Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2011-03-29FILE TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING DATE 7- Tuesday, March 29, 2011 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 i Board Members Present: Chair: Fred Wilcox; Members: Linda Collins, George Conneman, John Beach, Hollis Erb, David Slottje (Alternate Member) Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Creig Hebdon, Engineer; Christine Balestra, Planner; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM i Continuation of discussion of the Findings Statement for the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 1 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4- 37, 26 -4 -38, and 26- 4 -39,' Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves the construction of 106 + /- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. Member of the applicant team present were: David Parks, attorney, Fred Wells from Tim Miller Associates, and Mark Parker from Keystone Associates. Mr. Wilcox suggested going through the redlined version of the Findings Statement dated March 29, 2011. Page 10: • Community Character, first sentence: change "meet" to "address." Page 17: Mr. Slottje initiated a discussion about bus passes, saying he no longer believes that the bus passes adequately mitigate the traffic issue. The Board has established that no bus stops there, and that it is more likely than not that the people in this development won't ride buses. He doesn't think it is a bad idea, but just can't say that traffic will be mitigated. Mr. Wilcox responded that that's why there are multiple mitigations. Not knowing which measures will work better than others at mitigating the traffic issue, the Board has discussed multiple mitigations, any one of which might be sufficient. It's also possible none in combination will. PB Minutes 03 -29 -2011 Page 2 of 6 Mr. Parks stated that he came to the conclusion that a substantial amount of money is going to TCAT, and he hopes that with this contribution, they will be willing to take a detour and enter the subdivision. Passes might increase ridership. It also can't be discounted that $5- per - gallon gasoline could motivatepeople to get out of their cars. The passes might be the tipping point. Ms. Collins is also not' convinced that these mitigations are enough, primarily because all the mitigations fall into two' basic categories: present and future, but traffic impacts are happening now. The two mitigations that are happening now shift the burden onto the people living in the townhouses. They will have to change their behavior. She does not think it's appropriate to shift the responsibility to the owners, nor does she think the hoped -for change will happen without significant incentive. She wants to see mitigations that happen now and are the responsibility of the developer. If the "maximum extent practicable" is zero, then perhaps the project as currently formed is not something she can vote for. Ms. Erb commented that the Board is supposed to look for balancing: counterbalancing negatives with positives. Mr. Parks assured the ;Board that since bus passes cost $500 per year, he will have to educate the purchaser about why this expenditure is worth it. Page 21 & 22 Mr. Slottje stated that the main impact of this project is traffic. Traffic -wise, an 80 -unit project is better than a 106 - unit'project. And what is important to many Board members is the 65 acres, which is available in both scenarios. The only thing that is not available is affordable housing, and affordable housing is already available in this portion of the Town. Given that the traffic is the primary impact, the primary benefit of the affordable housing piece, as configured, does not come close to the benefit of reducing traffic. Mr. Wilcox responded that "affordable housing" in this context is housing priced for a family that earns the median income in Tompkins County. There is a concentration of low- income housing on West Hill, and he doesn't think the applicant will consent to low- income housing. This would be for median - income people who can't afford to live in Town and need to live in the outlying areas. Mr. Parks commented that, according to INHS, 80% of median income is considered low income in order to qualify for subsidies. Ms. Erb stated for the record that the unmet total is 80 -120% of'median income. Mr. Beach stated thatihe and his friends could not afford to live in Holochuck in the normal units, but they could afford the lower- priced units. They make too much to be eligible for low- income housing. That's the group who are squeezed out of the housing market. Mr. Parks, responding to a question, said that people are going to enter into a contract for the applicant to build the units before they're built. There are limiting factors in how they are built -- certain areas where they can't build basements, and the affordable housing units will probably go in there. If they build a basement in one unit, they have to build basements in all units in that building. The first set will be built as spec houses to show basic layouts. The affordable units would be interior units. People will most likely pay more for units based on view. PB Minutes 03 -29 -2011 Page 3 of 6 Discussion ensued regarding who would administer any ongoing effort to keep the units affordable. Mr. Wilcox said that keeping up with it would be a bureaucratic nightmare, and that as long as they start as affordable housing, he feels the Board has done their job. Mr. Bates agreed, and suggested that the units will be assessed at a lower value. Unless owners do improvements to bring the assessment up, units will assess somewhat the same relative to the more costly ones. Ms. Erb said she is just interested in increasing this stock of more affordable housing. All people can do to jack up thei price of their narrower, smaller, no basement units, is to add tons of amenities. Mr. Slottje wondered if it was responsive to the affordable housing issue to require affordable prices only for the first people in. He agrees that affordable housing is needed, but does not think this meets it. This also does not tip the scale on traffic. He said he is advocating for 80 units without affordable housing. Mr. Wilcox said that developers are asking to build in the $300,000 to $350,000 range. So, for someone to build in the $175,000 to $185,000 range, he considers this a potential benefit to this community. He doubts, someone is going to propose 100 units of median - income housing or a node, so is content to take it piecemeal — to take 11 units now and see what else comes in. He does not want to do means testing. The Board discussed riot using fixed figures for the income guidelines for the affordable units. Ms. Brock suggested using the most current annual median income numbers as the units are sold. The homeowners association would need to certify that they comply with the guidelines. Mr. Parks agreed. The Board agreed on the following methods for determining the initial sale price of the units: • HUD definition ,of affordability, not including utilities • 120% or less of median income • Annual median income guidelines from HUD for Tompkins County Page 22 top: • Delete "The traffic impacts from the proposed action and" Page 23: • Change sentence in the third paragraph to read that 10% of the units will be "affordable for the initial purchasers at 120% of the median income range." Delete the parenthetical statement. • Last sentence of the third paragraph: Change "could" to "would" • Immediately before the last sentence add this language from page 14: "Except for the Cliff Street/North Fulton Street ...LOD D." • Ms. Brock will 'add language to say that mitigations will also help reduce visual impacts. Page 10: • Change "in" to "at the top of" the price range The Board took a break at 8:35 p.m. and returned to session at 8:44 p.m. PB Minutes 03 -29 -2011 Page 4 of 6 Agenda Item Discussion of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 1 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4 -38, and 26 -4 -39, Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density' Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves the construction of 106 + /- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David, M. Parks, Esq., Agent. Mr. Wilcox stated that the plan will have to change to reflect the narrower, smaller units. The Board discussed the draft resolution. Page 6, Resolved is The Board agreed to require that the applicant bring building samples of colors for both the siding and roofs before final ;subdivision approval. They'd like to see a variety of earth tones. To a question from Mr. Parks regarding the number of color samples, the Board agreed that four is enough. ! Page 5, fourth bullet from top: Mr. Hebdon explained that the Town is an MS4 (Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems) municipality. In August; of 2010, the State issued a new design manual, with the result that as of March 1, 2011, all projects have to meet the new guidelines. The DEC said that any project that did not have preliminary site plan approval by March 1 would have to meet the new standards. Some conflicting information from the DEC suggests the applicant will be relieved of that requirement. This bullet addresses that the applicant will need to show a waiver from the DEC stating that. The applicant did submit plans that met all the guidelines at the time. Mr. Slottje asked Mr. Hebdon if he considered the new rule a good idea. Mr. Hebdon responded that he has not worked with it enough to form an opinion. The Town has followed the previous guidelines for several years, and they seem to be working. The way it is set up now, the applicant will have to meet the new guidelines. The bullet will be rewritten to acknowledge that they may get a waiver from the DEC. Page 4, bullet 3: i Ms. Erb stated that the orientation of the buildings was counterproductive; it forces longer driveways for the A unit, and looks like they're not going along the slope but into the slope. Mark Parker responded that the long drive was to avoid a shared driveway. John Beach commented that he has lived with a shared driveway, and will never do it again. Public Works is concerned about the steepness of the slope of the driveways for buildings 9 and 10. Discussion ensued regarding reconfiguring the driveways. If the owners can't get up the driveway and can't turn around, they'll need to back up 200 feet. Mr. Bates noted that they may PB Minutes 03 -29 -2011 Page 5 of 6 need a turnaround for fire trucks. He also noted that the length of the driveways may require sprinkling of the units. Regarding a possible signal or roundabout, Fred Wells stated that they will provide an estimate for each and how they came up with that estimate. Ms. Balestra will call Tim Logue regarding the cost of the roundabout in installed in the City. Mr. Parks suggested their share for a roundabout should be 5% based one their additional traffic input into the system. The state and local shares of the cost of a roundabout are generally 80 percent and 20 percent, respectively. Regarding factoring possible future developments into the cost sharing, Ms. Brock stated that the Board can't make any assumptions about the unproposed property across the street. The current proposal calls for 72 units of affordable senior housing. The applicant had proposed contributing $10,000 for a future park- and -ride; this offer stands. i Approval of Minutes PB RESOLUTION No. 2011 -024: Minutes of March 1, 2011 Moved by Fred Wilcox; ,Seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on March 1, 2011; 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 1. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, ;Conneman, Beach, Slottje, Erb Nays: None PB RESOLUTION No. :2011 -025: Minutes of March 8, 2011 Moved by Fred Wilcox;, Seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on March 8, 2011; now, therefore, be it i RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on March 8. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Conneman, Beach, Slottje, Erb Nays: None PB RESOLUTION No.;2011 -026: Minutes of March 15, 2011 Moved by Fred Wilcox; Seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on March 15, 2011; 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 15. PB Minutes 03 -29 -2011 Page 6 of 6 Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Conneman, Beach, Slottje, Erb Nays: None Adjournment Upon motion by John Beach, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Debra DeAug tine .Deputy o Clerk il TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, March 29, 2011 (Special Meeting — Note Earlier Start Time) AGENDA i 6:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 6:05 P.M. Continuation of discussion of the Findings Statement for the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 1 -5.1, 25 -2- 41.2, 26 -4 -37, 264-38, and 26 -4 -39, Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves the construction of 106 + /- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and' Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. Discussion, of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), Town of Ithaca Tax ParcefNo.'s 24- 3 -3.2, 25- 1 -5.1, 25 -2 -41.2, 26 -4 -37, 26 -4 -38, and 26 -4 -39, Low Density Residential Zone, Medium Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves the construction of 106 + /- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road). The development will be concentrated on the west side of the property closest to NYS Route 96, zoned Low and Medium Density Residential, with more than half of the eastern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner /Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. 3. Approval of Minutes: March 1, 2010, March 8, 2011, and March 15, 2011. 4. Other Business: 5. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning I 273 -1747 i 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.) �OFIT F TOWN OF ITHACA EMU 215 N. Tio a Street Ithaca N.Y. 14850 �`� `j° I www.townJthaca.ny.us TOWN CLERK 273 -1721 HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks, Trails, Water &Sewer) 273 -1656 ENGINEERING 273 -1747 PLANNING 273 -1747 ZONING 273 -1783 FAX (607) 273 -1704 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SCHEDULING OF SPECIAL MEETING ON MARCH 29.2011 Notice is hereby given that a special meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is scheduled for Tuesday, March 29, 2011 beginning at 6:00pm. The meeting will be held in the Town Board Room of Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY. Susan Ritter Director of Planning Dated: March 24, 2011