Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2013-07-02TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. July 2. 2013 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than fiye minutes). 7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music / Ford Hall Facade Upgrades, 146 Conseryatory Driye. 7;05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approyal and Special Permit for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music / Ford Hall, located at 146 Conservatory Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41- 1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves removing the deteriorating existing concrete precast exterior panels and replacing them with a new Trespa panel system. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Richard Couture, Associate Vice-President for Facilities, Agent. 4. Approval of Minutes: June 18, 2013. 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 MEETING Tuesday,July 2, 2013 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox(Chair), Linda Collins,John Beach, Paula Wedemeyer,Jon Bosak,Yvonne Fogarty, Hollis Erb Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Lor- raine Moynihan-Schmitt, Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and accepted the secretary's posting of the public hearing notice. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - No one came forward to address the Board. AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music/ Ford Hall Facade Upgrades, 146 Conservatory Drive Steve Dayton, director of planning, design, and construction at IC, was present. He stated that the precast concrete panels on the exterior of Whalen have aged and are starting to crumble, posing a hazard for pedestrians.They're proposing putting on a new facade like the one they put on the Park Business School. There's asbestos in the caulk, so the concrete panels will be removed by an abate- ment contractor. The goal is to get it taken down before the kids come back and to start installing the new system in early August and finish in late September. Mr. Bosak asked what makes it a system. Mr. Dayton responded that it's in the way the panels are anchored, by connecting with the structural members. Ms. Erb asked whether all debris would be removed by the abatement company. Mr. Dayton respond- ed that it would because there's no way to separate the caulk from the concrete. He said this would involve hauling ten truckloads of material away. Ms.Wedemeyer noted that she works at IC. She asked if the building will be able to be used during abatement. Mr. Dayton said it would, explaining that the asbestos is held within the caulk; it's not airborne. When they removed a sample panel, it took 15 minutes, it's so deteriorated. PB Resolution No. 2013-023:SEQR, Preliminary and Final Site Plan &Special Permit, Ithaca College -Whalen Center Facade Renovations, Tax Parcel No. 41-1-30.2 Moved by Jon Bosak; seconded by Hollis Erb WHEREAS: Planning Board Minutes 07-02-2013 Page 2 of 6 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music/Ford Hall, located at 146 Conservatory Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves removing the existing deteriorating concrete precast exterior panels and replacing them with a new Trespa panel system. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Richard Couture,Associate Vice-President for Facilities,Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting as Lead Agency in an environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval and Special Permit, and 3. The Planning Board, on July 2, 2013 , has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environ- mental Assessment Form(EAF) Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, drawings titled "Whalen Center for Music, Exterior Recladding Options," date, stamped June 7, 2013, prepared by King + King Architects, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental signifi- cance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval and Special Permit; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 New York State Environmental Quality Review for the above referenced actions as proposed, based on the information in the EAF Part I and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Part II, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Fogarty, Beach,Wedemeyer, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music/ Ford Hall, located at 146 Conservatory Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves removing the deteriorating existing concrete precast exterior panels and replac- ing them with a new Trespa panel system. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Richard Couture,Asso- ciate Vice-President for Facilities,Agent Mr. Wilcox opened the public hearings at 7:10 p.m. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that under new zoning, this project might not come before the Planning Board. Ms. Ritter agreed that institutional zones will have different criteria. Planning Board Minutes 07-02-2013 Page 3 of 6 Mr. Bates responded that the extent of the demolition and the actual work to be performed are not the issues that prompted the need for Planning Board approval in this case, but rather the cost of materials and removal. Mr.Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. PB Resolution No 2013.024: Preliminary and Final Site Plan &Special Permit, Ithaca College - Whalen Center Facade Renovations, Tax Parcel No. 41-1-30.2 Moved by Jon Bosak; seconded by Linda Collins WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music/Ford Hall, located at 146 Conservatory Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves removing the existing deteriorating concrete precast exterior panels and replacing them with a new Trespa panel system. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Richard Couture,Associate Vice-President for Facilities, Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as Lead Agency in an environmental review with respect to the project has, on July 2, 2013, made a negative de- termination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on July 2, 2013, has reviewed and accepted as ade- quate, drawings titled "Whalen Center for Music, Exterior Recladding Options," date-stamped June 7, 2013, prepared by King+ King Architects, and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Permit for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music, finding that the standards of Article XXIV Section 270-200, Sub- sections A - L, of the Town of Ithaca Code, have been met; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists, having de- termined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant altera- tion of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and 2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed facade upgrades to the Ithaca College Whalen Center for Music, located at 146 Conservatory Drive on the Ithaca College campus, as described on the drawings listed above. Planning Board Minutes 07-02-2013 Page 4 of 6 Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Fogarty, Beach,Wedemeyer, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM Other Business At the request of Mr. Wilcox, Lorraine Moynihan-Schmitt prepared comments about the Supreme Court case Koontz v. St.John's River Water Management District. She handed out the reported syllabus of the Court's holdings and recommended that Board members read the entire case Opinion, which is available on line. She stated that it's very fact specific and the full Opinion hinges largely on the reported facts, which she outlined for the Board: Mr. Koontz owned a 14.9 acre parcel,wanted to develop 3.7 acres, and offered to deed over an 11.2 acre conservation easement on the remainder of the parcel. The District said no: that either he could develop 1 acre and deed the remaining property (13.9 acres) to the District as a conservation easement or he could develop the 3.7 acres and provide substantial cash to make improvements to off-site wetlands owned by the District and located several miles away. The Supreme Court cited the factual findings of the lower Florida court: The property is located on a heavily travelled state road and is also bordered within 1000 feet by another state road.The property is bisected by high-voltage power lines. The lower court deemed the property area was already degrad- ed by impacts of prior development. There was no wildlife needing protection and the species identi- fied in the wildlife survey were animals that frequented developed areas.The lower court found that the northern portion of the parcel, offered to be mitigated from further development by deed of con- servation easement to the District, actually drained well.The applicant offered to re-grade/elevate and improve the area to be developed and the stormwater and mitigation plans (including a dry-bed pond for retaining and gradually releasing stormwater on the portion of the site to be developed)were deemed by the lower court to be sufficient. The Supreme Court applied the facts of the case to its prior precedents in Nollan and Dolan,which hold that there must be a proper nexus and rough proportionality between the condition demanded by the governmental agency and the impact of the land use the agency is trying to protect(social im- pact, environmental impact, etc.). The Supreme Court indicated that, in this case, the governmental agency appeared to overreach such that the conditions demanded would be unconstitutional. The Court also expanded and fleshed out the Nollan/Dolan standard to clarify that this standard requires that a proper nexus and rough proportionality must be applied when a permit is denied (as well as when it is granted with conditions), and also when the condition demanded is money in connection with the permit approval. This is not a unique standard in New York law as well. The Court of Ap- peals in NYS applies the same standards in reviewing conditions of approval.Town Law Section 277(4) respecting subdivision approval with condition of reservation of Parkland, or money in lieu thereof, is a good example. Nexus and proportionality: it can't be so skewed that it's unconstitutional under the Takings Clause. Ms. Moynihan-Schmitt said she thought the Supreme Court was shocked by how far this water management district reached. The case was remanded back to the lower court to apply the proper nexus and rough proportionality standard. Planning Board Minutes 07-02-2013 Page 5 of 6 Ms. Fogarty asked about the District's offer to allow him to develop the 3.7 acres, plus give substantial cash to mitigate off site. Ms. Moynihan-Schmitt said the Court was saying it was an overreach because these wetlands weren't anything special, such that they needed protection that would warrant the demands made by the agency. It's already in a highly developed area with heavily travelled thoroughfares and power lines. It's not so pristine that that type of extraction would be legal. The agency was trying to apply two Flor- ida statutes (Water Resource Act and State Wetlands Act)where the government interest to be pro- tected was that construction must not be harmful to the water resources of the District or cause con- struction on wetlands contrary to the public interest. But here, on these particular facts, those inter- ests did not justify the large extractions being demanded by the agency. It had not provided adequate justification for requiring that approximately 93% of the land be deeded to a conservation district or approximately 77% be deeded over with a substantial offsite wetland improvement payment. Ms. Bosak said his initial take was that the agency was unreasonable. Contrary to the reports that ma- jor law was made here, what they were really doing was being unreasonable. Ms. Moynihan-Schmitt agreed, saying the Court was trying to flesh out the Nollan/Dolan standard. She said those cases established the rule of law that you have to establish a rational relationship be- tween the condition being imposed and the impact of the development to be protected What is the harm they are trying to protect against? Proper nexus and rough proportionality is the standard. Ms. Moynihan-Schmitt quoted from the Syllabus, "Because of the direct link between the government's demand and a specific parcel of real property, this case implicated the central concern of Nollan and Dolan: the risk that the government may deploy its substantial power and discretion in land-use per- mitting to pursue governmental ends that lack an essential nexus and rough proportionality to the effects of the proposed use of the property at issue." In addition, the Supreme Court in the Koontz case stated that "so long as a permitting authority offers the landowner an alternative that will satisfy Nollan and Dolan, the landowner has not been submitted to an unconstitutional condition." In other words, as long as one alternative offered to the developer is reasonable and meets the nexus/rough proportionality test, the permitting authority's actions will usually survive a challenge. Mr. Wilcox said this case is not as applicable as much for a planning board as it is for a town board negotiating with an applicant doing, say, a PDZ. Mr. Bosak disagreed, saying the Planning Board does try and negotiate. Ms. Erb agreed. Ms. Ritter said that the bus passes the Board negotiated with the Holochucks came to her mind. Mr. Bosak pointed out that if all other zoning negotiation went away, the Board could deal with most things during SEQR. Ms. Moynihan-Schmitt agreed and noted that these things are usually ironed out during the develop- er's conference and if the condition requested by the permitting agency is rejected by the developer, it may be a good idea to have counsel review same, applying the Nollan/Dolan/Koontz nexus and rough proportionality reasonableness standards. Normally, developers with projects that include potentially large or significant impacts come to the table with a lot to bargain with in order to meet the legitimate and reasonable concerns of the permitting agency charged with protecting the public interest. Upcoming event of interest Planning Board Minutes 07-02-2013 Page 6 of 6 Upcoming event of interest Ms. Ritter announced that on July 23, from 1 to 5, there will be a tour of public works projects. They'll rent a bus; seating is limited. Ms. Fogarty stated that on July 10, starting 6:30, the second meeting on the undeveloped Biggs prop erty will be held at the Museum of the Earth. A list of questions was sent to Ed Marx. AGENDAITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Hollis Erb, the meeting adjourned at 7:44 p.m. Respectfully submitted, ebra DeAugistine, DepDebra DeAugisti^, Deputy Town^lerk