Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2008-04-01FILE CNI�`J DATE PLANNING BOARD TOWN OF ITHACA 215 NORTH TIOGA ST. ITHACA, NY 14850 TUESDAY, APRIL 12008 7:00 P.M. PRESENT: Rod Howe, Chair; Members: Eva Hoffmann, George Conneman, Larry Thayer, Fred Wilcox, Susan Riha, Hollis Erb and Alternate Kevin Talty STAFF: Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner; Christine Balestra, Planner; Darby Kiley, Planner; Dan Walker, Town Engineer; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Paulette Neilsen, Deputy Town Clerk. OTHERS: Scott Abbett and George McConochie, SED, Inc. Ontario, NY Frank Rogan, Sunset Grill Maria Maynard, SB Ashley Management Peter Bicombe, Coddington Road, Willseyville Mellissa Madden, Dilmun Hill John Confer, Hammond Hill Road, Brooktondale Katherine Wolfe, Trowbridge & Wolfe Architects Call to Order: Chairman Rod Howe called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and stated for the record that the Postings and Publications for the Public Hearings had been duly posted. The fire exits were identified and the first agenda item announced. Persons to be Heard There was no one wishing to address the Board at this time. Chairperson Howe announced the next agenda item. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 1 Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Sign Variances for the Sunset Grill restaurant located at 823 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -4 -2, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal is to allow a second freestanding sign on this property (where one freestanding is permitted) that is too close to the side lot line (15 -foot setback is required). Matt Torchia & James Rogan, Owners/Applicants; Frank Rogan, Anent. Chairperson Howe — We have materials from Christine, but if there's any comments that you would like to make. Frank Rogan, Sunset Grill Yes, where the sign was originally placed in the drawing, it's easy to come within the 15 4eet border if I'move the sign back about 5 feet. Which would make it 16 feet on one side and 17 feet on the other, from one end to the other end, to the property line, because it's a triangulated property, it would be 16 on one and 17 on the other, away from the property lines. So we could definitely move that back and it would suit us just to put that issue ... I believe that Code is 15 -feet back from the property line. Chairperson Howe — My guess is more of the questions will be "Why do you need a sign there." I don't know if you've seen a copy of the proposed resolution, you know, certainly one of the things that we will probably talk about is having a sign, if there was a sign there, match the color of other signs, but there was also a suggestion to us that maybe in your bigger sign that's already 108 400t square, that maybe just putting your name there might mean that you wouldn't need a sign there. So maybe you could address why you feel you need a sign at that point. Mr. Rogan — I have had several people come into the restaurant since it's opening that can't find it, that know that it's there someplace, that slow down, don't know where to turn, they ... I have had many people tell me that it's dangerous not having a sign there. They don't know where they're supposed to turn. They don't know which building it's in, they don't know if it's in that complex... As they are coming up the hill they are leaving a 30 going into a 40. They're looking for "where's the Sunset Grill" and it's every weekend there's people from out of town, there's even people from town mentioning "We thought this was still Franco's. There's no sign." And with the sign, where we're asking for it to be placed, is about 100 -200 yards away from where the exchange from 30 — 40 picks up and it would be visible where the other sign is up in the air. The letters could only be that of about 4 -6 inches big, and it's not, it's pretty much after the driveway. It's about 12 4eet after the driveway is where that free - standing sign exists where this would be before the driveway. You would be coming, as I said, from a 30- 40, you would automatically see it. You could automatically turn on your blinker. You would have 100 -yards before you have to turn, approximately 100 - yards, prior to having to turn, so you could give people behind you time to see your blinker on. It's a lot involved with safety and just so that people know where we are. It's constant that people are asking "Where is it? We thought this was Franco's. We've been driving around looking for it." It's primarily an unmarked building at this point. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 2 Chairperson Howe —Let me open it up for questions. Eva... Board Member Hoffmann — I have a comment, and that is, it seems to me there is a fairly easy solution for this and that is for you to change the existing sign, the tall one, that says "Rogan's Corner' at the top. Take away the sign that says " Franco's Restaurant" because that doesn't seem to exist anymore, and put in the reference to the Sunset Grill, Mr. Rogan — Correct, and that's the sign that I was speaking of which comes after the driveway. And I may also state that I am only a tenant there and I have discussed it with the landlord, and he led me to believe that that sign was primarily,.. I'm sure that he would allow us a 4 -inch or 6 -inch thing, but I asked him for half the sign so that it could be 10 -inch Sunset Grill, and in the leases that he has signed with other people he has also dedicated certain allotments. Where Tracey's was, that's a confection store. Where the laundromat was which is on the sign, that right now is becoming a liquor store and the people that lease Rogan 0s Corner got the groceries, the pizza, and I think fast food or something. So under consideration of that, there's only that small little area that's available at this time for us to change. Board Member Hoffmann — To me it looks like it's about half the sign, slightly more than half the sign. At the top it says "fast food, pizza and subs, grocery and beer: and under that, it says "laundromat ", which is no longer there.. Mr. Rogan — Correct, which is the liquor store. Board Member Hoffmann — Then it says " Tracey's Hair and Tanning" Mr. Rogan — Which is now the confection store. Board Member Hoffmann — Right, and then it says " Franco's Restaurant" so it seems to me that those two businesses which are now different names all need to be on this sign and the old names need to be taken off and that should make it much easier for people looking for it to find you. Mr. Rogan — In reference, all he gave us is where it said Franco's, which, it's past the driveway, once again, and it's in small letters which are pretty much hard to decipher from the road. Well, they're not ... it's not as big of a sign as what we're trying to ... we're trying to make it less of a burden for people to recognize that this is the Sunset Grill and it's this building. Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah, well, the other thing is, I assume you are talking about people coming from the north, from the City of Ithaca and going up hill, because when you come from the other direction, you have the sign that's on the building that says "Sunset Grill", which is fairly easy to read. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 3 Mr. Rogan — Correct. And that's about the same size sign that we are trying to get in the front. It's a little smaller in the front. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, after having looked at this, and knowing what the situation was before, that this sign that is there right now was built before there was a sign permit issue and it was built twice as large as it should have been, and that you can have two signs if you have entrances on two different roads, but instead, the former owner chose to have a sign that was twice as large. I think it should be possible to go by the alternative suggestion that was given by Staff to us and just simply change the large existing sign and not put up a new sign. I would be ... I would not be inclined to approve the application for an additional sign for this property. Chairperson Howe — I actually understand for that, so let me just see how others are... the traffic issue and I have some sympathy Board Member Wilcox — I just want to make sure we are clear. There's no approval here tonight... Everyone at once, yes, just a recommendation. Chairperson Howe — That's why there is no environmental review because they are the lead for that as well. Larry... Board Member Thayer — I can understand why he wants one there and I would agree that there probably is a need there. But I also agree with Eva that that other sign really should be updated. I mean, why have three or four things that are meaningless on that sign? It's really a waste of advertising space. Mr. Rogan — Yeah, it's up to each individual to have it updated and collectively, we are waiting for the liquor guy to receive his liquor license, at this point, because the cost of having a cherry- picker go up there, pull that sign down and re- stencil, have it done two or three times ... if we wait until he gets his liquor license, then collectively, the three of us, go at it at once, and his liquor license he applied for six months ago and he should be receiving it shortly. But at that point is when we were going to, we were going to redo that part of the sign. So at that point that will be brought under (inaudible). Board Member Conneman — I agree with Eva and Larry. I don't think we need another sign. Somehow this... advertising things that aren't there doesn't make any sense to me. Chairperson Howe — There's two, sort of two separate issues here. Board Member Riha — Yeah I am kind of in agreement with Rod, for safety sake, people approaching from the City should be, before they get to the drive, should have some indication.. . PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 4 Board Member Thayer — I was going to say, if we just cut out "breakfast, lunch and dinner" at the bottom of your sign...change the color of it, and reduce the size...just have "Sunset Grill" period. Mr. Rogan — That would be fine. Board Member Thayer — And reduce the size and bring the color back like the other signs are... Mr. Rogan —The green.. . Board Member Thayer — I would have a tendency to go along with you on that. Mr. Rogan — Okay. if that's under consideration, we would definitely consider that. Board Member Wilcox — Of course we don't know what the Zoning Board of Appeals might say, that's true, but we can include it in our recommendation... Board Member Thayer — Exactly. Chairperson Howe —Kevin? Any... Board Member Talty — Ditto. Chairperson Howe — To what Susan said? Board Member Talty — I would be in favor of the sign given all the different attributes that have been discussed in the last five minutes, because it's really a safety issue. I know when I go up the hill, I mean, I know where it is now, but if I don't, if I'm not familiar with the area, you'd be past it and then you'd have the issue of turning around and coming back and things of that sort... Board Member Hoffmann — You don't' actually, because there is a second entrance from Coddington Road. Board Member Thayer — If you make the turn. Board Member Talty — If you know it's, if you know. If you're not familiar, you don't know. Board Member Hoffmann — No, but if you are in the turning lane and you are looking and you see a road going off there ... if you're really hungry ... and you're looking for a restaurant... you might just turn off there and try to find it. Board Member Talty — A lot of "mights ". PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 5 Chairperson Howe — Hollis, you've been very patient, do you want to chime in here... Board Member Erb — I'm not very comfortable with granting what is essentially a third sign on this location. There's already a variance and we have one large sign where, in theory, the possibility of two small ones. In fact, the face of this one existing sign is larger than the sum of the two 50- square foot signs already. That the liquor store does not yet have its license so you don't want to get the big sign painted doesn't strike much appeal to me because it seems to me you could have all the signs painted and just cover over the one that isn't yet in play. Board Member Hoffmann — I was going to suggest that too. Chairperson Howe — And again, I think there are two issues here. There is a collaborative issue about the one sign and then the decision... Board Member Erb — But I think "Sunset Grill" could be big enough on the Rogan's Corners sign that the issue of it being a traffic safety, I think is a red herring. I don't feel that that is grounds for having another 50- square foot sign on this property when it already had the variance to combine the two into one. Chairperson Howe — Well and we're suggesting that if...that the current sign is no more than 24- square feet, and I forget what Larry suggested in his comments, but... Board Member Erb — Even so, the variance was already granted to the owner of the property once to combine the two. If the owner wants to take the other one down to 50... Board Member Riha — The other one we are talking about, for point of clarification, is the Sunset Grill sign on the building? Everyone — No, no, it's the big one... Board Member Riha — It's the big one. So that's my issue. So the property itself only gets two signs? It seems like there is a whole bunch of businesses. So the sign limitation is per piece of property? No matter how many businesses are on there? Chairperson Howe — Who can address that? Christine? Ms. Balestra — Say that again? What was the question? Board Member Riha — Is the limitation ... I was surprises about ... I'm confused about whether the sign limitation is per piece of property, no matter how many businesses are on there. Ms. Balestra —That is the way that I understand the sign law reads. That it's per property, not, regardless of how many businesses are on the property. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 6 Board Member Riha — So this individual is basically, he didn't have any control over the size of that first sign, the Rogan's Corner sign, but because they built that sign so big, every other business can't put another sign? Everyone — not another ... a freestanding sign... Board Member Erb — ...freestanding sign. They all have wall signs... Ms. Balestra — right, right. Each business can have a wall sign, but they can only have a certain number of freestanding signs. Mr. Rogan — And if I can approach the wall sign, the wall sign is primarily... it's parallel with the road, it's nothing that you would really see ... it's parallel with the road ... .it's something that you would have to be 10 -15 feet down the road before you would even see the sign on the side of the building because of the angle projectory. It's perfectly parallel with the road. The building, as a matter of fact, the south end of the building is cocked back a little bit so it's leaning back, not towards the road, where the projection of your eyesight would be. It's actually coming away from the road in the back so the sign is at an angle away from the road, it would be on the side of the building and I don't see where that would ... I understand the law and everything, I'm just stating that it's of little to no use. Chairperson Howe — Fred, we haven't heard from you. Board Member Wilcox — Just a couple questions. Frank and I go back a ways here, so, for the record. Did Franco's have a sign on that side? Where you're asking for one now? Mr. Rogan — Yes, and at that point, I thought that that was accepted when a couple of the outbuildings that were built and the deck that was built, I thought that at that point that sign was accepted, but I guess it was never brought into connection with anything. Board Member Wilcox — Now, I want to talk about ownership, if I can, of the various buildings. Not all three buildings are currently owned by the same entity... Mr. Rogan — Yes. Jim Rogan and Julie( ?) Rogan, yes.... Board Member Wilcox -m ...all three buildings are still owned by the same legal entity? Mr. Rogan — Yes. Yes, Board Member Wilcox — Do you control that legal entity? Mr. Rogan — I'm a ... their property manager. They have a residence in Florida and I conduct their business for them... PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 7 Board Member Wilcox — We're talking about your parents? Mr. Rogan — Yes. Umm while they're out of town and when they are in town they're... they're quite often, but during the winter they are in Florida. Board Member Wilcox — But they own the property and all three buildings? Mr. Rogan — Correct. Matt Torcia leases the Sunset Grill, Kevin leases Confection, Chris leases the old laundromat, and there's a group of people that lease the old convenience store. Board Member Wilcox —Okay. Alright, Chairperson Howe — And Fred, can you give some indication where you may be leaning. Board Member Wilcox That ... well, there's two they'd update it. It's.. probably 15 years, 10 y what's in front of us. T1 blocking traffic, looking sign there before, it mai there before. I aaree th, — I like Larry's suggestion, is kind of where I'm leaning, issues here; there's the existing tall free - standing sign, I wish the hair cutting place has been gone for so long, I mean, gars it's been gone. So that needs to be updated, but that's not ere is a safety issue for people coming up in the left hand lane, '.o get, looking to find where the Sunset Grill is. There was a never have been approved, but nonetheless, there was a sign it if we made it smaller and tnnk nut hrPakfact h inch nnri Hinncr so that it's not 24- square feet, 8X3, that it's 7X2, something a little bit smaller, that it has that same green that we see on the rest of the property, that's what I would be in favor of. Board Member Thayer — How about if you don't like the sign on the building, you take that down? Mr. Rogan — Uhmmm. Which sign? The sign on the road? Board Member Thayer — the one that you said is parallel with the road that you didn't think did any good. Was my feeling of what you were saying. Mr. Rogan — There is not a sign there that is on the building that is parallel to the road. Everyone — There is but it's not really parallel to the road. Mr. Rogan — There's no existing sign on there. There was a Franco's sign on there which, it was taken down. Chairperson Howe — He's talking about the one on your building. Mr. Rogan — Oh, on the back now? PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 8 Chairperson Howe — That's what he's referring to. Mr. Rogan — Oh that sign. That sign, if you're coming from the south, that's 'a great sign, because you can read it, it's legible. Yes, if you're coming from the south heading north down the hill, it's great. People can see that. Chairperson Howe — Okay. I just want to see if, were we correct in our interpretation of the number of signs on the outside? Ms. Brock — Yes, the sign law says "In the case of multi -use facilities, one free - standing sign shall be allowed for the development as a whole, regardless of the number of separate enterprises. If such multi -use facility has entrance for vehicular traffic on more than one street, two free - standing signs are permitted." Chairperson Howe — I know there's probably more comment, but let me open up the public hearing and see what the public has to say about this. So if you want to have a seat for a minute. At 7:22 p.m. we will open up the public hearing. If anyone is here to address our recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the sign variance for the Sunset Grill Restaurant. Is there anyone here who would like to address the Board on this issue? We'll keep the public hearing open for a couple more minutes. Eva. Board Member Hoffmann — I have an alternative suggestion to what Larry suggested, and that is; instead of a permanent free - standing sign, how about permitting a temporary sign on the other side of the building on the northern end of the building, that could be seen as one comes from downtown driving south. And that could be on the building until such a time that the liquor store gets its license and they update the big sign with all the information about the businesses that are going to be there. Chairperson Howe — Eva, it's not clear to me where you're suggesting... Board Member Hoffmann — Where the X is. If you look at the first page of photographs, you see the sign that says Sunset Grill on the southern gabled end of the restaurant building. On the opposite gabled end you would see it as you drove south from downtown. Board Member Talty — Which is the bottom picture. Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. Right. Or somewhere along there, so it would be seen from approximately the same direction that you would see a permanent sign. A free - standing sign, which 'I think would be much more of a problem, aesthetically. And if this were a temporary sign until they could get the proper signs up on the big sign, then it could be taken down at that point and people would have the proper directions on that sign. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 9 Chairperson Howe — But I think a temporary, I mean, that still doesn't address, some of us think there is a traffic- safety issues turning in. So I think some of us feel it would be appropriate to have a sign at this end of the building. Board Member Hoffmann — But the sign would be there, a temporary one, on the building. Chairperson Howe — A temporary one, but, I don't think then, when they fix the other sign, it really still addressing the traffic concern. Hollis... Board Member Erb — I am looking at the bottom photograph... Board Member Wilcox — No you're not. ..(every one laughs) Board Member Erb — I am pointing at the bottom photograph, and you're not sure what my X -ray vision can do, so be careful. .'I'm looking at the bottom photograph here, and if we want to talk about traffic problems, I actually think that people, if they really don't know where they're going, and they see a sign in this white circle, they're going to pull into the driveway, which is the wrong driveway. They're going to say "oh look, Honey, it's right there... tum...turn..,turn" instead of going up to the main entrance at the big Rogan's Corner sign. If you sit and look at this, look at how prominent that driveway is. If the sign is there, they're going to... Chairperson Howe — I wouldn't, that wouldn't be my inclination. Board Member Talty — No, that's a driveway. Chairperson Howe — No, my guess is this is a discussion that we've all kind of made up our minds and that we're not going to convince ourselves, so, fairly soon, I think we'll just take a vote and see how we play this out. Are there any comments before I close the public hearing? I will close the public hearing at 7:25p.m. So does anyone want to give a convincing argument to sway others on board? Board Member Wilcox — I'll start. I'll start. I appreciate Eva's position, but I truly don't think that changing the free - standing sign to reflect the businesses that are actually there solves the safety problem. I, it's, it should be done. It will be done. I think the Citgo signage makes everything else look good, frankly, and there's not much we can do about that. So, I'm concerned about the traffic heading south in a zone where people are accelerating from 30, to frankly, 45, even though the speed limit is 40 and that a sign smaller than what's requested in a more, in a color that's more compatible with the signage that's already there, is reasonable and appropriate. Chairperson Howe — Any other last persuasive... PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 10 Mr. Rogan — Can I just, .where the sign, where I offered it to be relocated to, or made a suggestion for where it to be relocated to, that would leave that sign from the driveway that, I'm sorry ma'am, I don't know how to pronounce your name... Board Member Erb — Erb, Hollis. Mr. Rogan — it's approximately 100 feet south away from the deck. So it would definitely spy would be heading to, not the first, because you away from that driveway, right on the edge of spindles, it would be right there and that would you're heading to. of that driveway and it would be 2 feet Dt the building as being the building you would be primarily, you know, it's 75 feet that decking, the handle there, with the say that that building is the building that Board Member Talty — Rod, I'd just like to say, why don't we take Eva's suggestion and why does it have to be temporary? Why can't you have a nice gable sign under the eave that says Sunset Grill, that could be partially lighted for the nighttime...could also look at something like that? Chairperson Howe — My guess is aesthetics. Like my, I would actually prefer a sign on the corner than actually on the gable, and we probably all have different views about that, so, when we get to, if somebody moves a resolution and we start talking about conditions, we can certainly sort through some of that out. Board Member Hoffmann — There may be something in the laws that prevents such a sign being permanent too. I mean, there may be too many (inaudible, someone coughed)... Mr. Kanter — Well it would just make some different kind of variance from what we've proposed. Board Member Erb — What I haven't said is that if a sign does go forward, I would prefer for it to be the green and white color scheme. All — yes.... Chairperson Howe — And that's in the proposed resolution. Would someone like to move the resolution? Board Member Thayer — I'll move the resolution. Ms. Brock — Which one? I mean, there are .... what you have in front of you is not a completed resolution. There are a number of alternatives ... there's not a resolution here. You need to specify what you want it to be. Board Member Thayer — Okay we are going to approve it and change the color. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 11 Chairperson Howe —That's in here... Board Member Thayer — And cut the sign essentially in two... Chairperson Howe — So let's...you're talking about, when you, are you saying.... Board Member Thayer — Take out "breakfast, lunch and dinner" just have "Sunset Grill" with the matching colors. Chairperson Howe — Do you have a suggested square feet that you're, that you think would be reasonable? Board Member Thayer — No. Board Member Riha — Well, right now it's 3 by 81 ..we want it 1.5 by 8 or something... Board Member Wilcox — I'd go 2 by 8, yeah, 2 by 8. Chairperson Howe -- So 16- square feet, suggesting any change there? Board Member Thayer — No. Board Member Wilcox — No. Would it still be 5 feet in height? Are you Chairperson Howe — And we are taking out "breakfast, lunch and dinner" Board Member Erb — There was a comment... Board Member Wilcox — It's a restaurant but no food.... (everyone laughs)... Board Member Erb — There was a comment that it wasn't clear that the lights were going to be correctly shielded. Chairperson Howe — That's in here as well, that "the lighting will comply with all applicable sections of the outdoor lighting law" which I guess is the shielding... Board Member Hoffmann — I think that's especially important because of where it's located because you don't want to have lighting that is blinding to traffic that comes. That's a traffic hazard too... Chairperson Howe — Now we also, there has been a proposal that it would actually change slightly from what ... the location. So I don't know if we need to address that, or whether we say "in consultation with Staff, we understand it might shift a little bit from where..." so I'm not sure how to handle that. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 12 Board Member Thayer — I would say include a condition saying "relocate sign so it meets proper setbacks", required setbacks. Board Member Riha — Right, because in the first whereas, it says, "and a second free- standing sign and locating the sign within 15 feet of the side lot line." We could decide what line we could cross that out. Board Member Thayer — Right. Board Member Riha — Because we're not going to locate it within 15 feet of the side lot. Chairperson Howe — Is it up to us in this resolution to say anything about updating the other sign or is that outside what we should really be focused on this evening? Mr. Kanter — I think that's kind of a policy issue for the Board, but it's also, as I think Fred mentioned, it's kind of irrelevant to the decision at hand. It's not really part of the application. Board Member Riha — Right. I'm fine with that. Chairperson Howe — So Larry, is that the resolution you're...do we have a second? ... seconded by Fred. With any other proposed changes to the resolution? Ms. Neilsen — I'm not clear on the two 15 -feet ones. We're taking that totally out? "Locating the sign within..." Board Member Riha — Fifteen feet of the side lot line, because they are now agreeing to put it set back 15 feet from the.. so we don't have to... Ms. Neilsen — So that is the setback, so we leave that in there? Board Member Riha — No, we take that out, because... Board Member Erb — End the sentence at "property", is that what we're doing? Chairperson Howe — Yes. Ms. Neilsen — Okay. Mr. Kanter — Well, if the applicant is actually saying he is changing the proposal, I think we can do that. Ms. Brock — Okay. Mr. Kanter — I think that's what you're saying. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 13 Board Member Wilcox — So we're clear, our recommendation is that they don't need a side yard variance. That they can locate the sign on the property and meet the side yard setback requirement? Board Member Thayer — Yeah, that's the way I understand it. Board Member Erb — And so we're also, there's a clause right there that we're also removing? Board Member Riha — Right. Ms. Brock — Why don't I read what I think it will be. So in the first whereas, the last sentence needs to read "the proposal includes allowing a second free - standing sign on the property." Delete "and locating the sign within 15 feet of the side lot line." The second whereas remains the same. Now therefore be it resolved, "that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the request for sign variances for one five foot tall, sixteen- square foot free - standing sign for the Sunset Grill Restaurant where the proposed sign will exceed the number of free - standing signs on the property, with such approval subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed sign shall not exceed 16- square feet in total sign area, nor 5­, feet in height as defined in the Town of Ithaca sign law. b. Remains as written c. Remains as written d. Remains as written.....add a new e e. The applicant must ... no, we don't need that, because he has stated he is relocating the sign. Why don't we just say in e. the sign must be located so that it complies with side lot line setback requirements" just to make it clear. Chairperson Howe — And do we need to say anything about and that the sign will only say "Sunset Grill "? Ms. Brock — Do you care as long as you have the smaller size? Board Member Erb — No. Well, yes, in a way, in a way because the only argument that is successful in my mind is the safety issue of knowing where this is. Chairperson Howe — I think I care. Board Member Erb — So I care, which is the font size for Sunset Grill, explicitly. Ms. Brock — So, "the sign must contain only the text 'Sunset Grill'? With no graphics? I mean, how explicit do you want to get? PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 14 Board Member Hoffmann — Well the reason being that the lettering should be large enough that it's readable so that it doesn't create a different hazard... Board Member Erb — Right. The persuasive argument that's pulling me in tonight is safety issue, know where it is. That doesn't have graphics. That is "hello"' Ms. Brock — Okay, so the sign must contain only the text Sunset Grill with no graphics. Board Member Wilcox — And if there are any questions, obviously the minutes will have our discussion and Christine, you would be ... whose application is this? Christine, you will be at the ZBA and could... Ms. Balestra — We will provide not only the resolution, but probably the minutes for the ZBA. Board Member Wilcox — Yeah, they'll understand why we came to the conclusion we did. Chairperson Howe — So those changes are acceptable to Lang and Fred.. 'so all those in favor of the resolution please raise your hands. So we have 6 in favor ... all those opposed ... 1 opposed ..,so 6 in favor and 1 opposed. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 028 Recommendation to Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals Sign Variances — Sunset Grill 823 Danby Road Tax Parcel No. 40 -4-2 Sign Review Board (Planning Motion made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Fred Wilcox. WHEREAS: Restaurant Board), April 1, 2008 1. This action is consideration of a Recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a sign variance to permit the placement of a new freestanding sign for the Sunset Grill restaurant, located at 823 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 404-2, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal includes allowing a second freestanding sign on the property. Matt Torchia & James Rogan, Owners /Applicants; Frank Rogan, Agent and 2. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a site plan and sign details showing the proposed location, dimensions, materials, and details of the sign, along with other application materials. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 15 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the request for sign variances for one 5 foot tall, 16 +/- square foot freestanding sign for the Sunset Grill restaurant, where the proposed sign will exceed the number of permitted freestanding signs on the property. Such approval subject to the following conditions: a. The proposed sign shall not exceed 16 square feet in total sign area, nor 5 feet in height, as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law, and b. The proposed lighting for the sign shall comply with all applicable sections of the Town of Ithaca Outdoor Lighting Law, and c. The proposed color scheme for the sign shall match the green /white color scheme of the other signs on the property, and d. The applicant must obtain a sign permit prior to installing the new sign, and e. Sign must be located so that it complies with side lot line setback requirements, and f. Sign must contain only the text "Sunset Grill" with no graphics. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: Ayes: Howe, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Erb and Wilcox. Nays: Hoffmann The motion was carried 6 to 1. Chairperson Howe introduced the next agenda and asked the applicants to come before the board and introduce themselves. Maria Maynard, Property Manager for S.B. Ashley Management. Ms. Maynard introduced herself to the board. Chairperson Howe — And would you like to make a brief presentation or some comments? Ms. Maynard — A brief presentation and then I would like to introduce Peter Bicombe, who is the landscape architect for this project. Our presentation here tonight is to ask the Town of Ithaca for a review of our north facade landscape improvement, which we PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 16 propose to the north side of the East Hill Plaza. This is primarily at the Cornell end of the Plaza. There are three main entrances for three different offices for Cornell. One is the payroll department, the other is the sponsored programs department, and the other is the communications and media - services design studio. These are their main entrances. As you can see here from this photo that Peter has presented to us, [referring to photo] this is the existing facade of the north of the building. We have come to you to request your approval to help soften and beautify the back of this entrance area because we would like to improve and incorporate some landscape trees, shrubbery. And at this time I would like to turn it over to Peter Bicombe, who is our landscape architect who has worked on the plan and to review what our proposal is. Peter, you need to state your name and address and... Peter Bicombe, Willseyville, NY Mr. Bicombe introduced himself to the board. Chairperson Howe — Is there something you would like to add to the...? Mr. Bicombe — Just how we are going to achieve the. ..what we call an alley or.. (not audible) ... turn that around... Chairperson Howe — Can you use the... [now using microphone] Mr. Bicombe — Right now the asphalt runs right up to the building, the full length about 300 feet on the back side where Cornell uses the office space. So the first step would be to demolish the...what would be these entrances of concrete and provide space...for a new paving entrance and then build beds on either side of each one of these three entrances on this side of the development a fourth entrance. So basically we'll have to remove the asphalt and then prepare the subgrade for planting and retaining the planting mix where it meets the asphalt with a curbing of granite edging, which will be placed in concrete, slumped concrete. Up against the build we're going to have a maintenance strip of gravel, which will provide surface drainage around these planters, which right now the (not audible) is towards this catch basin here and there is another one down there [referring to map]. Once the beds are prepared we will install trees. These are the large upright trees that are going to be rather narrow crowns with a single trunk. At each entrance gracing each side will be little ornamental trees and in one spot we'll have a cluster of three where there is no entrance. So these are ornamental lilac trees and these will be either a small petite crab... flowering crab or service bevy tree. The larger trees will grace almost give the softening affect that Maria was talking about almost immediately. Down below will be some shrubs and they're not really meant to block anything, but just enhance the...widen beds. These are about 8 feet by 8 feet and the entrance is about a 10 foot diameter paving pattern. Now I guess I'll open up to questions. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 17 Chairperson Howe — Are any of you aware of any environmental considerations? I think our questions can address environmental and just regular and then we'll move to the SEQR and the public hearing? And we're going to switch tapes. I know one, probably, question even though I think Darby has done a good job of explaining the safety zone, but maybe it's worth you just verbally talking a little bit more about the safety zone. You probably expected that, didn't you? Ms. Kiley — Okay. So in Town Code Chapter 250 under Vehicles and Traffic Article I specifies East Hill Plaza with a variety of safety zones. And it was specifically written for the north side of the building that it is a 20 foot width running adjacent to the north face of the building. So it's the building edge and then 20 feet right against the building edge is the safety zone. So what ... in order, and please correct me if I'm wrong on this, in order for this landscaping to go in, they have to shift the safety zone and feed and there is appropriate... there is enough space there to do it and the ... Tom Parsons went out to check it out and so did Kristie Rice from the Code Enforcement Office. So there is space to move the safety zone, but in order to allow that to happen Town Code needs to change and so the Town Board needs to make a change to the Town Code whether it's just a change in the description or another recommendation we had is that the safety zones actually are removed from Town Code possibly and then are just described in the site plan, which we can do as part of the site plan that is going forward here. So please ask questions if... Chairperson Howe — Okay. We'll see if there's clarification. I think we'll start on this end this time and work our way... Board Member Wilcox — And go this way. Who visited the site with Tom Parsons? You said that Kristie did? Ms. Kiley — I don't know if they visited together... Board Member Wilcox — How do we know Tom Parson's opinion on the safety zone? Ms. Kiley — He wrote an email to the department. I think to Jonathan. Mr. Kanter — Yeah. It's in the file. I don't know if we circulated it or not. Board Member Wilcox — It would have been nice to have seen that because that is an important part, I think, of at least my consideration is the safety zone. But if you have an email from Tom saying that... Ms. Kiley — Yes. I mean he wrote a very long email about it. Board Member Wilcox — Okay. Okay. Other than that my only comment is you used to work for the Town of Lansing, right? PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 18 Ms. Kiley — I know. Board Member Wilcox — How did this plaza wind up in the Town of Lansing? You have quite the influence in your short stay here. We might want to condition the approval on modifying the sheets as appropriate. Ms. Kiley — Peter, you said you made those changes and had some copies. [joking] Chairperson Howe — Hollis? Board Member Erb — I walk my dog around that entire Plaza and I will be thrilled at the improvement to the appearance. Chairperson Howe — Kevin? Alternate Member Talty — I just have one question considering we have to deal with snow about 5 months out of the year. Snow removal. I have a question with regard to the plantings because you can go up and down any one of our streets and when the plows remove the snow invariably there is going to be salt and other minerals, elements that are going to attack those plants. And I think the last thing that you guys want to do is keep replanting them every year. So my question is, what are you planting and what is the conditioning behind these plants. in order for longevity to occur? Ms. Maynard — We actually have that same obstacle, if you will, with some other properties that we manage such as the Plantations at Cornell. They are very skeptical about certain calcium or rock salt that is being used around any of the plantings or bushes or shrubs around their property. It is a little more to task maintenance -wise. It's a little more of a challenge for snow removal. It is a challenge as it is even in the East Hill Plaza in regard to shopping carts, shopping corrals, pedestrians, cars, vehicles, mean, so we leave it upon our snow truck or snow plow contractor to use discretion. He's certainly going to be aware of it. And also in most of all of our properties regardless of if there is protected planting or shrubbery, we place stakes, which are reflective stakes, but it's nothing more than maybe about an inch, half an inch in diameter, a bunch of reflective stakes, which our contractor for snow removal actually requires us to do because if he runs into one of our plantings or destroys a curbside we are going to hold him responsible. So it's our responsibility to mark them out property for him. Alternate Member Talty — So with all that being said... Ms. Maynard — It's a little more maintenance on our part, but we will do our best to protect that just as we do any of our other properties. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 19 Alternate Member Talty — Okay because it looks great. I think it would be a great addition, but a year from now, like all the residents of this Town are the ones going to be staring at these bushes. Okay? So I want something that is going to be able to have some type of longevity so after a year or two or three, they are not dying; they're not red, you know, and they are suppose to be green. Ms. Maynard — That is our responsibility as property management is to, you know, certainly take care of the outside of the property as well as the inside of the property. It is a high - profile area and that's our responsibility and we will continue to maintain it just as we do any of our other flowers and beds and shrubs and trees. Mr. Kanter — So were the plant species selected with salt tolerance and urban settings and lives? Ms. Maynard — Yes. One was the fact that there is no sun on this side of the building so we had to be very cautious in selecting... that we chose the right type of plants to be there. Board Member Wilcox — That's ... I'm sorry. I'm speaking out of turn, but that's what we didn't hear. Are these salt resistant? Chairperson Howe — We were going to ask the question. Alternate Member Talty — I'm sure you guys would have gotten to that. Chairperson Howe — Susan? Board Member Riha — I'm fine. Chairperson Howe — George? Board Member Conneman — I'm fine. I agree you have to maintain those plantings otherwise it will look worse. Chairperson Howe — Larry? Board Member Thayer — I'm all set. Chairperson Howe — Eva? Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, about the plowing and these plantings with these curvy lines here, I imagine that you are going to have to have somebody do some careful hand shoveling around these circular entrances. Ms. Maynard — That is correct and currently there is because our snow plow does not go up through these entrance ways as it is. We have maintenance at any snow PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 20 removal, with any sidewalk, including the front of the plaza, the side of the plaza, and in the back of the plaza that is still continued either with the use of a snow blower or hand shoveling. It's not just the use of a plow. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. I would like to see a condition added that any plants that die are replaced and again we can use a certain time period like we did recently with another property. And about the plant,, Yrn very glad to see this being spruced up and made to look nicer, but there's another problem with plantings that we often run into and that is when there are utility lines overhead and there are tall growing trees planted under them or near them, one usually has to cut off branches making them look very ugly in the end. I know that when I looked up there, outside the door of the Cornell financial affairs office, there is a utility line going over to a pole across from this road and at the very end of the building there is towards the hotel, towards that end, there's a door, which is also very close and a planting underneath, which is also very close to the utility line overhead and I would like to have you consider changing the plantings around so that you don't have a tall growing tree growing up into those utility lines. Ms. Maynard — I believe Peter can address that for you. We have selected particular trees that will not impede on any part of the ... we are not looking for a maintenance issue either. I mean we are not looking to either obstruct windows, having anything growing up against the building, which is then going to cause maintenance issues ongoing. So these trees have been selected carefully for just those reasons as well. Board Member Hoffmann — But even if it is a columnar tree, I understand that you can get a Gamecose ( ?) as in a columnar variety, but I don't know about the other one, the Green ash, doesn't it branch out sideways? Mr. Bicombe — The Cimarron ash is particularly more of an upright ash. Board Member Hoffmann — But if it is planted right under a utility line... Mr. Bicombe — Well, no. That wouldn't be right. Board Member Hoffmann — Some how it looks like it from the drawings as if that might happen. Chairperson Howe — I'm sorry, what was that? Mr. Bicombe — I'm sorry if we put a tree underneath a power line. We can't have that. I understand. Board Member Hoffmann — So what are you proposing to do? Mr. Bicombe — Well, we'll have to revise that plan and not have a tree underneath the line... PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 21 Ms. Maynard — The height of the tree should never reach the height of what that utility line is. However, what I guess Peter is saying is if we need to shift then we will do that so that it doesn't give the impression that it is going to grow ... we wouldn't want that either. Chairperson Howe — Anything else, Eva? Board Member Hoffmann — Let's see. On the Short Environmental Assessment Form, point 10, the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project, I would like to see cemetery mentioned under other. Ms. Brock — I couldn't hear her. Chairperson Howe — She would like to add cemetery under "other" on number 10 of the SEAR. Mr. Kanter — I think that is appropriate. Board Member Hoffmann — Of Plaza, Town of Lansing omitted Ms. Maynard — I apologize. course I would like to see all the mention of East Hill Board Member Hoffmann — And it is on almost every drawing that you submitted. Some of them ... oh, there was something about a proposed stop sign at the end of the driveway as it comes onto Pine Tree Road. Is that something you are doing as part of this? Ms. Maynard — We met.. 'Peter and myself met with Tom Parsons, who is the Assistant Fire Chief in the Town of Ithaca to describe to him the nature of the work that we wanted to perform up there in terms of the landscape. His visit with us, we did some measuring. He said I have no problem with that; it certainly is not going to impede in any way and if I need to get into here, you know, a couple of shrubs is not going to get in my way. As far as having any kind of congestion that may impede the passage of any firefighting these shrubs and trees are not going to do as such. So I think that the fire safety zone issue is really kind of on the other side of this. I think that when Tom met with us, there were a couple of suggestions that he had made when we were walking the length of the Plaza. One is you can see there is a dual ... there is a double line in the back of the Cornell end. If you start to proceed to the west existing the back of the Plaza, towards the P &C there is no stripage. So he suggested that we continue with the double stripe going all the way back the entire length of the Plaza. We agreed that maybe that would be fine and he told us it is not intended to be a driving lane, we could certainly see that maybe that would define it and keep traffic in their areas. He also suggested that we needed to improve upon maybe some of our signage back there that said fire lane because there had been, and I will admit to it, arbitrarily cars may be parked in a fire lane and there needs to be better signage there. So he also PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 22 recommended that in addition to the stop sign. So if we were going to put in a double stripe line that kind of looked like a driving lane in the back of the Plaza we'd certainly want people to know that there was a stop sign there just as there is on the north entrance of the Plaza as well. Mr. Kanter — That actually was in the email that Tom Parsons sent us so I apologize. We probably should have sent that to the board for your information. Chairperson Howe — That is not something that we address. Mr. Kanter — Well, it's part of the site plan that is in front of you. Yeah. Chairperson Howe — We may be adding a condition... Mr. Kanter — Well, no. It's shown on the site plan. Board Member Hoffmann — Then the other thing is about moving that fire lane a little bit. I was a little confused when I read the text here because it sounded as if it could be simply moved out into the lane without having to change the law about the safety zone. Mr. Kanter — But the law is very specific as to where it is and there is even a map that is referenced in the Code that says that shows here it is and now it is being moved 10 feet. Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah. Mr. Kanter — Unfortunately it is in the Code and so the only way you can change that, as. Darby said, is either change amend the Code by changing the fire zone or take it out of the dam Code where every time you change it you gotta go with a local law, which doesn't make sense to me. Board Member Hoffmann — I actually remember when we did this and we were concerned not just about the back of the building, but even more so about the front of the building toward the parking lot and there are cars on that side, especially that stop in this fire lane or safety zone very often. Ms. Maynard — And I think in the north part of the building in the law or the written here, it says excluding the promenade and running the entire length of the building from east to west. So it seems like if there was to be simple language that would include including the promenade also in the south but then there was maybe never a thought that there would ever be sidewalk or landscape or an entranceway there that would have to be considered, but I would also like to address that there is nothing here that says you can't put a plant or a shrub in the fire lane. It really is about restricting the access that may impede the fire fighting. And I think that has been clearly addressed by Tom Parsons. That this is not impeding the fire lane and it's not in any way going to get in the way of fire fighting. So I don't know where here it says that you can't put a tree or a PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 23 shrub in a fire lane. So I think moving it doesn't seem like this is., Jt would have to move the fire lane. Board Member Riha — Wouldn't that be something Susan advised...? Chairperson Howe — I think basically we are leaving it up to the Town Board on how to handle it. Ms. Brock — The law, Chapter 250, does specifically reference a map from 1990 showing the safety zone so it does seem that at least that reference needs to be updated and if the Town Board determines that the existing strip of land is appropriate then so be it. But the applicant themselves have proposed to move it, right? Ms. Maynard — No. I think that that was recommendations that came from Jon Kanter in an email back to us. It said you may need to move this or change the local law because this may be in a fire lane access that you cannot ... but the way we're interpreting it is that there is nothing that says we have to move it and by merely putting in some shrubs or some trees in this fire lane access, especially if it's not restricting as I continue to say from the fire department's perspective it's not an issue. Ms. Brock — 'But the drawings that you've submitted show a shift in the safety zone, correct? Ms. Maynard — Again with a recommendation that if we needed to do so and again with the suggestion, I think, coming from the Town that this may be an issue that we need to address. Mr. Kanter — That was my recommendation that that be done because I didn't want to have any question that of interpretation and a fire safety zone to me implies an unimpeded area where fire apparatus can., and so it's not a question of whether it is reasonable to shift the zone, it is unfortunately a question of another step in the process has to be gone through to go to the Town Board to do something. Ms. Brock — And since the drawings before you, which are what you are being asked to approve, show that shift at this point it seems to me you need to vote on whether you are going to approve this. Board Member Riha — Taking a conservative point of view, we might as well keep a large fire lane. Chairperson Howe — Any other questions right now for the applicants? [none] Would someone like to move the SEQR? Made by Fred, seconded by George. Carried unanimously. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 24 ADOPTED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 029 SEAR Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval East Hill Plaza — North Facade Landscape Improvements Tax Parcel No. 62. -2 -1.121 341 -377 Pine Tree Road Planning Board, April 1, 2008 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by George Conneman. WHEREAS. 1. This action involves consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the East Hill Plaza — North Facade Landscape Improvements, 341 -377 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tax Parcel No. 62. -2- 1.121, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal includes the installation of new landscaping, brick pavers, and changes to the safety access lane along the rear of the plaza adjacent to the Cornell University Offices. Cornell University Real Estate Department, Owner, S.B. Ashley Management Corporation, Agent and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in this uncoordinated environmental review with respect to this project, and 3. The Planning Board, on April 11 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a set of drawings with a cover sheet entitled "East Hill Plaza, North Facade — Landscape Improvements" dated 3/3/08, prepared by Peter Bodycombe, Landscape Architect, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed demolition project, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 25 Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Erb, Riha, and Wilcox Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. Fi FIT R for r_nmmarrial Znne. The or000sal includes the installation of new landscaping, d changes to the safety access lane around the Cornell University offices Cornell University Kew tstate ueparimenu, Owner: S B Ashley Management Corp. Agent. Chairperson Howe opened the public hearing at 7:58 p.m. and invited members of the public to address the board. There being none, Chairperson Howe brought the matter back to the board (public hearing remained open). Chairperson Howe — Fred, it looks like you...? Board Member Wilcox — Nope. I'm all set. Chairperson Howe — I'll close the public hearing at 7:59 p.m. Is there someone who would like to move the resolution? Susan. Seconded by Hollis. I know we have some changes that we've been noting along away. Board Member Hoffmann — You know, I just realized that we should have made some corrections in the SEQR, too. I think it says being reviewed and accepted as adequate the environmental assessment form and drawings and so on, but I think we need to have those pages in the drawings. Board Member Wilcox — The changes in the drawings are something that we'll request in the approval, not SEQR. The drawings are adequate to do a SEQR review. Board Member Hoffmann — Right. All right. Board Member Wilcox — Okay? But we want a final set of drawings that are correct. Chairperson Howe — Susan, would you like to read the changes? Ms. Brock — Yes. Under the resolved clauses number 2, a) ... revise a so it reads, "Town Board amendment to Town Code Chapter 250 to modify the East Hill Shopping Plaza safety zone so that the north fagade landscape improvements comply with the revised requirements of Chapter 250, or Town Board repeal of Chapter 250". b) revision of the above referenced drawings to change all Town of Lansing references to Town of Ithaca and put Town of Lansing and Town of Ithaca both in quotes. c) the building owner shall PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 26 replace all plantings that die within the first blank years, you can fill in the blank, after they are planted on site. And I did not know whether this board wanted to add condition d about restricting plantings under overhead power lines. Chairperson Howe — Eva, how did you want that to be worded? Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I just think if this is an attempt to beautify, if you plant trees incorrectly so that you have to mutilate them after they come up into the land then you don't have something that's beautiful. So I guess I would like to see what I thought the applicant hinted they could do; shifting the plantings so that there are lower plantings under the power lines and moving the taller trees to other places where they could grow up freely without being interfered with. So how would you phrase that? Chairperson Howe — Is that something we would ask staff to review the shifting of those plantings? Ms. Kiley — Yeah or maybe even show the power lines on the drawings so that we know where those lines are. Board Member Wilcox — Yeah. It's difficult for me to look at what was provided to say they are putting something tall under a power line. I'm also convinced they are not going to spend the money for landscaping and then have to in some way disfigure a tree in order to cut it down. I'm not concerned. Board Member Hoffmann — You can see the power lines on the... Board Member Wilcox — I know you can see it clear, but I can't translate that picture and this drawing on top of each other. Mr. Walker — You might want to reference this as overhead utility lines because I believe they are cable and telephone as opposed to power. Chairperson Howe — Okay. Board Member Hoffmann — Whatever they are. Chairperson Howe — In what timeframe do we think is reasonable if a plant dies that it would be within... Board Member Wilcox — In perpetuity. Ah, within the first year? I'll start. Board Member Hoffmann — Didn't we have three years last time when we were talking about the property near Bums Road? I think we put in three years if they died within the first three years they have to be replanted. I think we could try to be consistent. Alternate Member Talty — Okay. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 27 Chairperson Howe — People okay with three years? Board Member Wilcox — Yup. Chairperson Howe — And were you able to capture that discussion about... Ms. Brock — I'm sorry. I'm still not clear what you want for the plantings. Do you want the lines revised to show low plantings under overhead utility lines? Board Member Riha — No, I think that the drawings should just be reviewed by the Staff. Ms. Kiley — Maybe revised showing overhead utility lines and then we will be able to...at least if they are on the drawing, then we know. Board Member Erb — In relationship to the tallest expected height of the closest trees... Board Member Wilcox — Wait a minute, wait a minute.. Just put the power line location on the drawing, we'll be fine. Board Member Erb — All I'm saying is that the actual mature height of the trees has not been specified. And it might be that they are 8 feet below at maximum height anyway. Board Member Wilcox — If the applicant puts the power line on the drawing, and being a landscape architect, they will do the right thing. Mr. Kanter — We need to say something then like, show utility line on plan and make sure that no trees will grow into the utility line, in layman terms... Board Member Erb — Capture that... Ms. Brock — How about, condition d. "show overhead utility lines on drawings with depiction of plantings whose heights will not reach said lines." Board Member Riha — Sounds good. Board Member Erb — Good enough. Chairperson Howe — Any other changes? opposed? ... any abstentions? It's unanimous. All those in favor, say aye...anyone Thank you. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 28 ADOPTED RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 030 Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval East Hill Plaza — North Facade Landscape Improvements Tax Parcel No. 62. -2 -1 A 21 341 -377 Pine Tree Road Planning Board, April 1, 2008 MOTION made by Susan Riha, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS: 1. This action involves consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the East Hill Plaza — North Facade Landscape Improvements, 341 -377 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tax Parcel No. 62. -2- 1.121, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal includes the installation of new landscaping, brick pavers, and changes to the safety access lane along the rear of the plaza adjacent to the Cornell University Offices. Cornell University Real Estate Department, Owner; S.B. Ashley Management Corporation, 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 the project has, on April 1, 2008, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate application materials, including a set of drawings with a cover sheet entitled "East Hill Plaza, North Facade — Landscape Improvements" dated 3/3/08, prepared by Peter Bodycombe, Landscape Architect, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed the East Hill Plaza — North Facade Landscape Improvements, 341 -377 Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca, Tax Parcel No. 621-2- PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 29 1.121, Community Commercial Zone subject to the following conditions to be accomplished prior to issuance of any building permit, unless otherwise noted: a. Town Board amendment to Town Code Chapter 250 to modify the East Hill Shopping Plaza Safety Zone so that the north facade landscape improvements comply with the revised requirements of Chapter 250, or Town Board repeal the provisions of Chapter 250 pertaining to the Safety Zone, and b. Revision of the above referenced drawings to change all "Town of Lansing" references to "Town of Ithaca ", and c. The building owner shall replace all plantings that die within the first 3 years after they are planted on site, and d. Show overhead utility lines on drawings with depictions of plantings whose heights will not reach said lines. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Erb, Riha, and Wilcox Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. Chairperson Howe announces the next agenda item. ilm Replacement, Dryden Road. Mellissa Madden, 147 D, Plants Building, Cornell Chairperson Howe — We have the material in front of us, but would you like to give us just a brief overview. Ms. Madden — The Dilmun Hill Student Farm currently has a half- tom -down 6 foot fence enclosing the area that's shown on the map. In places it has been supplemented with things that have been tacked to the posts to make it 8 feet tall and almost none of the construction has been done by a professional fence builder and a lot of it is questionable. So, hope of the Dilmun Hill students and also the Cornell Agricultural Experiment Station is that we can replace the inadequate fence with an 8 -foot high fence installed by somebody who knows what they are doing, fully. The students have already started to take down the fence well before I was even hired to do this job, so, as soon as we found out that you would need to see it, I asked them to stop. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 30 I don't know. The best place to see it was on Route 366 where you can see it sort of tacked together, two layers of fence, and there's been a lot of damage to the student crops, especially in the past year, because the deer incursion into the area. Chairperson Howe — If you want to just say something about the sample that you brought in. Ms. Madden — I can unroll it, but I don't know if I can really manage it by myself. This is 8 feet long and it's graduated. It's graduated in size from sort of more rectangular size holes in the bottom, to be more square shaped holes at the top so they get larger as it goes up. Supposedly there's some groundhog prevention with those smaller holes, honestly doubt that, but, I've been told that... Chairperson Howe — By the way, has anyone seen the deer - fencing that's been going up in the Plantations? Ms. Madden — Yeah, this is the same fence that's been put up at the Plantations and the Blue Grass Lane Facilities. And that sample came from the Blue Grass Lane Facility and I was told that it was really effective. Board Member Hoffmann — Excuse me. That microphone does not make the sound louder to us. You really have to speak up. It just records what you are saying. Chairperson Howe — We're going to start in the middle this time. Susan, do you have any comments or questions? Board Member Riha — Yeah, I mean, I think the Dilmun Hill Farm, the students work very hard, they need a deer fence. I think there's no question about that, given the importance of this farm to the students at Cornell. So the major, my only major concerns had to do with the Unique Natural Area and the setbacks. I've spent some time on that farm, so I'm not concerned about the overlap with the Unique Natural Area necessarily meeting the 75 foot setback from that and I was sympathetic to the idea that if they had to go within all these setbacks, they were going to substantially change the size of the farm and the area available to them. That was my extent of the logic. And knowing that whole setup over there, there's not any place else they can really expand. So, I'm quite sympathetic to this proposal. Board Member Talty — I'm all set. Board Member Erb — I feel the same way. I'm not concerned about the setbacks on either side, even the 366 side, no one's going to attempt to come anywhere close there. It's unapproachable, and after all, it is an organic farm. Board Member Wilcox — I am concerned that we are going to deprive the deer population of proper nutrition ... (everyone laughs) ... no, I have no issues. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 31 Chairperson Howe — And I am also supportive of it. Board Member Hoffmann — I love the idea of organic farming being studied and I love the idea of this perhaps being a model that can be used in other places over the state, but, I have some concerns. When this precinct was set up and the Recreation Way was created and the Natural Area around it was protected by the Town, we fought very hard, those of us who were working on this, to get that 75 -foot buffer around the natural area, to protect it. And there were lots of threats from all around, and I am very concerned about encroachments into that 75 -foot buffer area. So, I have no problem with a fence being put up, but I don't like the fact that it actually looks on the map as if it's encroaching even a little bit into the Natural Area, it's not just in the 75 -foot buffer, but it goes over on this little drawing that you submitted to us called I& Dilmun Hill Fence", the proposed fence line actually goes over into the Natural Area and I couldn't quite tell from where I was looking, but I took a couple of photographs, which I'll pass around to you if you want to look at them, from Maple Avenue, where you can see from a distance, a little bit, the area where the farming is happening...lt looks to me like the open area slopes down to the Cascadilla, towards the Recreation Way Rather, and the last part of it is a rather steep slope. That's the Natural Area that we are protecting and I can't imagine you could farm on that, but it looks to me like you are farming on some areas that are quite sloped anyway. And my concern when you do studies on how one can farm on slopes and building terraces, and stuff like that, which is very useful, but I guess my question would be, because in the letter you say "If these areas within the setbacks would be lost, it would substantially reduce the productivity and opportunities of this operation." And I would like to hear you explain a little more of that. It says the land area is 7.12 acres but it doesn't say how much of that is farmed and how much would be lost of the farming then. Ms. Madden — Well, I don't have a number for how much would be lost and what I would say is that my position at Cornell is a representation of a new, a renewed commitment by the administration to support this farm. So my feeling...) act as the mentor to the student group which is in charge of the land use of the site... Board Member Hoffmann — You act as what? I didn't hear? Ms. Madden — The mentor. I have a large amount of farming experience, and I am guiding them through 'a visioning session right now. They haven't had a lot of mentorship or guidance in the past five years and one of my jobs is to provide that guidance on a long-term basis and establish plans and sort of invisible structures to support their vision. And part of that is to use their farm more fully. So I would say last year they didn't fully utilize the 71 acres. I really hope they will and I, that's part of my job, is to help them create that as a model student farm much more than it has been. One thing that has happened is we have just received a grant to establish a perennial alley cropping system on an acre of the land. So... PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 32 Board Member Hoffmann —I didn't hear you... .a what? Ms. Madden — An alley cropping system which is basically, you leave strips in between either trees or shrubs that you plant and you can put annuals or even like a pasture system in the alleyways. We just received a grant to establish an acre of that. So that's a new full acre use that wasn't in, wasn't there before this year. The lifetime of that system is 25 -years minimum. So, we're looking at really big changes on the farm and I'm basically the embodiment of what those changes are. Chairperson Howe — Hollis, do you want to comment on that? Board Member Erb — Eva, would you feel more comfortable if we conditioned this on shifting the fence itself so that where there's that little bit where it has oozed over the line, we pull it back on the correct side? Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I had another question about installing the fence actually, and it also has to do with how the farming is happening there. When I hear "conventional farming", 1 think of the kind of farming that was done before the 20th century, for thousands of years, to me, that's conventional farming and that's what you're doing, organic farming. But, what happened, in the last 100 years or so, was dependence on huge machinery which often compacts the soil, ruins soil and ruins lots of things and I'm just wondering, do you use ... what do you use when you do your farming and how are you going to put in the fence? I Board Member Riha — I guess I want to know how this is relevant to the decision? I mean, we could talk a lot about this subject. Board Member Hoffmann — For instance, if the fence is going to be put in by having a huge machine come and dig big holes... Board Member Riha — I am sure it will be similar to the Plantations. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I don't know what happened in the Plantations. Board Member Riha — But, I mean,... Board Member Hoffmann — I would like to know how it is going to happen here because this is in... Board Member Riha — But how is that going to be relevant to this decision? Board Member Erb — It could be relevant if there is damage to the Unique Natural Area on the south side in accessing the outside area of the fence to put in the post holes. I think that's where she's going. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 33 Board Member Riha – I think the Code Officer, if equipment went in this Unique Natural Area and starting destroying the actual area, wouldn't that be a violation? I guess I want to get into how much we want to micro - manage. Mr. Kanter – We don't really have any codes that deal with that. Board Member Riha – So it would be okay if we said, you can put in the fence and they decided to just go into the Unique Natural Area with major machinery and trash it? [several talking at once] Mr. Walker – Can I give some information? I have animals. I've been on farms and raised horses and keep the deer out of my garden, too. I don't use a fence. I use a shotgun; it's more effective. But, the people that are putting this fence up that put the quote in here —they use a farm tractor, a fairly moderate sized one. Probably 40 to 45 horsepower farm tractor and they drive the posts usually. Alternate Member Talty – Right. That's what I assumed. Mr. Walker – If you look at the picture, the proposed fence construction, you can see that there is a 4x4 fence post in there, in the lower picture. Then there is a smaller diameter middle post it looks like. This is a high - tensile steel fence. The corners will be re- enforced and that's where most of the work is done. Board Member Riha – Right and it seems like they successfully put these in, in the Plantations in the whole area they are trying to maintain.. So I guess I'm not concerned about writing into our proposal... Mr. Walker– I agree. I do not...l believe... [several talking at once] Mr. Walker – I think Code Enforcement will make sure that they don't disturb the natural area because they have to get a building permit. They also have to make sure they don't disturb more than. ..any ground for sediment and erosion control purposes. If the fence is moved into that buffer area, I just did a real quick calculation, it would be a little over an acre, an acre and a quarter that they'd lose, which would be close to 10 percent of their farmland and they have already established the strips in there. You can see that from the aerial photo that there are buffer strips in between the crops. So I believe it would impact their operations significantly. This fence, again, is not going in virgin ground. It's going where the existing fence is. So they are basically replacing the fence. Board Member Hoffmann – Okay, but it was how they were going to do it that concerned me. PB 4 -1 -05 Final Pg. 34 Board Member Erb — I think I would still like to see them actually move the fence and adjust it to the UNA boundary on the south side where it slips over. Chairperson Howe — That seems reasonable. Ms. Ritter — Rod, can I mention... Chairperson Howe — Yes. Ms. Ritter — What I wanted to say —this is not a unique natural area. The unique natural area is south of here. This is the natural area that was identified during the rezoning process. I think the line on this map that they used to identify the natural area was unusually very straight and what Melissa's group did was they took that information from the very straight, unusually straight... what they said was the natural area line I think was to go follow the fence line essentially. That's what they asked for and I just think that Melissa's map is correct and the natural area's line was probably not correct. You know, someone didn't go out there and really look at the fence lines. Mr. Kanter — It was more generalized. Ms. Ritter — Exactly. Chairperson Howe— Great. Thank you. I haven't given Larry or George a chance to... Board Member Thayer — I don't have a problem with replacing the existing fence. Board Member Conneman — I have a problem with the fence. And Melissa, I want to assure you that all my professional career I have been involved with agriculture and I was one of the early ones that gave the organic people a shot at a lot of things. I can tell you the stories, but there's lots of them. However, the solution with your problem, it seems to me, is you fence everything out. To me, that's not the solution; that is treating the symptom. What I want to know or put on the record, what is Cornell doing to provide leadership to solve the deer problem. That means ... we have an Animal Science Department, we have a Vet College, we have a natural resource department and what we do as a solution is to put up a fence. That doesn't solve the problem and they ought to be taking leadership to do something about that. Just as you have taken leadership with the organic thing. It is ridiculous to fence everything because we are going to fence everything out and the deer are going to have the roads pretty soon if we continue to fence. Alternate Member Talty — They have the roads now, George. Board Member Conneman — They have the roads, too, that's true. But I mean that is the real problem. The problem is to face what the real problem is, not the symptom of it. I have no objection to organic agriculture or anything. I think Eva is all wrong about modern farming, too, but the issue is we ought to tackle the problem and all we do is put PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 35 up fences. We wanted to fence the Plantations to hold things. We want to fence this, you want to fence that. You fence everything out. That is not the solution to the problem. And I think it is about time Cornell took some leadership and tried to solve the problem and not push it off by fencing everything out. Board Member Thayer — Who has solved the problem? Board Member Conneman - Who has solved the problem? No one has tried, Larry. Cornell can provide that leadership. Board Member Thayer — I don't know anybody... Board Member Conneman — There are solutions to the problem. Chairperson Howe — And I think actually Cornell has ... my understanding is there's a variety of solutions that they're trying to put in place. There was an active survey with all the neighborhood groups... Board Member Conneman — Yes. We did that several years ago and nothing's happened. Board Member Erb — Well, there is a trap- neuter - release program going on right now with the vet school. Board Member Conneman — Well and the Village of Cayuga Heights tried to sterilize deer and all that kind of stuff, but the issue is you ought to tackle the problem and it has nothing to do with you. I mean you're an innocent bystander, but the issue is to tackle the problem and Cornell, I think, has ignored the problems for years and in my opinion the little things they do are these bits and pieces, you know, things that don't amount to a darn. Chairperson Howe — We have some Cornell persons in the audience, but I don't think ... maybe during the public hearing if there is anything that they want to say about this. I think we probably ... is there anything more about SEQR because I would like to move on and open the public hearing. Board Member Wilcox — Can I move the SEQR motion? Mr. Kanter — Please. Board Member Thayer — I'll second. Chairperson Howe — So made by Fred and seconded by Larry comment before we vote? Do you have a PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 36 Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. Two more things about the fence. You said that the fences have been successful where they have been installed before. Do you know if they have been successful in keeping out smaller animals than deer, too, that can do damage? Ms. Madden — I definitely don't feel like I can give testimony about that. We have a pretty serious groundhog problem and our most effective way of dealing with it last year was a dog. Board Member Hoffmann — And the other question is, the posts are supposed to be treated pine. How are they treated? Ms. Madden — I don't have that answer for you. Board Member Hoffmann — Because in the past it has often been treated with chemicals that are not too nice like arsenic. Alternate Member Talty — That's not any more. Board Member Wilcox — They can't do that any more. Alternate Member Talty — You can't even buy that any more. You can't get that. Board Member Hoffmann — That's not available any more and they don't have anything else that's equally bad? Ms. Madden — I think that will be part of the site plan application. Ms. Ritter — I think they are using less toxic posts now. They are still pressure treated... Board Member Riha — The kind you put in on your deck if you can't afford redwood. Ms. Ritter -- But they aren't quite as bad as they used to be that's my understanding. Board Member Hoffmann — I was just wondering if you might be able to put in metal posts or something instead. Ms. Madden — I think that's a cost issue and l can't ... again I can't answer for that because this quote... Board Member Wilcox — Wood's fine. Ms. Ritter —Wood looks nicer. Ms. Madden — The date on this quote is 2 years old. We have to get an entirely new quote. I know the cost of metal has really gone up. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 37 Chairperson Howe — Are we ready to vote? We are ready to vote. All those in favor raise your hand. [Carried unanimously.] ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 031 SEAR Preliminary and Final Site Plan & Special Approval Cornell University Dilmun Hill Farm Replacement Deer Fence Tax Parcel No 63 -141 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, April 1, 2008 Motion made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Larry Thayer. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for the replacement of a deer fence at the Dilmun Hill Farm, located south of Route 366 /Dryden Road and east of Pine Tree Road, on Cornell University property (Precinct 7), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63 -1 -11, Planned Development Zone. The proposal involves replacing a 6 -foot tall deer fence that currently exists around the perimeter of the +/- 7.1 acre farm fields with a new 87 foot tall fence. Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS), Owner /Applicant; Melissa A. Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator, ,Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval and Special Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, a drawing entitled " Dilmun Hill Fence" dated 313108, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval and Special Approval; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 38 EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Erb, Riha, and Wilcox Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for the proposed replacement of a deer fence at the Dilmun Hill Farm, located on Dryden Road approximately 300 feet east of Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63 -1 -11, Planned Development Zone No. 9. The project involves replacing the existing 6 foot high fence with an 8 foot high deer fence in the same location. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Melissa Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator, Agent. Chairperson Howe opened the public hearing at 8:23 p.m.. and invited members of the public to address the Board. With no one interested in speaking, Chairperson Howe brought the matter back to the Board. Chairperson Howe — Other discussion items that we have? Board Member Wilcox — The only comment was is that putting up.the 8 foot fence will help ensure that this area will stay agricultural and therefore open and that's a benefit that needs to be mentioned. I move the resolution as drafted. Chairperson Howe — Well, wait a minute. I'll close the public hearing at 8:24 p.m. Board Member Wilcox — I'll move the resolution as drafted. Board Member Riha — Second. Chairperson Howe — Susan is seconding. You have a comment? Ms. Ritter — I have a correction. Chairperson Howe — Correction. Ms. Ritter — Under the now therefore be it resolved, I had added 3...1 wasn't sure which standards we were supposed to be followed... which criteria and standards in regard to approving the special approval and I've spoken to the Town Attorney so you need to strike out from there the standards of Article IVX, Section 270 -200 subsections a -I. That can all come out. It is only the sections that are within the Planned Development Zone language itself. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 39 Ms. Brock —So retain the standards of... Board Member Riha — Section 271... Ms. Brock — And then the word that follows of will be Section 271A0.1 and the rest of that sentence is unchanged. Board Member Wilcox — That change is acceptable. Chairperson Howe — . Are there other changes? All those in favor? [Carried unanimously.] ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 = 032 Preliminary and Final Site Plan & Special Approval Cornell University Dilmun Hill Farm Replacement Deer Fence Tax Parcel No 63 =1 =11 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, April 1, 2008 Motion made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Susan Riha, WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for the replacement of a deer fence at the Dilmun Hill Farm, located south of Route 366 /Dryden Road and east of Pine Tree Road, on Cornell University property (Precinct 7), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63 -1 -11, Planned Development Zone. The proposal involves replacing a 6 -foot tall deer fence that currently exists around the perimeter of the +/- 7.1 acre farm fields with a new 8- foot tall fence. Cornell University College of Agriculture and Life Sciences (CALS), Owner /Applicant; Melissa A. Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator, 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 Approval has, on April 1, 2008, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, drawings entitled " Dilmun Hill Fence" prepared 3/3/08 and other application materials, PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 40 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Approval for the replacement of the 6- foot tall deer fence with an 8 -foot tall deer fence at the Cornell University Dilmun Hill Farm, finding that the standards of Section 271- 10.L,.and Section 271- 10.H(13) of the Town of Ithaca Code, have been meet, AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the replacement of the 6 -foot tall deer fence with an 8 -foot tall deer fence for the Dilmun Hill Farm, as shown on the drawing entitled " Dilmun Hill Fence" prepared on 3/3/08, subject to the following conditions: a. granting of the necessary variances by the Zoning Board of Appeals prior to issuance of a building permit, and b. obtaining a building permit from the Town of Ithaca Building Department. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Erb, Riha, and Wilcox Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower Between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus Chairperson Howe introduced the agenda item. Chairperson Howe — It was on the agenda last time, but we had to take off from the agenda because of not having enough voting Planning Board members here. And Kevin, we are going to ask you to recuse yourself from the discussion. Who is here representing Ithaca College? Male from audience responds. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 41 Chairperson Howe — Okay. Great. And once you get settled we'll just ask you to introduce yourselves and give us your business addresses. George McConochie appeared before the Abbett to the Board. They were also joined from Ithaca College. Board and introduced himself and Scott by Doctor Clark Joseph and Doctor Conifer Mr. McConochie — The four of us are trying to represent Rick Couture here, who couldn't make it tonight who is the named applicant. Our business address is 317 Route 104 in the Town of Ontario, New York. So again my name is George. Both Scott and I are owners and operators of a company called Sustainable Energy Developments and it's based in Ontario, New York. We are a community wind -power development company that develops a range of wind -power projects from residential systems to on= site power applications like is being examined at Ithaca College to small scale community wind farms. Our goal is to develop wind projects that produce local economic benefits using renewable wind - power. We have been in business for almost 6 years now and in that time we have seen a significant change in people's perception of wind power perspective and beneficent solution to our nation's energy needs. There is also a lot of hype surrounding wind -power now. It's got a lot of potential to damage the industry and to damage our reputation as a company. We believe that every project that we work on has to be prudently developed and concerns of every town and all the stakeholders need to be taken into account in order to ensure our long term success and the industry's long term success. So, you know, our reputation and the industry's standing are on the line everyday and the only way for us to ensure our longevity is to maintain openness and patience to develop projects that are acceptable to all the stakeholders. We have been discussing the viability of a wind project here at Ithaca College for almost 2 years now. When we initiated these discussions it was clearly expressed to the College that the economic benefits of an on -site wind project were not assured based on the complexity of the wind regime and the resulting wind - generated electricity. So the College, you know, understood that and they placed a large value on the project for the educational and environmental benefits and they decided to more closely examine the project through an in -depth feasibility study that is going to be co- funded by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. The goal of the feasibility study is to gather factual, scientific data concerning the viability of a wind project at the school so school officials can make an informed decision about whether they want to pursue further development of a wind turbine itself. So we are here tonight to get a permit to install a tower so the college knows that there's enough wind to support a wind turbine project. We understand that there is some opposition to the idea of installing a wind turbine at the college and I would like to be very clear that we are not here tonight to get permission to get for a wind turbine. I simply hope that the college will be granted an opportunity to scientifically explore the viability of an on -site wind turbine so that any future debate can be approached with factual understanding of the project. I'm going to turn it over to my colleague, Scott, to sort of tell a little bit more about what we are trying to do with this met tower. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 42 Chairperson Howe — And while you're doing that, I actually wanted to just ask Susan for some clarification because one of the things that was brought to ... in the letter that we received from the County Planning Department, I think there was a suggestion that we can't fully separate looking at the temporary metrological tower from the possibility of the there being a wind turbine some time in the future. But I think tonight we really are just focused on the temporary metrological tower. Ms. Brock — That's correct. That's all the special permit will cover. Chairperson Howe — So that... Board Member Riha — So there's really no need to discuss that second point in the Tompkins County Department of Planning letter. Mr. Kanter — Right. Although as much as it creates a need for a majority plus 1 vote on the part of the Board... Board Member Riha — Right, but it seemed like not relevant to our decision right now. Board Member Wilcox — It seemed off base to me. [general agreement] Board Member Wilcox — Yeah. We are looking at a tower tonight; not a wind turbine. Chairperson Howe — So it sounds like we are all on the same ... sorry. Go ahead. Mr. Abbett — My name is Scott Abbett. I also work for Sustainable Energy Developments at 317 Route 104 in Ontario, New York. I just wanted to give a brief overview of our plans and the tower itself. We are seeking permission to install a tower that is 164 feet tall for a period of 1 year to collect wind data. The tower itself is 6 inches in diameter. I brought a mock replica just to give you an idea of how the width of the tower is and the color is actually strikingly similar to what the tower would be as well. I'm happy to pass it around. But there will be a series of wind measurement equipment on the tower essentially at 3 different levels. There will be blooms that come out with instrumentation. Here is an example of an anemometer that would be on the tower. It doesn't produce any noise or anything like that. There is also a wind vane; it's one of the other sensors very similar to this. It just has a fitting so it can determine which way the wind direction is. It will be a...the tower is a tilt -up design. It is held in place via guy wires. The guy wires are anchored to the ground via concrete blocks that will eliminate any need to excavate the site. We just ... the concrete blocks will be placed on the site, used to anchor, and then removed afterwards. Once the site is cleared, the installation will take approximately 4 to 5 days very weather dependent. At the end of the measurement period all the tower and all the equipment will be removed completely from the site. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 43 There are no lights on the tower. There's no electric interconnection. It's powered via batteries, which is fed via a solar panel which is on the tower itself. For ... in regards to site access we have included a survey map of site access from TG Miller. That is tab 4 on the plan that we have submitted. All the access will be via current routes and will require no modification or alterations to access the site. We have obtained permission from Dominion Gas to use their right -of -way to access the site. That would be the gas pipeline right -of -way that is depicted on TG Miller's plan. The only equipment that will be needed to access the site is a pickup truck from our company and a-concrete block delivery vehicle that will have to access the site as far as equipment. For clearing the site, the installation will require that the depicted survey area will be cleared. It is approximately .8 acres of land. Trees will be cut down by the Ithaca College facilities personnel using chainsaws. They won't be using any logging equipment to access the site, clear the site. There are some rare sedges which have been identified on the site via Robert Wesley. These currants have been flagged and they are located in certain clumps on the actual site. They will be marked off and we will be avoiding those sites during the clearing and the construction throughout the whole process —they will be flagged off and fenced off so we won't be impacting them negatively. And we will have no negative impacts to the environmentally sensitive South Hill Swamp, which is nearby the site. Essentially, we have taken all the recommendations and questions that came up in the previous meeting we had for our sketch plan. We have done our best to answer those questions in this plan. So I guess at this point, I'll open it up to any particular questions you may have. Chairperson Howe – I will start with a question that was actually made by the Environmental Review Committee and its ... you probably don't get copies of these letters, but they ... one of the members wondered why ground -based Doppler technology wasn't being considered. So I'm assuming you can't ... you answer that. Why isn't ground -base Doppler technology being used? Mr. Abbett – There are other methods of wind measurement. The tower that we are proposing is basically the industry standard at this point. Doppler can be considered sodar and lidar, both of which one uses light and one uses sound to measure wind. These particular technologies are used in larger wind farms via a met tower nearby as well to verify. It alone does not produce accurate results, but they correlate it with the tower that's in the area. So for example, they have a tower up and they are able to place this sodar facility around the site and get different readings and correlate with that tower. In addition, both technologies do require a significant amount of clearing as well. It's kind of a ... people have this thought that you can put it as long as you have this one straight side up. Any trees or anything in the vicinity, I was told by Cathy Moore, who works for IDOT ?, she works in sodar out of Albany, NY that at least an acre would need to be cleared in order to create the line of sight you need for these equipment to effectively get measurements. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 44 Chairperson Howe — I assume most of our comments will relate to SEAR so we'll have this discussion for the SEQR determination. Eva, I'll start with you. Questions? Board Member Hoffmann — I wondered if you could remind me of how ... I know that have read it somewhere in here, of how much power would well...forget that. I'll come to that another time. Board Member Thayer — That's a good question. [laughter] Board Member Hoffmann — Well, but I realized it has to... Board Member Erb — It has to do with the wind mill instead of the metrologic towers. Board Member Hoffmann — But that's not what we're talking about. Board Member Thayer — I know we're not talking about that. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, that's why I withdrew. Board Member Thayer — But it would be interesting to know if it's all worth it; if and how much power does that put out and how much of the percentage of Ithaca College power would it be? And it relates to the fact that we need the, ..you know. Mr. Abbett — It ... you know, it's really undetermined at this point. I don't want to sound like I'm trying to avoid discussion of the wind turbine, but this study really is designed to find answers to those questions. You know, we are going to be looking at wind turbines in a wide range of sizes that are going to produce a wide range of power. We are not talking about 50 or 75% of the College's electricity. You know, it's probably going to be under 30% at the most. It's a very significant energy user. We are not going to ... and really that is about as much as I can say. Some of the questions that came from the County in terms of doing photo simulations and those kind of questions are very difficult to answer because we don't know what the best turbine is going to be for this school. Board Member Conneman — The tower is temporary. If you find that there is not enough up there, you take the tower down? Mr. Abbett — Absolutely. Board Member Wilcox — No. No. No. The tower comes down in 1 year. Board Member Conneman — Okay. I think it is an important question of what percent of power is generated because if it doesn't generate very much then there are bigger solutions you can do to save energy. Okay? PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 45 Board Member Wilcox — I'm sorry. I don't think a meteorological tower generates any power. Board Member Thayer — Not this tower. Board Member Conneman — The one they put up would generate power. That's what we are talking about, right? Board Member Wilcox — No. We're not. We are not talking about a turbine here tonight. Board Member Conneman — I know we are not talking about it tonight, but ultimately that is the issue, Fred. That is the bottom line. Board Member Thayer — Well it relates to the need of this tower in my mind. Board Member Erb — Yeah, but then we are guessing what we think their need is. Chairperson Howe — I think he answered it as best they can answer it tonight. Mr. Abbett — And I think that the college wouldn't be even looking at this possibility if they didn't see a benefit either economically, environmentally, or educationally. And I think in this case the school sees benefit in all 3 and that's ... it's not just the economics, it's not just the energy, there's a strong educational component as well. Board Member Conneman — We'll argue that later. Chairperson Howe — Susan? Board Member Riha — I'm fine. Chairperson Howe — Hollis? Board Member Erb — I appreciate... you' re not the lads that took care of it, but I appreciate what was added in tab 9 and for the record I found tab 13 about noise to be completely useless because there was no map attached and I have no idea where the facility is that was being suggested we could go get ... visit and listen to the absence of sound. Driving directions to the site are attached. Make it up. Chairperson Howe — So that's on the record now so...Fred? Board Member Wilcox — A couple things if I may. Why this site as opposed to another location on Ithaca College's campus? Mr. Abbett — Essentially we looked at the topographic area and you want to find a representative site to gather data. You don't want it to be at the top of a hill; you do PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 46 want it to be at the bottom of the hill. You kind of want it in the middle. This area in particular was a flat area, which, you know, we thought would be the best location to put the tower and give us a representative depiction of the wind in that entire zone that they own — Ithaca College lands. Board Member Wilcox — The elevation is relevant. Obviously you would prefer a higher elevation than a lower one? Mr. Abbett — There's a direct correlation between... typically between elevation and wind power output, yes. Board Member Wilcox — I want to comment on the materials, too. I thought, actually, from the archeological assessment that was provided to how they were going to get to the site to the materials that were provided with regard to the pitch pine and sedges, I thought they actually did a pretty good job. [general agreement among board members] Board Member Wilcox — The material is reasonably complete other than the one you pointed out, Hollis. I also need to point out I did a quick measurement. This meteorological tower will be about 1,000 feet from where I live for what it's worth. Chairperson Howe — Did you get a public notice about it? Board Member Wilcox — Ah ... no. Chairperson Howe — Now you said there is other resource folks here. What would they...l'm not sure there's other questions. What can they address and then we can see if there are some questions about the resource people? Mr. McConochie — Doug Conifer was here to answer questions on the forest habitat and the endangered plant species. Chairperson Howe — Are there any specific questions about was it covered in here and what we just heard? Board Member Riha — I think they did a good job covering... Board Member Thayer — Excellent job. Board Member Hoffmann — Again, I don't have a question, just a comment that I thought there was a lot of good material here, but what really brought me around and took care of my hesitations and objections were the comments by Doctor Conifer, which I thought were very good. Board Member Thayer —Agreed. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 47 Board Member Wilcox — I believe I was the one when you were here last who said I didn't want to be placed in the position of having to chose one environmental benefit over another. That was my concern until I read the materials. Board Member Erb — That and the access road already being fairly close to it I thought was a very nice feature. Chairperson Howe — And by the way... Board Member Hoffmann — That comment, actually, refers just to this particular application for this particular tower. I have other comments if it comes to another tower. Board Member Thayer — That's for sure. Chairperson Howe — And I think we can call this either the meteorological tower or the metrological tower. Board Member Wilcox — Which is right. I saw it both ways in the materials. Board Member Riha — It's meteor. Chairperson Howe — Well, Jonathan can explain. He explained it to me today. So if you have... Mr. Kanter — I don't think we have time tonight. It will take a couple of hours. [laughing] Chairperson Howe — Would someone like to move the SEQR resolution? Board Member Wilcox — Can I mention that the public may want to address us prior to doing the SEQR? I suspect many of their issues are SEQR related. I'll just throw that out to the Chair. Chairperson Howe — That's fine. If you would like to have a seat we'll open up the public hearing. We'll open the public hearing at 8:46 p.m. and if there are members of the public who would like to address this project please come forward. Ms. Brock — And the public hearing is for the preliminary and final site plan and special permit technically. Chairperson Howe — Correct. Thank you. I always rely on people picking up the agenda and I realize sometimes people don't pick up the agenda. Ms. Brock — I just want to make it clear this is not for the SEQR. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 48 [general agreement] Ms. Brock — So then after you vote on SEQR they would be expecting another public hearing on the preliminary and final site plan and special permit that this public hearing is going to cover that. But you shouldn't close the public hearing until after your vote on the SEAR. [agreement] Chairperson Howe — Is there anyone who would like to address this? So we'll keep the public hearing open and we'll come back to ... is there someone who like to move the SEQR resolution? Board Member Riha — I'll move it. Chairperson Howe — Susan Riha. Seconded by Hollis. Any discussion? Any changes? Mr. Smith — Rod, I'll just mention that the resolution is from the old meeting so just the dates need to be updated. Ms. Brock — Right. So in the caption the date March 18th should be April 1St. And also in whereas number 3 the date needs to be changed from March 18th to April 1 st Board Member Wilcox - I would also like to ask that we make a change to the short environmental assessment form. Question 11 —does proposed action involve permit approval... from another government agency? I think it should state that the Zoning Board of Appeals needs to grant a permit or approval as well as ... the New York State Energy and Development Authority...) don't know what that means ... but yes the ZBA has to grant... Chairperson Howe - Well, I think the NYSERDA is just...that's where the funding is coming from. Board Member Wilcox - Yeah ... it says list agency name and we need to list the Zoning Board of Appeals. Chairperson Howe - So that's fine with everyone? [agreement] Any other changes to either the SEQR form or resolution? [none] All those in favor? [carried unanimously] ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 033 SEAR Preliminary and Final Site Plan & Special Permit Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower South Hill = 1,900 feet North of King Road East Tax Parcel No. 43 -1 -4 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, April 1, 2008 PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 49 Motion made by Susan Riha, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -14, Conservation Zone. The project involves clearing approximately 0.8 acres of vegetation for the construction of a +/- 164 foot high metrological tower. The tower will be used to collect data such as wind speed, wind direction, and temperature for a maximum period of 12 months. The study is to determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine on the Ithaca College owned lands in the future. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Associate Vice - President for Facilities, Agent, and 29 This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to site plan approval and special permit, and 3. The Planning Board, Short Environmental and Part II prepared "Ithaca College — RE Metrological Tower' materials, and on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Assessment Form (EAF) Part I, submitted by the applicant, by Town Planning staff, a bound packet of materials titled %quest for Site Plan Approval for the Proposed Temporary date stamped February 14, 2008, and other application 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed project; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Erb and Wilcox. Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 50 PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -14, Conservation Zone. The project involves clearing approximately 0.8 acres of vegetation for the construction of a +/- 164 foot high metrological tower. The tower will be used to collect data such as wind speed, wind direction, and temperature for a maximum period of 12 months. The study is to determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine on the Ithaca College owned lands in the future. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant: Richard Couture, Associate Vice= President for Facilities, Agent. Chairperson Howe — The public hearing is still open. Are there further comments about the proposal? John Confer — I've looked as carefully as I could at the highest detail maps, survey maps, and the nearest house along the utilities' right- of- ways ... was that you, Fred, who said you thought your house was 1,000 feet away? The nearest house is 1,400 feet. Board Member Wilcox — You know I sat here.,Ym in Deer Run by the way. I'm in one of the townhouses and it looks like about 4 inches on this map, which is 1,000 feet...is what it looks like. It could be 1,200 feet. Mr. Confer — I believe it is 1,400 feet. And I know this is a critical issue. On the highest relief survey maps that we have available I tried my best to measure that. Chairperson Howe — Thank you. Any other comments? We had a first and a second, right? Ms. Brock — No. Chairperson Howe — Would someone like to move... Ms. Brock — Do you want to close the public hearing? Chairperson Howe — Yes. We would like to close the public hearing at 8:50 p.m. Is there anyone who would like to move the resolution? Board Member Riha — I'll move the resolution. Board Member Erb — I'll second it. Chairperson Howe — Seconded by Hollis. Board Member Wilcox — Should we add a condition that indicates that approval of this temporary tower in no way obligates this board in any way to any further action that may PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 51 come before this board with regard to a wind turbine. I want that very, very clear that we can approve a temporary tower and let's say that the wind up there is great and it's fast and there's a lot of it and they come back with a proposed 250 foot, 300 foot turbine tower, wind turbine tower. We could say no for whatev ... for appropriate reasons. So I want to make sure it is clear we are not obligated... this board is not obligating itself in any way and I don't know whether I simply need to state that or whether it is appropriate in the... Chairperson Howe — I think it's... [many talking at once] Ms. Brock — That's not really a condition. Right? It's more of a declaration. Board Member Wilcox — Yeah, you're right it is. Board Member Riha — And I don't see how approving a met tower can be interpreted as... Board Member Wilcox — I don't want anybody to think that one implies the other. Board Member Erb — That's good. It's been stated out loud very clearly now. Chairperson Howe — Are we ready to vote? Ms. Brock — We need to change the dates again in the caption, in whereas paragraph 2, and paragraph 3 and in the now therefore be it resolved clause the last word says meet and it should be met. Chairperson Howe calls for a vote. Carried unanimously. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 = 034 Preliminary and Final Site Plan & Special Permit Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower South Hill —1,900 feet North of King road East Tax Parcel No. 43 -14 Town of Ithaca Planning Board, April 1, 2008 Motion made by Susan Riha, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 52 East and the Ithaca College Campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -1 -4, Conservation Zone. The project involves clearing approximately 0.8 acres of vegetation for the construction of a +/- 164 foot high metrological tower. The tower will be used to collect data such as wind speed, wind direction, and temperature for a maximum period of 12 months. The study is to determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine on the Ithaca College owned lands in the future. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Associate Vice= President for Facilities, 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 the project has, on April 1, 2008, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 1, 2008, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a bound packet of materials titled "Ithaca College — request for Site Plan Approval for the Proposed Temporary Metrological Tower", date stamped February 14, 2008, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower project finding that the standards of Article XXIV Section 270 -200, Subsections A — L, of the Town of Ithaca Code, 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 Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus, as described in the bound packet titled Ithaca College — Request for Site Plan Approval for the Proposed Temporary Metrological Tower' date stamped February 14, 2008, subject to the following conditions: a. granting of the necessary height variance from the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals prior to issuance of a building permit, and b, submission of one set of the final site plan drawings on mylar, vellum, or paper, signed and sealed by the registered land surveyor, engineer, PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 53 architect, or landscape architect who prepared the site plan materials, prior to issuance of a building permit, and cl submission of a map for review and approval of the Director of Planning, prior to issuance of the building permit, showing areas of sedges to be protected with flagging and fencing during both installation and removal of the tower, and that all flagging and fencing be installed prior to any work occurring on the site, and d, the temporary tower and all associated materials (anchors, equipment, guides, etc.) are to be removed from the site by July 1, 2009, and e. project will require obtaining a building permit for the installation of the tower and a demolition permit for the removal of the tower from the Town of Ithaca Building Department. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Riha, Erb and Wilcox Nays: None The motion was passed unanimously. Mr. Kanter — Maybe we should just state for the record that the board has by unanimous vote overridden the County Planning Departments determination with a majority plus 1 vote. Chairperson Howe — Thank you, Jon. Mr. Kanter — For the record. Board Member Wilcox — A rhetorical observation. How long did we spend on a fence and how long did we spend on the tower? [laughing] Generic Environment Wolf, LLR Presenter. IS ., Ln Kathryn Wolf, of Trowbridge and Wolf, appeared before the board and gave an update on the Cornell Transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (T- GEIS). Ms. Wolf made the following points: • Purpose of project two -fold: Cornell recognized the need to reduce single occupancy vehicle use and to develop an environmental impact statement that would allow the Planning Board to understand potential transportation growth impacts holistically. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 54 • T -GEIS document in final editing stage and will be delivered to the Town in approximately 2 weeks. • The Transportation Impact Mitigation Strategies (TIMS) will then be completed as a stand -alone document. It will function as Cornell's 10 -year transportation plan. The TIMS will be delivered to the Town a few weeks after T -GEIS is complete. Ms. Wolf suggested that Planning Board meetings during the month of May include discussions on adequacy of the T -GEIS (and TIMS) with a public hearing held in June. The Board discussed what is provided to the Board document. The question causing the impacts. The future, they would be adopting. The first step is to make sure what answers and responds to issues raised in the scoping regarding the significance of impacts depends on what is Board also discussed how the TIMS would be used in the The Board thanked Ms. Wolf for her presentation. Other Business Consider changing the April 15, 2008 Planning Board meeting to April 22, 2008. Board Member Wilcox moved that the Planning Board move the scheduled April 15th meeting to April 22nd in order to accommodate Ithaca College. Seconded by Hollis Erb. Vote on motion carried unanimously. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 038 CHANGE OF DATE REGULAR MEETING of APRIL 15, 2008 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD APRIL 1, 2008 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS. The Town of Ithaca Planning .Board has received a request from Ithaca College to change the April 15, 2008 Regular Planning Board meeting to April 22, 2008 to allow all their Project Engineers to be available for questions from the Board and Public. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby reschedules the Regular Planning Board Meeting from April 15, 2008 to April 22, 2008 to accommodate Ithaca College. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 55 A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Wilcox, Conneman, Erb, Hoffmann, Thayer and Riha Nays: None The motion was carried unanimously. Approval of Minutes February 19, 2008, Special Meeting of March 11, 2008, and March 18, 2008. February 29th — moved by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb. Vote on motion —Eva Hoffmann abstained. ADOPTED RESOLUTION. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 = 035 ADOPTION OF OFFICIAL MINUTES MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 29, 2008 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD APRIL 1, 2008 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from February 29, 2008, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on February 29, 2008. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Riha and Erb Nays: None Abstention: Hoffmann The motion was carried. March 11'' — moved by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb. Vote on motion —Eva Hoffmann and Larry Thayer abstained. PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 56 ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 = 036 ADOPTION OF OFFICIAL MINUTES MINUTES OF MARCH 11, 2008 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD APRIL 1, 2008 MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from March 11, 2008, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on March 11, 2008. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Wilcox, Conneman, Hoffmann, Talty and Erb Nays: None Abstention: Thayer and Riha The motion was carried. March 18th —moved by Hollis Erb, seconded by Kevin Talty. Vote on motion – Eva Hoffmann, Larry Thayer, and Susan Riha abstained. ADOPTED RESOLUTION: PB RESOLUTION NO. 2008 - 037 ADOPTION OF OFFICIAL MINUTES MINUTES OF MARCH 18, 2008 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD APRIL 1, 2008 MOTION made by Hollis Erb, seconded by Kevin Talty, WHEREAS. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from March 18, 2008, and PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 57 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: The Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on March 18, 2008. A vote on the motion was as follows: Ayes: Howe, Wilcox, Conneman, Talty and Erb Nays: None Abstention: Hoffmann, Thayer and Riha The motion was carried. Training Board discussed upcoming training sessions and required training hours. Committee Reports Board Member Erb gave a brief report on the Comprehensive Plan Review Committee, Adjournment Chairperson Howe adjourned the meeting at 9:30 p.m. rauiCUC muisen, Deputy Town Clerk PB 4 -1 -08 Final Pg. 58 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday April 1 2008 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Sign Variances for the Sunset Grill restaurant located at 823 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -4 -2, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal is to allow a second freestanding sign on this property (where one freestanding is permitted) that is too close to the side lot line (15 -foot setback is required). Matt Torchia & James Rogan, Owners /Applicants; Frank Rogan, Agent. 7:15 P.M. SEQR Determination: East Hill Plaza Landscape Improvements, Pine Tree Road. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed landscape improvements to the north side of the East Hill Plaza located off Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 62- 2- 1.121, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal includes the installation of new landscaping, brick pavers, and changes to the safety access lane along the rear of the plaza around the Cornell University offices. Cornell University Real Estate Department, Owner; S.B. Ashley Management Corp., Agent, 7:30 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell University Dilmun Hill Farm Deer Fence Replacement, Dryden Road. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for the proposed replacement of a deer fence at the Dilmun Hill Farm, located on Dryden Road approximately 300 feet east of Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63 -1 -11, Planned Development Zone No. 9. The project involves replacing the existing 6 foot high fence with an 8 foot high deer fence in the same location. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Melissa Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator, Agent. 7:45 P.M. SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower, Between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus. 7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 43 -1-4, Conservation Zone. The project involves clearing approximately 0.8 acres of vegetation for the construction of a +/- 164 foot high metrological tower. The tower will be used to collect data such as wind speed, wind direction, and temperature for a maximum period of 12 months. The study is to determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine on the Ithaca College owned lands in the future. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Associate Vice - President for Facilities, Agent. 8:15 P.M. Presentation and discussion regarding the Cornell Transportation- focused Generic Environmental Impact Statement (T- GEIS). Kathryn Wolf, Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Presenter, 10. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 11. Approval of Minutes: February 19, 2008, Special Meeting of March 11, 2008, and March 18, 2008. 12. Other Business: Consider changing the April 15, 2008 Planning Board meeting to April 22, 2008. 13, Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Tuesday, April 1, 2008 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town. of Ithaca on Tuesday, April 1, 2008, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Sign Variances for the Sunset Grill restaurant located at 823 Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 40 -4 -2, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal is to allow a second freestanding sign on this property (where one freestanding is permitted) that is too close to the side lot line (15 -foot setback is- required). -Matt Torchia & James Rogan, Owners /Applicants; Frank Rogan, Agent, 7:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed landscape improvements to the north side. of the East Hill Plaza located off Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 62 -2- 1.121, Community Commercial Zone. The proposal includes the installation of new landscaping, brick pavers, and changes to the safety access lane along the rear of the plaza around the Cornell University offices. Cornell University Real Estate Department, Owner; S.B. Ashley Management Corp., Agent. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Approval for the proposed replacement of a deer fence at the Dilmun Hill Farm, located on Dryden Road approximately 300 feet east of Pine Tree Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 63 -1 -11, Planned Development Zone No. 9. The project involves replacing the existing 6 foot high fence with an 8 foot high deer fence in the same location. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Melissa Madden, Organic Farm Coordinator, Agent, 7:45 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Ithaca College Temporary Metrological Tower located approximately 1,900 feet north of King Road East between King Road East and the Ithaca College Campus, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 43 -14, Conservation Zone. The project involves clearing approximately 0.8 acres of vegetation for the construction of a +/- 164 foot high metrological tower. The tower will be used to collect data such as wind speed, wind direction, and temperature for a maximum period of 12 months. The study is to determine the feasibility of installing a wind turbine on the Ithaca College owned lands in the future. Ithaca College, Owner /Applicant; Richard Couture, Associate Vice - President for Facilities, Agent. Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matter or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, March 24, 2008 Publish: Wednesday, March 26, 2008 :Wednesday,: March,26;12008 1 Tk1F'ITHACA JOUR4AC l y Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street April 1, 2008 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name h1A-Top lsFo�cGe 1'�cCONOCr1�i ? n ah er �a d . A44(S Address NC MMq : M . :vp, e 9 Aini 2• eMl___ IUy 3443 N �, ��, „, ►{ M rs� ►� 4 d aCa 1e � �� Cam( 5L 17a-h�tc 14 (2 Q�) 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 April 1 2008 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting Date of Publication March 24, 2008 March 26, 2008 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 26`h day of March 2008. Notary Public CONNIE F. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No.01CL6052878 Qualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 26, 20 �0