. The proposal includes subdividing a +/- 0.07 -acre strip from the western boundary of Tax Parcel No. 37- 1- 20.11, to be consolidated with Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -20.10 (10 Allison Drive). Estate of Clara Leonardo, Owner; Richard Leonardo, Applicant. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval and Special Permit for the proposed Cornell Plantations Plant Production Facility located on Forest Home Drive at the Arboretum Test Gardens, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 65- 1 -5.2, Low Density Residential zone.. The project involves the construction of a 3,270 +/- square foot greenhouse with an attached +/- 1,200 square foot head -house (support space), a 7,550 +/- square foot open -air lath house, and a +/- 2,000 square foot storage structure. The project also involves installation of approximately 1,840 feet of sanitary sewer line along Forest Home Drive for this new facility and the existing neighboring building. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Hal Martin, 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, June 28, 2004 Publish: Wednesday, June 30, 2004 The IthacasJourrial , ; �K Wednesday, June 30, 2004.11 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SIGN -IN SHEET DATE: July 6, 2004 (PLEASEPRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL. MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME I PLEASE PRINTADDRESS /AFFILIATION 7Q RE.-MA i5ggwpzau I 1 Z� Uj ApkeK 6 CecIV a vta D� tl (c, pjvtt�- ffigj�/ L crim 2�fn6 cvc)v� a a (Foc U � S L� ow a a i h l�- i� �� 7 rze wer; z 1: �VOR--IX;el jt� t wow r� ka, Klee Zd 'N (� 7Q 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 Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, on Tuesday, July 6, 2004 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioua Street. Date of Posting: June 28, 2004 Date of Publication: June 30, 2004 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 30th day of June 2004. Notary Public CONNIE F. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No, 01CL6052878 Qualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 26, 20