Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2012-04-17TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. April 17,2012 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes), 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval 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, mostly 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. The Planning Board will also consider a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the two proposed freestanding community signs. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner/Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. 8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. 4. Approval of Minutes: April 3, 2012. 5. Other Business: 6. Adjournment Susan Ritter 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 17.2012 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 17, 2012, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval 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, mostly 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. The Planning Board will also consider a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the two proposed freestanding community signs. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner/Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. 8:(X) P.M. Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 Dated: Monday, April 9,2012 Publish: Wednesday, April 11,2012 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 17. 2012 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: April 9, 2012 Date of Publication: April 11, 2012 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 11'*^ day of April 2012 Notary Public OARRl^ WHITMORE v^ri/Notary^Public.^Sta^eo^^ , commission Expi?es'brember 26^l/ \ V \ Wednesday, April 11,2012 | THE FTHACA JOURNAL TOWN OF tTHACA_ PL^_NING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBUC _ H^INGS Tuesday, April !7,,26l2 By direction of Ihe Chair person of Ihe Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Rannlng Board of the Town of litiaca on Tuesday, April 17, 2012, at 215 North Tloga Street. Ithaca. N.V,. at the follow ing times and on the follow ing matters; 7:05 P.M. Consideration of Firtal Subdivision A^ro-- val for the proposed Holodhuck Homes Subdtvi- sion, located between NYS Route 96 CTrumansfaurg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock BoulevaniX Town of Ithaca Tax Parpek No.'s ,24-3-3.2, 2S-1-S.1, 25-2-41,2, 26-4-37, 26-4- 38, and 26-4-39, Low Den sity Residentiaf Zone. Me dium Density Residential Zone, and ConsetvaUon Zone. The propose in volves tfie construction of 106+/- town f>ome type units in a clustered neigh borhood development, with two entrances pressed frtjm NYS Route 96 fTromanaburg Road). The developmeni will be con centrated on tfts west Side pf die property closesi to /S Route 96, zoned Low bnd Medium Density Resi- benllal, with more tfian tialf ^f the eastern portion of I property, mostly zoned ation. remaining Lndevek^jed. The New j/ofk Stale Office of Parks, Recreation, and Histonc servation proposes to quire most of the eastern portion of Ihe property in njunctlon with dev^p- Irtent of the future Black Di amond Trail, The Pl^jj^g . will also cor^i^ ^ ■s^.tttommendaiion to tfie• jWflt ' of lifiaca Zoniig poatd of Appeals regarding• ' "f' ^n i^rfances for the tvwi-- • ^prt^J^ed heesfending' ' |orw»Uf% sigiis- Itefixhudk Homes LLC, ^ vwner/Appiicant: David M. P.M. ConsiderBtlon j recommendation to (lie^ of fdiaca Town Boaid Raiding prisedndng^ to the Of%l^ Map lltfieTown of Ithaca, Said Planning Board wfij. t said times and said place sar ail persons in support f such matters or otjiec->ns thereto. Persona nay ijpear by agent or In per-|m. IncRviduds with visual iRtpajrments. hearing Impairments or other spe- cfel needs, will be proi4ded with assistance as neces sary, upon request. destrmg ssststanca rnate such a raqueei ni(9 less than 48 hours pdorto the bme of the fublc Susa^Ritter Director of Planning - 273-1747 Dated; Monday, April 9. 2012 4/11/2012 Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street April 17,2012 7:00 p.m. PLEASE SIGN-IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name Address TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, April 17, 2012 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox (Chair), Linda Collins, George Conneman, John Beach, Jon Bosak, Hollis Erb Staff Present: Chris Balestra, Planner; Creig Hebdon, Town Engineer; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk. Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement (via skype) at 7:30. Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. and accepted the secretary’s posting of the public hearing notices. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM PUBLIC HEARING :Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval 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 Conserva- tion 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 prop- erty, mostly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Rec- reation, and Historic Preservation proposes to acquire most of the eastern portion of the property in conjunction with the development of the future Black Diamond Trail. The Planning Board will also consider a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the two proposed freestanding community signs. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner/Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent. Mr. Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:07 p.m. David Parks, Agent, and Mark Parker, Keystone Associates, were present. Mr. Parks stated that he would like to discuss several issues after the Board has finished their discussion: the bus-pass require- ment, vanpool agreement, affordable housing agreement, and requirements for deeding the property to the NYS Parks Department or a suitable alternative. Mr. Parker provided substitute drawings for structures #2 and #18 because of errors in the original drawings. Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 2 of 13 Mr. Wilcox suggested that, rather than going person by person, the Board work through the docu- ment condition by condition. 1.c. Mr. Parker explained that Phase 1 contains all the infrastructure from entrance to entrance and all the stormwater facilities. The remainder, from the main entrance to the cul-de-sac, will occur in Phase 2. He broke the phases down into sections for the phasing of the homes. The timeline for building homes will depend on the housing market. Ms. Erb pointed out that the entire first section has only two affordable housing units. The requirement was for 10% of the106 units to be affordable. She thinks that, in keeping with the spirit of the condition, the 10% should be met within each sec- tion since there’s no guarantee that the other buildings will be built. Mr. Conneman and Ms. Collins agreed, with Ms. Collins stating that this would meet both the spirit and the letter of the condition. She also pointed out that the applicants already admitted that they don’t know what the economic future is, and all 106 units may never be built. Mr. Bosak agreed that this would be the best scenario for the purpose of risk management. Mr. Parks suggested swapping Building 18, which is currently in Section 1, Phase 1, with Building 8, which is in Section 2, Phase 1. This would provide four afforda- ble units instead of two in Section 1, and four affordable units instead of six in Section 2. The Board was comfortable with that solution. 1.d. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that the sewer pump station would be maintained by the homeowners association, and wondered whether pump stations have to be built to Town standards just in case the Town ever has to take them over. Mr. Hebdon responded that it is a DPW policy not to take over any pump stations. In the case of a power failure, the Health Department requires generator backup. Re- garding easements, Ms. Brock explained that there will only be a sewer easement because the water infrastructure is within the area of the road that will be dedicated to the Town, and the way the water lines are located, there is sufficient area for the Town to do maintenance on the line within that land. There will be a deed to that property. Bruce Bates skyped in at 7:30 p.m. ff. Mr. Parks gave a brief overview of what happened prior to Mr. Bates’ involvement. The Fire Chief pointed out the requirement that there should be no greater than a 10% grade on any roads; upon further clarification, he said it’s not a fire department issue, but a code issue. It’s not a safety issue with the fire department – they deal with grades above 10% frequently in Ithaca – but since it’s writ- ten in the fire code book, he wanted to point it out. Since the Fire Chief thought it was a code issue, the applicants wanted to bring Mr. Bates into the discussion. The reason they have a higher grade (10.51% and 10.75% over spans of 150 feet to 300 feet) is that they wanted to keep the grade at the intersection of Route 96 as level as possible. Anything done to modify the grade will raise the grade at the intersection. Mr. Bates said that now that the applicant has discussed it with Town Engineering staff, he doesn’t see a problem as long as they don’t exceed the grades currently proposed and as long as they use the standard Mr. Hebdon uses (American Association of State Highway and Transporta- tion Officials (AASHTO) from their Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 2011 edi- tion). Mr. Hebdon confirmed that NYS DOT and almost every state in the nation defers to this book. The 10.75% grade meets the AASHTO code and NYS guidelines. It was originally steeper, but Engi- neering asked them to take it down and to level the area at the bottom. Ms. Brock confirmed that the law allows the code enforcement official to set a different limit. Mr. Bosak pointed out that Chief Parsons also had an issue regarding the alignment of driveways. Ms. Balestra explained that she spoke with the DOT regarding future improvements the Town is considering for West Hill. One of the Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 3 of 13 improvements is a connector road across the street from the Holochuck proposal. Jim Weber will send an official letter to the DOT stating that this is part of an official plan for the Town and that it should alleviate the offset intersection issues. When the future connector road is built, the West Hill fire station can feed into it, and it will be across the street, fully aligned with the Holochuck entrance. The DOT was satisfied and will await the official letter. Mr. Bates left the meeting electronically. Mr. Parks noted that they do not have the ability to change the location of the roadways since they don’t have any more land they can use. 1.i Roof and siding samples were provided and were met warmly by the Board. No stone samples were provided. They will be made of slate or stone in the same color tones as the siding samples. 1. j. Ms. Erb pointed out that the affordable units were originally interior units, and that’s what would make them affordable. Mr. Parks explained that since it’s cheaper to build single-story units than two-story units, the affordable homes will be moved from the middle to the end with larger lots. Mr. Bosak commented that end units in townhouse complexes are desirable, so that will be a very nice deal for those tenants. Mr. Wilcox added that end units tend to be higher priced than inside units since they have more windows, fewer neighbors, etc. 1.k. The same sign will be used at both entrances. The signs will require variances because of size. 1.n. Ms. Brock pointed out that neither the homeowners agreement nor the Offering Plan say any- thing about an education plan, only that residents must be educated. Mr. Parks responded that the newsletter would be the method of educating the residents. Ms. Brock said that the document doesn’t say anything about a newsletter. She will add a condition regarding method and frequency. 1.p. Bullet 1: The Board agreed that they meant annual bus passes. Mr. Parks stated that the requirement for the purchase of bus passes was to be one pass per unit, and the mitigation the Board was seeking was mitigation during peak hours, Monday through Friday. He would like the ability to negotiate with TCAT for a bus pass specifically tailored to peak-hour travel. Mr. Bosak said his recollection is that the Board identified traffic as the key problem, and the only serious mitigation was to persuade people to use buses instead of cars. That is not going to be accom- plished with something limited to peak hours. If this is going to present itself as a serious mitigation, it will have to be an unlimited pass, because the idea is to break people’s habits. Mr. Parks responded that the reason for the mitigation was to minimize traffic impacts at peak hours. There’s not a need to mitigate at other hours when traffic is not an issue. Mr. Bosak replied that in the real world, for there to be a chance for this to be a mitigation during peak hours, it will have to change a person’s relation- ship with their car. Ms. Erb agreed that it shouldn’t be a limited pass. They can still negotiate for a volume discount with TCAT. Mr. Parks pointed out that passes need to be purchased in the name of one resident and would include a photograph. Mr. Parks said the vanpool is logistically difficult and very expensive. At a cost of between $170 and $200 per month per person (depending on the number of people sharing the van), it would be diffi- cult, if not impossible, to provide that service. He requested that the homeowners association be able to simply advertise the fact that vanpool services are available, that they need a minimum of seven people to make it viable, and the HOA will pay for that service. If there is a lot of interest, the HOA would bear it, so it would be based on interest. Providing it to everyone would be cost prohibitive – especially if people are not using the service. This is different from bus passes: it is clearly specified Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 4 of 13 that bus passes are money wasted if residents don’t use them. Ms. Erb recapped: Mr. Parks is worried that the HOA will have to supply a van whether anyone wants to use it or not, and that he wants lan- guage that says the HOA will advertise the possibility that for every seven people, the HOA will pro- vide the van service. Mr. Parks agreed. In order to contract for a van from VPSI, seven people are needed. The HOA will advertise the fact that the vanpool service will be supplied to any resident who is interested, but that the minimum requirement would be set forth by the vanpool provider. Mr. Bosak said that he likes that the offered language does not mention hours – it’s up to the people who ask for the service. Ms. Collins asked who will be putting the newsletter together, advertising the vanpool service, etc, if there is not staff. Mr. Parks replied that they will be volunteer positions. That’s the way most HOAs are run, but there’s nothing stopping them from hiring someone. Mr. Conne- man confirmed that in his townhouse complex, people do a lot for free. q. There will be no streetlighting, only lights on the units. There will be up to three lights on the front façade of each unit. It was pointed out that all lights will have to match the cut sheets provided and comply with Town’s outdoor lighting law. t. Mr. Hebdon stated that Public Works would like to have a pre-construction meeting before any construction starts. The applicants agreed. It will be made a condition of approval. v. Mr. Parks stated that they’ve run into a problem with the language that requires permitting access to the land if it is dedicated to someone other than the State. Agencies they’re spoken with don’t nec- essarily want unfettered public access to the land. It’s an environmentally sensitive area with extremely steep slopes, which creates a liability problem. He does not remember any discussion regarding public access to anything but the Black Diamond Trail. Ms. Erb said that the Museum of the Earth takes field trips down to that area and people from the Fingerlakes School of Massage use it. Mr. Parks said that if this is the case, they are trespassing. Each organization they’ve approached about public access, including the Fingerlakes Land Trust, has their own internal ways of dealing with the liability aspect of lands they own and how they allow people on that land. It would be difficult to work out the re- quirement other than by coming back to the Board with the individual needs of a particular not for profit. The Black Diamond Trail is not an issue because New York State is taking the liability for it. Discussion ensued regarding the acreage. The question was asked: is it okay for the Board simply to encourage the recipient/buyer of the land to allow public access? Ms. Erb stated that she doesn’t care about the rest of the land, only about access to the Black Diamond Trail. Mr. Parks said that even if the Stated doesn’t want the land, he has no problem guaranteeing access to the trail. Ms. Brock re- minded the Board that they didn’t require any parkland because the public was going to have access to this piece. If the public access is removed, the Board is unraveling their prior rationale. Normally for a subdivision of this size, or even a much smaller one, the Board would require a parkland set- aside. Ms. Erb would take preserving a unique natural area and facilitating access to the trail as a tradeoff. Ms. Brock stated that the Board would have to go back and look at the Findings Statement or other statements made about why parkland was not required. Mr. Bosak said he would rather work on the language to allow public access “to the maximum extent possible.” Ms. Brock asked Mr. Parks why this is an issue, and if the State has said they don’t want the acreage. Mr. Parks said this is not the case. Ms. Brock said she doesn’t want to undo something that does not need to be undone. Mr. Parks responded that this language is painting them into a corner if the State falls through. He felt that another agency, such as the Fingerlakes Land Trust, would balk at it because of the liability. Ms. Brock stated that she was on the board of the Land Trust when they decided to allow ice climbing at Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 5 of 13 Lick Brook. Clearly there’s a lot of liability in letting people climb up frozen waterfalls, but they al- lowed it. She asked whether the Land Trust directly said they would not accept the liability. Mr. Parks responded that they hadn’t, but that the applicants have approached two other not for profits who agreed that they would be okay in preserving the land, but they were worried about the liability. To a question by Ms. Brock, he stated that they are not land trusts, but are engaged in land trust activities. Regarding the Fingerlakes Land Trust, it’s a question of whether they’ll acquire the land or want it to be given to them. Anyone who has showed any interest has balked at being forced to allow public access to the land. When asked, he stated that the Fingerlakes Land Trust has not balked. If they are just given the land, they will accept it. Warren Allmon, PRI, who was in the audience, said PRI has not been contacted about this, but that they would guarantee any access the Board wants and they would work with the Land Trust to make that happen. Mr. Parks said that PRI was not one of the people they approached. Ms. Brock said it’s not known whether there’s a problem. If there’s an issue, they can come back and get this condition modified. The State has not said they won’t take the land whether or not they pay for it, and the Land Trust has not weighed in and said they don’t like the language. Her recommendation is to leave it alone. Mr. Wilcox said that when the Board was doing the environmental impact statement, no land was set aside for recreational use because there is this land for recreational use. If the Board de- cides it’s not for recreational use, they will need to go back and revisit this issue. Mr. Parks said he would not advocate for any course that would necessitate going back to Step 1. Ms. Erb located the April 2011 draft of the Findings Statement, and said that regarding the recreational resources, aside from a statement that “residents will have direct access to the Black Diamond Trail and the 65-acre adjacent parcel,” it stated that “the Holochuck Development will also include areas for passive and active recreation.” Whether the entity controlling the hillside is happy about that is the sticking point. Mr. Bosak suggested changing “public access” to access by residents of the development. Ms. Erb pointed out that parkland was never mentioned. Mr. Parks said he would be happy with language that said access would be allowed within the policy of the organization. Mr. Bosak said that having sug- gested that language, he’d be okay if the Board took that suggestion, but at this point, he’d be happier to leave it the way it is and revisit it if necessary on the grounds that it will be unlikely. Mr. Allmon stated that PRI and the hospital are in the process of planning to build a path from PRI to the hospital and from the hospital to the Black Diamond Trail. He asked if this might solve the problem. Mr. Wilcox responded that mitigating on another parcel may be a problem. Ms. Brock said that since Board members didn’t know about this issue until tonight, they have not had a chance to go back and look at all the other documents and the minutes to figure out what they based their opinion on. She is personally uncomfortable changing the language without being able to do that. Mr. Wilcox agreed that by leaving the condition the way it is, the applicant will be forced to come back if they want it changed, and given how important it is, that’s the right approach. hh. Regarding enforcement of the affordable housing agreement, Ms. Brock suggested it should say that “at the Town’s option” they can pay the liquidated penalty. Mr. Parks said they didn’t consider any outs as an option, and that they were planning to build the 11 units. This was a request from Guy Krogh to add some type of penalty in addition to the remedies specified. Mr. Wilcox said that what’s important to the Board is the 10% affordable units in each section, not the 11 total affordable units, just in case the other buildings aren’t built. The Board agreed that the requirement should be that Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 6 of 13 liquidated damages in the amount of $50,000 for each affordable unit be subject to the Town’s op- tion and apply if fewer than 10% of the units built in each section are affordable. jj. Mr. Parks’s understanding of the requirement was that it prohibited a blank prohibition on solar energy, but that allowing solar shingles would satisfy it. So the language he drafted for the homeown- ers association is such that solar shingles are allowed: that is the solar option. They didn’t want panels on the roofs, and the shingles blend in nicely. He said that Mr. Krogh had questioned whether that would satisfy the condition. Mr. Wilcox said they will want to maintain the continuity of look and feel across the development. Mr. Bosak said that although he’s not disagreeing, the Board was specifi- cally trying to prevent aesthetics from being a criterion. Mr. Parks recalled that they were not going to be allowed to completely prohibit the use of solar energy. Ms. Erb agreed that it’s better than a blan- ket prohibition. Mr. Bosak wondered whether there would be a prohibition of solar hot water, which is a better use of solar than photovoltaics (PV). Ms. Collins asked whether there would be a blanket prohibition against solar panels. Mr. Parks responded that there is no blanket prohibition; the only solar device that will be allowed are solar shingles. Ms. Collins said that we’ve come to a point in our society that we may need to think differently about aesthetics, and asked that if the HOA decides as a group that it is not aesthetically unpleasing to have solar panels on their roofs, why can’t they do that? Mr. Parks responded that they can. The HOA will have that rule when it starts out; if they want to change it later, they may choose to do so. Mr. Bosak shares Ms. Collins’s concern and is more ready to believe that market considerations would make the difference. He’s not so concerned about the style of PV, but that they’re ruling out water collectors, which is a proven technology that saves more money than PV. But if the energy costs become a consideration, the Board can probably rely on the HOA to bow to economic reality. Ms. Collins said that as long as this does not restrict the HOA from changing the policy, she doesn’t have a problem with it. Mr. Wilcox asked when the Holochucks will cede control over the HOA. Mr. Parks responded that there will be a total of 106 votes – the State will decide when they have to cede control. Joel Harlan, Newfield, spoke in favor of the project. Will VanDyke, 1213 Trumansburg Road, stated that his lot is adjacent to the south entrance of the development. He wishes he and his wife could have been involved sooner, and they have concerns about the plan as it is. At this point, there’s not much they can do in terms of stating their case, but they appreciate all the consideration the Board has taken to mitigate traffic, etc. The only exit is cross- ing over their driveway and going up the hill. He has concerns about traffic, but other than that, he wanted to state his appreciation for all the consideration the Board has taken so far. To Holochucks, he said that any kind of commitment they can take regarding privacy and noise would be appreciated. Mr. Erb pointed out to him the drawing that shows how the landscaping scheme explicitly addresses the privacy of the bordering properties. Mr. Wilcox closed the public hearing at 9:39 p.m. PB Resolution No. 2012-020: Final Subdivision Approval, Holochuck Homes Subdivision, Be- tween NYS Route 96 & NYS Route 89, 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 Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by John Beach Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 7 of 13 WHEREAS: 1.This project involves consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for the proposedHolochuck 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 project involves the construction of 106 +/- town home type units in a clustered neighborhood development with two entrances proposed from NYS Route 96 (Tru- mansburg 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 east- ern portion of the property, mainly zoned Conservation, remaining undeveloped. The New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation will acquire most of the eastern por- tion of the property in conjunction with development of the future Black Diamond Trail. The Planning Board will also consider a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Ap- peals regarding sign variances for the two proposed freestanding community signs. Holochuck Homes LLC, Owner/Applicant; David M. Parks, Esq., Agent; and 2.The proposed project, which requires subdivision approval by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, is a Type I action pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Chapter 148 of the Town of Ithaca Code regarding Environmental Quality Review; and 3.The Town of Ithaca Planning Board established itself as lead agency to coordinate the environ- mental review of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, and issued a positive determina- tion of environmental significance at its meeting on December 18, 2007, in accordance with Arti- cle 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (also known as the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act) for the above referenced action as proposed, and confirmed that a Draft En- vironmental Impact Statement (DEIS) would be prepared; and 4.The Town of Ithaca Planning Board held a Public Scoping Meeting on March 18, 2008 to hear comments from the public and interested and involved agencies regarding the scope and content of the DEIS, and accepted the revised Final Scoping Document (amended by the Planning Board at its meeting on March 18, 2008), as being adequate; and 5.The applicants prepared the DEIS, dated September 1, 2009, and submitted said DEIS to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for consideration of acceptance as complete; and 6.The Town of Ithaca Planning Board reviewed the DEIS and amendments at its meetings on Sep- tember 15, 2009 and October 6, 2009; and on November 3, 2009, accepted the DEIS as complete and adequate for the purpose of commencing public review, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.9; and 7.The Town Planning Board scheduled a public hearing on Tuesday, December 15, 2009 at 7:15 p.m. to obtain comments from the public on potential environmental impacts of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, and extended the public hearing and accepted written comments from the public regarding the DEIS until January 5, 2010; and 8.During the comment period, the Tompkins County Health Department informed the Town of Ithaca via letter dated November 17, 2009, that a former dump located on the Holochuck proper- ty was noted in the County Health Department’s 1995 database of abandoned landfills as the “Oddfellow’s Refuse Site”; and Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 8 of 13 th 9.The DEIS identified two 20 Century trash dumps visible on the surface of the property that was the subject of the DEIS, including a trash dump identified as Locus 1; and 10.On December 11, 2009 Town Staff visited the Holochuck Property, located the dump site identi- fied by the Tompkins County Health Department, and determined that it was not the same as the Locus 1 dumpsite indicated in the DEIS (although it may have been an extension of Locus 1), and further that it appeared to be located on the parcel proposed to be transferred to the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation; and 11.The NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation submitted a letter to the Town of Ithaca, dated January 4, 2010, stating that a subsequent site visit by Town of Ithaca Staff and Fin- ger Lakes Regional Staff on December 28, 2009 determined that there were potentially two dumpsites of significant size located on the portion of land shown to be conveyed to the NYS Of- fice of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation and that further site assessment for hazardous materials, documentation of the full extent of the debris field, followed by a cleanup/closure as directed by the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation, would be necessary before the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation would agree to advance an acquisition of the property; and 12.The Planning Board determined that the newly discovered information about the various dumps on the Holochuck property was important and relevant and that there was a potential for signifi- cant adverse environmental impacts because of the potential public safety issues posed by these dumps located close to the proposed dense housing development. The dumps appeared to con- tain sharp, rusted metal, glass objects, medical refuse, and other unknown and potentially hazard- ous items. Locus 1 was located within the proposed developed area and another dump was locat- ed in the woods only a few hundred feet away from the proposed developed area. Additionally, there was not much known information about whether these dumps may have contained or cur- rently contained hazardous waste; and 13.The Planning Board, on January 5, 2010, found that the DEIS inadequately addressed the im- pacts of the two dumps identified in the DEIS, and further that the DEIS did not address the im- pacts of the dump(s) identified by the Tompkins County Health Department and observed by Town of Ithaca Staff, and therefore required the preparation of a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) to the DEIS, to address the significant adverse impacts of the dumps; and 14.The applicants prepared an SEIS, dated July 27, 2010, concerning the two dumpsites referenced above, and the Planning Board, at its meeting of September 7, 2010, reviewed and accepted the SEIS as complete and adequate for the purpose of commencing public review, pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617.9; and 15.The Planning Board held a public hearing at 7:05pm on October 5, 2010 to obtain comments from the public on potential environmental impacts of the dumpsites located on the site of the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, as evaluated in the SEIS, and accepted written com- ments by the public until October 15, 2010; and 16.The applicants prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS), dated November 4, 2010, regarding the proposed Holochuck Homes Subdivision, and submitted said FEIS to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for consideration of acceptance as complete; and Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 9 of 13 17.The Town of Ithaca Planning Board reviewed and revised said FEIS at its meetings on December 7, 2010, December 21, 2010, January 4, 2011, and February 1, 2011; accepted the FEIS on Feb- ruary 1, 2011, filed a Notice of Completion of FEIS on February 9, 2011, and distributed the FEIS to involved and interested agencies and the public, as required by 6 NYCRR Parts 617.9 and 617.12; and 18.Due to errors that were discovered in the EIS regarding traffic models affecting two City intersec- tions (N. Fulton/Cliff St. [Buffalo St.] and Taughannock Blvd./Cliff St.), the Holochuck appli- cants and the Planning Board agreed, at the March 8, 2011 Planning Board meeting, to re-open the FEIS for the limited purpose of having the applicants provide corrected traffic analysis tables and related text; and 19.The applicants submitted corrected traffic analysis tables and text to the Planning Board for con- sideration of acceptance of the revised FEIS at the March 15, 2011 Planning Board meeting; and at its March 15, 2011 meeting, the Planning Board reviewed, revised and accepted the revised FEIS with corrected analysis for the two City intersections; and 20.The Planning Board, on March 1, March 8, March 22, March 29, and April 5, 2011, reviewed and discussed the Findings Statement for the Holochuck Homes Subdivision; and 21.The Planning Board, at their meeting on April 5, 2011, adopted the Findings Statement for the Holochuck Homes Subdivision and granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the project, with conditions; and 22.The Planning Board, at their meeting on April 17, 2012, has accepted as adequate a revised land- scaping plan Sheet L-1, titled “Landscape Design for development of Holochuck Homes LLC,” prepared by Tim Miller Associates, Inc., most recently revised October, 2011; a set of plans enti- tled “Holochuck Homes Subdivision, NYS Route 96,” including Sheet C010, titled “Existing Conditions Plan,” Sheet C020, titled “Slope Map,” Sheet C100, titled “Master Plan,” Sheet C110 titled “Phasing/Section Plan,” another Sheet C110 titled “Lighting Layout Plan,” Sheets C200, C210, C220, and C230, titled “Subdivision Plat,” Sheets C300, C310, and C320, titled “Erosion & Sediment Control Plan,” Sheets C330 and C340, titled “Cluster Road Plan & Profile,” Sheet C350, titled “Main Access Drive Plan & Profile,” Sheets C360 and C370, titled “Cluster Road Grading Plan,” Sheet C380, titled “Main Access Drive Grading Plan,” Sheets C400 and C410, ti- tled “Erosion & Sedimentation Control Details,” Sheet C420, titled “Pond Sections & Details,” Sheets C430 and C440, titled “Town of Ithaca Details,” Sheet C450 titled “Site Details,” Sheet C500, titled “Specifications,” and Sheet C600 titled “Tree Preservation Plan,” all prepared by Keystone Associates, LLC, dated August 14, 2009, and most recently revised 3/5/12 (except for Sheet C600, which is dated 1/17/12); elevation drawings labeled “Proposed Structure #2” and “Proposed Structure #18,” date stamped April 17, 2012; and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: 1.That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Final Subdivision Approval for the con- struction of the Holochuck Homes Subdivision, located between NYS Route 96 (Trumansburg Road) and NYS Route 89 (Taughannock Boulevard), as shown on a set of plans entitled “Holo- chuck Homes Subdivision, NYS Route 96,” including Sheets C010-C600, prepared by Keystone Associates, LLC, dated August 14, 2009 and most recently revised 3/5/12 (except for Sheet C600, which is dated 1/17/12), and a revised landscaping plan Sheet L-1, titled “Landscape De- Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 10 of 13 sign for development of Holochuck Homes LLC,” prepared by Tim Miller Associates, Inc., most recently revised October, 2011; subject to the following conditions: a.Submission of one large-size original or mylar copy and three large-size dark-line prints of the final approved subdivision plat (Sheet C200) for signing by the Planning Board Chair, said plat to be filed in the Tompkins County Clerk’s Office, and a copy of the receipt of filing pro- vided to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, prior to the application for any building permits, b.Renumbering of the second Sheet C110, titled “Lighting Layout Plan,” with another number that does not conflict with the first Sheet C110, titled “Phasing/Section Plan,” and submis- sion of the revised sheet to the Town Planning Department, prior to the application for any building permits, c.Entry into a sanitary sewer easement satisfactory to the Attorney for the Town and the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department, prior to any site work, d.Inclusion into the Holochuck Homes Homeowners Association documents of a statement that specifies that any sidewalks located within land to be conveyed and accepted by the Town shall be maintained by the Holochuck Homes Homeowners Association, prior to the applica- tion for any building permits, e.Revision of the Holochuck Homeowners Association Offering Plan, Exhibit T, titled “Public Transportation Plan and Agreement,” paragraph number 6 “Bus Passes,” to specify the home- owners association will provide one annual bus pass per unit and the homeowners association will advertise that it will pay for commuter vanpool services as long as the minimum require- ments set by the vanpool service provider are met, prior to the application for any building permits, f.As required by the Findings Statement, 10% of the units (11 units if 106 units are built) shall be priced for their initial sales so they are affordable to households earning on an annual basis no more than 120% of the Tompkins County median income for their respective household sizes. Affordable shall mean no more than 30% of a household’s gross income is spent on mortgage principal and interest, utilities, real property taxes, homeowner’s insurance and Homeowners’ Association fees. For the initial sales of these units, Holochuck Homes, LLC and/or the Homeowners’ Association shall verify that the households of the initial purchasers meet these income and expenditure requirements at the time of purchase, utilizing (i) the then-most current data published by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban develop- ment regarding annual Tompkins County Household median incomes, (ii) the then-most cur- rent information regarding real property taxes, and (iii) reasonable estimates by Holochuck Homes, LLC and/or the Homeowners’ Association regarding the costs for real property in- surance and utilities. Prior to issuance of any building permits for any townhouses, the appli- cant and Town shall enter into an agreement, satisfactory to the Attorney for the Town, be- tween Holochuck Homes, LLC and the Town to assure these requirements are binding on and enforceable against Holochuck Homes, LLC and the Homeowners’ Association, g.Revision of the Holochuck Homeowners Association Offering Plan, Exhibit V, titled “Afford- able Housing Plan and Agreement for Holochuck Homes Subdivision,” page 3 (unnumbered), paragraph number 8, “Penalties in Lieu of Specific Performance or Other Specified Reme- dies,” to make the liquidated damages subject to the Town’s option, have the liquidated dam- ages apply if fewer than 10% of the units built in each phase and section are affordable (with a Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 11 of 13 cap of 11 total affordable units), and increase the amount of the liquidated damages to $50,000 for each affordable unit not constructed, prior to application for any building per- mits for any townhouses, h.Receipt of any sign variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals for the proposed freestanding community signs, prior to the application for any sign permits, i.Submission of evidence of the necessary approvals of the Tompkins County Health Depart- ment on the final plat regarding the realty subdivision, prior to the application for any build- ing permits for any townhouses, j.Entry into a stormwater “Operation, Maintenance, and Reporting Agreement” between the Holochuck Homes Homeowners’ Association and the Town of Ithaca, which agreement shall be satisfactory to the Attorney for the Town and the Town of Ithaca Public Works Depart- ment and shall include easements and/or deed restrictions or other legally sufficient mecha- nisms to assure Town of Ithaca access to all lots containing stormwater facilities, prior to ap- plication for any building permits for any townhouses, k.Construction of the private stormwater facilities in a manner satisfactory to the Town of Itha- ca Public Works Department, prior to application for any building permits for any townhous- es, l.Completion of all roads, stormwater facilities, and required utilities, to the satisfaction of the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department, prior to the application for any building permits for any townhouses, m.Submission of proof of receipt of the necessary curb cut permit(s) from New York State for the accesses onto Route 96 (Trumansburg Road), prior to any site work, n.Submission of record of application for and proof of receipt of all necessary permits from county, state, and/or federal agencies, prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for any townhouses, o.As noted in the SEIS, submission of evidence that the New York State Department of Envi- ronmental Conservation has determined that the approved Revised Remedial Action Work Plan for cleanup of the Odd Fellows Refuse Site (Locus 1 and Locus 2), dated July 9, 2010, and any DEC-approved revisions to the Work Plan, have been completed prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy for any townhouses, p.Submission of easements or other agreements satisfactory to the Attorney for the Town neces- sary to ensure ingress and egress for all of the parcels in the subdivision, to guarantee future access over any roads owned by the Homeowners’ Association, to guarantee access to public roads and access to all private utilities, drainage and stormwater facilities, recreational ameni- ties, common open space and other common or shared facilities, and to ensure that future owners and leaseholders of all parcels have full rights to use all of the above-mentioned facili- ties, prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, q.Submission of record of approval for the water and sewer connections by the Tompkins County Health Department and by the Town of Ithaca Public Works Department, prior to construction of said facilities, r.Adherence to the Construction Operations procedures described in the EIS. Also, as re- quired and explained in the Findings Statement, noise-related construction activities shall be Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 12 of 13 limited to 7am to 7pm Monday through Friday. Work shall not be routinely scheduled for Saturdays, but will be permitted if required by extenuating circumstances, such as severe weather, subject to approval by the Director of Code Enforcement. Construction shall be prohibited between 7pm and 7am, and all day on Sundays and federal holidays, except emer- gency repairs (such as to stormwater facilities) will be allowed on any day, s.Conveyance of the +/- 65-acre eastern parcel to the New York State Office of Parks, Recrea- tion, and Historic Preservation or other established non-profit corporation that engages in land trust activities, prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first dwelling unit. Any conveyance to a non-profit corporation must contain adequate legal mechanisms to as- sure that the corporation will preserve the parcel, permit public access to it (except to the ex- tent such access is detrimental to the lands or any natural resources associated with them), and allow continuation of the Black Diamond Trail along the site’s eastern frontage near the shore of Cayuga Lake via a permanent easement or other permanent measure, t.All construction parking, staging, and storage must occur on site, u.Entry into an easement containing a minimum 10’ dedicated right-of-way from the cul-de-sac heading westerly along the boundary with the proposed State Park land, and then running north along the western boundary of the applicant’s land to the boundary with the Cayuga Medical Center property, and also heading south to connect with the main access drive, and showing a pedestrian right-of-way within the extension of the property to Route 96 south of Lakeside (Cayuga Ridge) Nursing Home to provide a potential connection from the sidewalk system opposite building 20 to the Lakeside (Cayuga Ridge) property, prior to application for any building permits, v.Revision of Exhibit H, Part 2 of the Homeowners Association Offering Plan, titled “Declara- tion of Restrictive Covenants of the View at West Hill Homeowners Association, Inc.,” to specify that the plan to educate residents about the need to control pets in the Unique Natu- ral Area and other natural areas, and to educate and communicate to residents the im- portance of using the public transit bus passes and vanpool services, shall be carried out through semi-annual written or electronic communications to the residents, w.Establishment of an escrow agreement funded in the amount of $10,000 to assure that the Homeowners’ Association or applicant pays a fair share contribution for any signal, rounda- bout, or similar traffic device at or near the northern entrance required by NYS DOT, with said agreement subject to the approval of the Attorney for the Town, prior to the issuance of any building permits, x.Establishment of an escrow agreement funded in the amount of $10,000 to be applied toward the expenses for a future park and ride lot on the Route 96 corridor or toward other transit- related improvements, with said agreement subject to the approval of the Attorney for the Town, prior to the issuance of any building permits, y.Prior to any work on site, applicant’s contractor will hold a pre-construction meeting with the Department of Public Works to discuss project implementation, and z.Revise Sheet C110, titled “Phasing/Section Plan” by moving Building 18 from Section 1 of Phase 1 to Section 2 of Phase 1 and moving Building 8 from Section 2 of Phase 1 to Section 1 of Phase 1; Planning Board Minutes 04-17-2012 Page 13 of 13 AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, hereby recommends to the Zoning Board of Appeals the request for sign variances for two 15+/- square foot freestanding neighborhood signs, where neighborhood identification signs in residential districts shall not exceed 6 square feet in size, be approved, with the following conditions: a. The proposed signs shall meet the setback and placement requirements of the Sign Law, b. The proposed solar lighting shall meet the requirements of the Outdoor Lighting Law, and c. The proposed signs shall not exceed 15 square feet in area each, as defined in the Town of Ithaca Sign Law. Vote: Ayes - Wilcox, Collins, Conneman, Beach, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board re garding proposed changes to the Official Map of the Town of Ithaca. On a motion by John Beach, the public hearing was postponed to the meeting of May 1". Mr. Bosak requested that vector graphic versions of all maps be provided electronically to the Board so they can scale them to a size they can actually read. AGENDA ITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Hollis Erb, the meeting adjourned at 10:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted. )ebra DeAugisHri^„Deputy Towt^lerk