Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2010-04-06FILE DATE V OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING 44 Tuesday, April 6, 2010 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox, Chair; Members: Rod Howe, Hollis Erb, George Conneman, and Jon Bosak; Ellen Baer (alternate) Staff Present: Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Creig Hebdon, Engineer; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Darby Kiley, Planner; Jim Weber, Director of Public Works; Debra DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:03 p.m. and accepted the secretary's posting of the two public hearings on the agenda. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be I No one came forward. AGENDA ITEM SEOR Determination: Chaffee 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1584 & 1586 Slaterville Road. Ellen Chaffee, co -owner of the property, stated that they built a house on a property that is large enough for two houses 26 years ago. In 1984 they got a variance from the ZBA to build the house where it is located. They have two addresses, but for some reason it is one lot. They've decided to sell the house, which has been rented since they built it. They have a buyer and would like to subdivide the property. Ms. Kiley pointed out that the Chaffee's had Planning Board approval in 1984 for a subdivision. PB RESOLUTION No. 2010 -025: SEOR Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval; Chaffee 2 -Lot Subdivision; 1584 and 1586 Slaterville Road Motion made WHEREAS: 1. This is Town of proposal Mr. Talty and seconded by Ms. Erb onsideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for . the I' two -lot subdivision located at 1584 Slaterville Road (NYS Route 79), Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56. -3 -16, Medium Density Residential. The involves subdividing the existing +/- 42,725 square foot parcel into two PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 2 of 11 lots, with #1584 being +/- 27,724 square feet, and #1586 being +/- 15,001 square feet. Scott, and Ellen Chaffee, Owners /Applicants; and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as lead agency with respect to Subdivision Approval; and 3. The Planning Board, on April 6, 2010, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Boundary Survey an, I d Lot Split for Ellen Chaffee, Scott Chaffee, 1584 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Keystone Associates, Architects, Engineers and Surveyors, LLC, dated 3/17/10, and other application materials; and 4. Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance for the reasons set forth in the Environmental Assessment Form Part II referenced above, in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Erb, Howe, Talty, Baer, Bosak, Conneman, Wilcox NAYS: None The motion passed unanimously. AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing, Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1584 and 1586 Slaterville Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56 -3 -16, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 42,725 square foot parcel into two lots ( +/- 27,724 sq. ft. and +/- 15,001 sq. ft.), each containing an existing residence. Scott & Ellen Chaffee, Owners /Applicants. Chairman Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. No one came fdrward to address the Board. Mr. Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 3 of 11 PB RESOLUTION No. 2010 -026: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval; Chaffee 2 -Lot Subdivision; 1584 and 1586 Slaterville Road Motion made by Jon Bosak and seconded by Ellen Baer WHEREAS: 1. This is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot subdivision located at 1584 Slaterville Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56. -3 -16, Medium Density Residential. The proposal involves subdividing the existing +/- 42,725 square foot parcel into two lots, with #1584 being +/- 27,724 square feet, and #1586 being +/- 15,001 square feet. Scott and Ellen Chaffee, Owners /Applicants; and 2. This is an (Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency with respect to Subdivision Approval, has on April 6, 2010, 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 Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff; and 3. The Planning Board, on April 6, 2010, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Boundary Survey and Lot Split for Ellen Chaffee, Scott Chaffee, 1584 Slaterville Road, Town of I Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Keystone Associates, Architects, Engineers and Surveyors, LLC, dated 3/17/10, and other applicatigIn materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the' Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approvall for the proposed two -lot subdivision located at 1584 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56. -3 -16, as shown on the map entitled "Boundary Survey and Lot Split for Ellen Chaffee, Scott Chaffee, 1584 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Keystone Associates, Architects, Engineers and Surveyors, LLC, dated 3/17/10 subject to the following conditions: a. submission of a driveway easement subject to the review and approval of the Attorney for the Town, prior to the Chairman's signing of the approved plat, and submission to the Planning Department of the County Clerk's filing receipt for the approved easement; b. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the most current plat and three dark -lined prints PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 4 of 11 prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Erb; Howe; Talty; Baer; Bosak; Conneman; Wilcox NAYS: None 1 The motion passed unanimously. Approval of Minutes of February 2, 2010 Mr. Bosak pointed out that on page 13 under committee reports, Mr. Kanter noted that there are actually two applicants for the vacant seat on the Planning Board. PB RESOLUTION No. 2010 -026a: Minutes of February 2, 2010 Motion made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Hollis Erb. WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on February 2, 2010; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on February 2, 2010. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Bosak, Baer, Talty, Erb NAYS: None The motion passed unanimously. Public Hearing: Consideration of a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. Chairman Jim Weber intri The last map m map. He notec outside the tom roads are not recognized as the inspection pavement widtl opened the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. bduced the topic. He noted that the map will be revised every year or so. as adopted in 1968; that map was used to draw the footprint for the new that there are three clarifiers on the map. 1) State roads are shown 'n limits for orientation points of view. 2) Private college and subdivision necessarily a representation of town highway standards, but are approved and established access routes; the town is not responsible for and maintenance of those roads. 3) Under town -owned roads and is, it's been noted that the pavement widths are not representative of the town highway r pavement, and right of way reE way based on i we can issue bL PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 5 of 11 ght -of -way widths. The map shows what we know to be the width of :his is the width reported to the state annually. We don't know what the Ily is because it might be a deeded right of way or established right of iaintenance. This is more to say we have safe and passable roads so ilding permits and continue through the process. Mr. Bosak wondered how the actual right of way is determined when necessary. Mr. Weber answered that, depending on the circumstance, there would have to be a title search. The records do exist, but it takes time to search through them. They all used 3 rods as a width, but in many cases would use a tree or a home as a beginning point. Ms. Brock noted that if deeds aren't helpful, rights of way can be established by use. Case law is clear that a right of way extends at least to the far side of the ditches. Look to see if there afire guard rails, signs, markers, or abutments to help determine where the right of way by use is, and it can vary almost segment by segment. It's not always a simple process unless the road has been deeded to the Town. Ms. Erb wondered what the squiggly mark in the upper corner across from Orchard Road signified. Mr. Weber responded that town parks need to be shown on the map, but not trails. During the maps- making process, staff identified trails and walkways the town maintains through cutting and mowing, but since they are not part of our parks system, they will be taken off the map. This map will not identify all the town -owned properties where we have rights of access. The town does have a separate map for trails. Ms. Brock noted that the official map contains streets, highways, and parks, and may also contain drainage systems. She researched all the preserves shown on the map — the deeds, the resolutions — and they all were clearly intended to be park land. The issue with trails and walkways is that if they're shown on the map, there's an implication that they are park land. This could be an issue because the town could then never change that land to any other kind of use. Mr. Bosak stated for the record that the new roads currently proposed for West Hill on the official map are insufficient to mitigate increases in traffic that would result from future develop nj ent allowed in the current zoning. The only possible mitigation on the map is the proposed road coming from 79 up to West Hill, which he does not believe will be any mitigation to the problem, and certainly not sufficient by itself. Mr. Weber stated that the purpose of this map is to show existing roads and adopted roads to make sure they fulfill the obligation of life, safety, and welfare. One of the other requirements staff were working with was corridors that have been identified within adopted plans. This does not preclude the ability to add more as traff ic is discussed and PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 6 of 11 options identified. He also reminded the Board that the map can be changed and amended at anv time. Mr. Bosak asked why this road was left on the map and others from the 1968 map taken off. Jon Kanter responded that the main reason is that the 2007 transportation plan adopted by the Town Board approves the portion between Mecklenburg Road, Bundy Road, and up to West Hill Drive. The majority of that road contains approved development plans. The reason other roads were taken off the map is that there is no record of them having been approved and no development plans that were filed. There were never any detailed studies of those roads. An official map should show a specific location of the road, not just an approximation of where it might be nice to build one. He also noted that the 2007 transportation plan focused on trying to find solutions other than roads to accommodate transportation issues and new development, such as enhanced transit and park- and -ride lots. So roads are not the only way to accommodate development on West Hill. The transportation plan would support other approaches. Mr. Bosak stated that he is not urging any of these roads be built; he's only saying that without them, there will be a problem. Mr. Kanter wholeheartedly disagreed. The reason the North Campus Approach project is not referenced on the map is that it's not an exact proposal, but a concept, which is referenced in the transportation plan as a recommendation. Since it does not have a specific location, it does not belong on an official map yet. Mr. Kanter suggested reminding Town Board of the importance of pursuing the North Campus approach project. Ms. Erb requested including Cradit Farm Road on the map since other campus roads appear. Mr. Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:50 p.m. PB RESOLUTION No. 2010 -027: Recommendation to Town Board Regarding Proposed Changes to Official Map Motion made by Rod Howe and seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, Section 270 of NYS Town Law authorizes the Town Board to establish an official map of that part of the town outside the limits of any incorporated city or village showing the streets, highways and parks theretofore laid out, and may also show drainage systems; and WHEREAS, the I current Official Map of the Town of Ithaca dates back to 1968 and has not been changed or amended since then; and PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 7 of 11 WHEREAS, Section 273 of NYS Town Law authorizes the Town Board to change or add to the official map of the town so as to lay out new streets, highways, drainage systems or parks, and any such change or addition to the Official Map must be referred to the Planning Board for a report thereon; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works has prepared a draft proposed, revised Official Map, dated February 2010, showing the current and proposed streets, highways and parks in the Town of Ithaca, which represents changes from the 1968 Official Map; and WHEREAS, the Town Board discussed the draft revised Official map as described above at its regular meeting on March 8, 2010, and referred the proposed changes to the Official Map to the Planning Board for a report and recommendation; and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board reviewed the draft Official Map, dated February 2010, and held a public hearing on the draft Official Map at its meeting on April 6, 2010; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recomnj ends that the Town Board adopt the proposed revised Official Map with the changes shown on the February 2010 draft and with the following additional changes: A. Add Cradit Farm Road's name to the map B. Add the future position of the Westview Subdivision Road connecting the existing end of Larisa Lane to Schickel Road as an approved future road. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Erb; Howe; Talty; Baer; Bosak; Conneman; Wilcox NAYS: None The motion passed unanimously. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed South Hill Business Campus Master Plan located at 950 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 39 -1- 1.2 and 39- 1 -1.1, Planned Development Zone No. 12 and Office Park Commercial Zone. The Master Plan includes the development of three new buildings (totaling +/- 197,000 GSF), a new loop road, additional storm water facilities, and new landscaping. The new buildings would contain a mix of office, manufacturing, and research and development uses, and would be phased in one at a time as needed. South Hill Business Campus LLC, Owner /Applicant; Miles G. Cigolle, A.I.A., HOLT Architects, P.C., Agent. Andy Sciarabbal managing partner of the South Hill Business Campus, introduced the project. They acquired the property in 2004 and remediated the property through the Brownfield program and did improvements to get energy efficiency up and costs down. PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 8 of 11 They've gone (from 25% occupancy to 84 %, with 40+ tenants — Challenge Industries being the latest — including manufacturing, R &D, professional offices, and service businesses. They've spoken to IC, town planning staff, and Jim Weber about the master plan and have incorporated their comments. They don't know if any of the plans will be built, but they want to be ready should any tenants require the space. Miles Cigolle did a tour of the sketch plans. The current building is mixed use, and their projection is for a similar mix. The tenants use far fewer than the 1200 parking spaces. The plan keeps the complex above the stream, and does not cross the stream. The principal entrance will be the one to the north. Of the three buildings shown in the plan, they don't know which would be built first. They wanted to take a comprehensive look at the whole site Viand to see what is the most the site would support in terms of building and parking and still maintain the feeling of a business park. He described the layout and use of the buildings and how they would be sited in relation to parking and landscaping. The two parking lots are currently discontinuous; they would connect them and put loops at both ends. The number of parking spaces .required by zoning is 1200 spaces; the scheme uses 950 spaces (a 25% reduction); they would need only 728 based on current use. Peter Trowbridge spoke regarding SEAR. Assuming the entire project will be built (under SEQR, they can't segment the project), it will exceed the Type I action under Town of Ithaca code, so they assume they will need to do a full environmental impact statement when (they come back with a preliminary plan. There was a traffic study done by SRF in 2005; they would amend and contemporize the study. There's an enormous capacity for traffic from DOT's perspective on Danby Road. There was a parking study done by their firm and TG Miller. They've begun a visual assessment of the site to see whether the buildings would have any impacts on the horizon. They would use the town's draft scenic inventory and Appendix B of the EIS as part of their visual assessment strategy. They hope the Board will be able to make recommendations to the zoning board for variances on parking and building height. They've demonstrated through projections of current use that they can reduce the number parking spaces. It doesn't make sense in a sustainable world to build more parking than is needed and have it sit there vacant. Building aesthetics was discussed. Mr. Talty would like the building to look as nice from the drive down the lake as the lake would from the building: muted colors, non - reflective glass, etc. Ms. Erb expressed concerns about the visibility of the building in the front. Mr. Trowbridge responded that the front building is already 30 feet lower than Danby Road. The placement would also depend on the tenant and the need for public visibility (e.g., a service like i a convenient care facility). TCAT was discussed. With the proposed new road, the bus won't have to turn around, but will loop back out to the road. PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 9 of 11 Mr. Wilcox noted that the Planning Board can grant a 20% reduction in the number parking spaces if the applicant can provide the data to support it. He suggested that if they have to go to the ZBA for a height variance, they should consider requesting a further reduction in parking spaces. He encourages walkways that loop around the detention ponds for employees to get out during lunch. He reminded the applicant that they would need a letter from Tom Parsons saying fire access is sufficient. Mr. Kanter suggested that if plans for the other vacant part of the site occurred on a similar timeline, they should coordinate reviews on the whole property to avoid segmentation. Mr. Sciarabbal discussed contaminated soils. They are currently in a remediation process. The DEC gave them a certificate of completion Dec. 31, 2008 based on the work plan. They spent 2009 doing quarterly monitoring and testing. The DEC has asked for another full year of monitoring. They won't know for another year where they stand. The parking issue was clarified. Zoning calls for 1268 spaces; their plans show 951 spaces — a 25 reduction; projections based proportionally on current use show they will need only 726 spaces. If they succeeded in reducing the number of spaces to 726 and later needed more spaces, they would have plenty of room to accommodate them. AGENDA ITEM I Consideration of 1033 Danby Roac 41 -1 -30.2, Multir includes the der the removal of construction of 280 bedrooms), Community Buili project will also College Circle Sieverding, Integ a sketch plan for the proposed Circle Apartments Expansion located at (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 43- 1 -2.2, 43 -1 -2.3 and le Residence and Medium Density Residential Zones. The project iolition of four existing apartment buildings (32 bedrooms) along with multiple existing parking spaces on the property to allow for the 8 four bedroom apartment units in nine new buildings (net increase of construction of an approximately 2,500 square foot expansion to the ling, and a net addition of 106 parking spaces on the property. The include new storm water facilities, walkways, drives and landscaping. Associates, LLC and Ithaca College. Owners /Applicants; Herman fated Acquisition & Development Corp., Agent. Carl Sgrecci, vice the project. IC isl Fewer students a College Circle ha students. Primaril)l in traditional resid this expansion will free up space for that will need atte room in College C offline and work or president for finance and administration at Ithaca College, introduced an enrollment- driven institution. They house 70% of their students. re looking to enroll in college and the market is very competitive. s been very successful and adding to it will help to attract more juniors and seniors live there, while freshmen and sophomores live ance halls on campus. There is a shortage of space on campus, so allow them to move juniors and seniors out of the residence halls and ower classmen. Also the campus is aging, and some of the buildings ntion in the next years are older residence halls. If they have more :ircle, it will provide them with the flexibility to take a building or two i it or replace it. PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 10 of 11 Mr. Sieverding described the three major components to the plan: 1) new infill buildings, which are possible given the space left between the buildings when they were originally constructed; 2) additions to existing apartments; and 3) an addition to the Community building. He gave a tour of the sketch plan. There will be additional landscaping, enhanced pedestrian access to the current sidewalk and to nearby retail establishments, and an expansion of the existing stormwater detention facility. When fully developed, the density level will be substantially below what zoning suggests. He pointed out known zoning issues: 1) as a multiple- residence zone that abuts on the south and east a low- density residential zone, the side yard setbacks of the plan are insufficient; and 2) parking for College Circle is occurring on a different parcel that is zoned differently. Mr. Bosak noted that the future use of the apartments could change and there's no contingency for increased parking. The representatives responded to questions and comments from the Board. • Drainage: They reported that drainage issues on the property have been remediated and there are no reported problems. • Handicap access: There are provisions for 4 to 5 fully accessible units. • Bicycles: Bicycles are seen padlocked to trees, light posts, and railings. There are provisions to )add bicycle racks to the site. • Bus: TCAT can be caught at the intersection of Danby and King roads. Previously, the applicant persuaded TCAT to extend bus route 11 through College Circle; this service was stopped because no one used it. • Community gardens: it was suggested that space be allotted for gardens. The Cornell gardens are fully subscribed. • Walkways: More walkways connecting the apartments to the current sidewalks were encouraged to discourage students from cutting through lawns. Environmental re'v iew: This is a Type I action. The applicant plans to do a long environmental assessment form. They will hire SRF to perform a traffic study — the same firm used by the South Hill Business Campus across the road. They will perform a detailed stormwater management plan. They would like to start the traffic study as soon as possible, while the students are still in town. There was discussion of the parameters of the study. Scheduling: Givenithe academic calendar and the need, the applicant would like to get through this process by the end of August/beginning of September, with the possibility of obtaining building permits and beginning construction at the end of October so that they can deliver the first of the units in August of 2011. Mr. Kanter recommended getting the stormwater management plan in as soon as possible. Demolition plans should be part of the site plan, submission. He requested copies of the housing needs assessment for the environmental review. Mr. Bates cautioned that with only 3 building inspectors and many projects) in the works, the building department is limited on how quickly permits can be issued. AGENDA ITEM Approval of Minutes of March 2, 2010 PB Final 04 -06 -2010 Page 11 of 11 PB RESOLUTION No. 2010 -028: Minutes of March 2, 2010 Motion made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by George Conneman. WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on March 2, 2010; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on March 2, 2010. A vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Clonneman, Bosak, Baer, Talty, Erb NAYS: None The motion was declared to be unanimous. Approval of Minutes of March 16, 2010 There was a q l estion as to the accuracy of the April 2nd due date for the landscape plan and building schedule for the resolution regarding the Courtside Racquet and Fitness Club. If the date is correct, did Cornell meet the deadline? Attorney Brock will look into it. AGENDA ITEM Other Business Mr. Kanter reported that there would not be enough business to warrant holding the meeting of April 20th. Board Member Erb moved and Board Member Talty seconded canceling the Planning Board meeting of April 20th with appropriate notice to the public. Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote — the motion passed unanimously. May 4th meeting agenda items Public Works facility master plan Cornell parking lot landscaping plan Equestrian Center landscaping plan modification Ithaca Estates Phase III subdivision Adjournment Upon motion, Chairperson Wilcox adjourned meeting at 10:03 p.m. Respectfully subn';iitted, Debra DeAug+sttine first- Deputy Town, Clerk 7:00 P.M 7:05 P.M TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, April 6, 2010 AGENDA to be heard (no more than five minutes). Determination: Chaffee 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1584 & 1586 Slaterville Road. 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1584 and 1586 Slaterville Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56 -3 -16, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 42,725 square foot parcel into two lots ( +/- 27,724 sq. ft. and +/- 15,001 sq. ft.), each containing an existing residence. Scott & Ellen Chaffee, Owners /Applicants. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed South Hill Business Campus Master Plan located at 950 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 39 -1 -1.2 and 39- 1 -1.1, Planned Development Zone No. 12 and Office Park Commercial Zone. The Master Plan includes the development of three new buildings (totaling +/- 197,000 GSF), a new loop road, additional storm water facilities, and new landscaping. The new buildings would contain a mix lof office, manufacturing, and research and development uses, and would be phased in one at a time as needed. South Hill Business Campus LLC, Owner /Applicant; Miles G. Cigolle, A.I.A ,, HOLT Architects, P.C., Agent. 8:00 P.M. Consideration of a sketch plan for the proposed Circle Apartments Expansion located at 1033 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 43- 1 -2.2, 43 -1 -2.3 and 41-1 - 30.2, Multiple Residence and Medium Density Residential Zones. The project includes the demolition of four existing apartment buildings (32 bedrooms) along with the removal of multiple existing parking spaces on the property to allow for the construction of 78 four bedroom apartment units in nine new buildings (net increase of 280 bedrooms), construction of an approximately 2,500 square foot expansion to the Community Building, and a net addition of 106 parking spaces on the property. The project will also include new storm water facilities, walkways, drives and landscaping. College Circle Associates, LLC and Ithaca College. Owners / Applicants; Herman Sieverding, Integrated Acquisition & Development Corp., Agent. 7. Appro I al of Minutes: February 2, 2010, March 2, 2010 and March 16, 2010. 8. Other Business 7 Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, April 6, 2010 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 6, 2010, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1584 and 1586 Slaterville Road (NYS Route 79), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56- 3 -161 Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 42,725 square foot parcel into two lots ( +/- 27,724 sq. ft. and +/- 15,001 sq. ft.), each containing an existing residence. Scott & Ellen Chaffee, Owners /Applicants. 7:15 P.M. Consideration of a recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. Said Planning Board Lill at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, March 29, 2010 Publish: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 theitha_ca�o,�u�rnj al`�co'�m�We�dn�,esday�Mar�oh�` 3�01�0 IN J lr 1 Mt Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street April 6, 2010 7 :00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN -IN - Please Print Clearly, Thank You Address GO�Y� L U L'\ +156' 1 3 Jam, V� 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 Journals. vj Location of Sign Date of Posting: Date of Publication to be used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio a Street. March 29, 2010 March 31, 2010 5.•. Gk' Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 315` day of March 2010. � U"L Notary Public CONNIE P. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No. 01CL6052878 Oualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires b cember 26, 20 C