Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2015-09-15^ TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Shirley A. Raffensperger Board Room, Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. September 15. 2015 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed construction of a new 10,811 +/- square foot parish center at St. Catherine of Siena Church, 302 St. Catherine Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71-1-10, Medium Density Residential Zone. The project will also include the replacement of parking spaces along with new utilities, walkways, landscaping, gardens, and fountains. The existing 10,275 +/- square foot parish center will be demolished once the new one is complete. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner/Applicant; Richard McElhiney Architects LLC, Agent. 2. Nomination and Election of Vice Chairperson 3. Persons to be heard 4. Approval of Minutes: August 4, 2015 and August 18,2015 ^ 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 or SPOLCE@TO\VN.ITHACA.NY.US. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) Accessing Meeting Materials Online Site Plan and Subdivision applications and associated project materials are accessible electronically on the Town's website under "Planning Board" on the "Meeting Agendas" page (httn://w\vw.town.ithaca.nv.us/meeting-aaendas). TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, September 15, 2015 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Town Planning Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox(Chair), Linda Collins,Joseph Haefeli,John Beach, Liebe Meier Swain Town Staff Present: Chris Balestra, Planner; Creig Hebdon,Town Engineer; Susan Brock,Attorney for the Town; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. AGENDA ITEM Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed construction of a new 10,811 +/-square foot parish center at St. Catherine of Siena Church, 302 St. Catherine Circle, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 71- 1-10, Medium Density Residential Zone. The project will also include the replacement of parking spaces along with new utilities, walkways, landscaping, gardens, and fountains. The existing 10,275 +/-square foot parish center will be demolished once the new one is complete. St. Catherine of Siena Church, Owner/Applicant; Richard McElhiney Architects LLC, Agent. Mr. McElhiney said their plan is to build the new building much closer to the church and to demolish the existing parish center,which is underused because of its distance from the church. People tend to leave their cars, go into the church, then go back to their cars. The intention is to bring the parish center and other aspects of the church's mission more closely into the life of the parish. In practical terms,you'll have to pass through the parish center to enter the church. The six 450-square-foot meeting spaces for various activities can be divided into individual classrooms or joined together in any shape or size. A covered walkway will connect the parish center to the church. They'll regrade and add garden walls, so as you pass through the gardens and into the church, it will change the tempo of your thoughts. They decided to elect the plan without the basement. The mechanical services that were to be in the basement have been moved up. They'll use the same stone as the church and keep the stone at the same eight-foot height, so the church remains the primary structure. Stone will be reused from the existing parish center. They're working on the phasing now on how to do that. The view looking from the church will be a facade of glass to provide a visual connection. Donald Harner from TG Miller talked about the site plan. They will maintain as many trees as possible; two or three trees will come out. Regarding erosion control, they will maintain most of the parking to the west. The south entrance will be dedicated to construction traffic. There will be new parking on the north side to make up for the parking that will be removed for the new building. They will maintain access to the north drive for events access, emergencies, and facilities maintenance. After removal of existing parish, the area will be graded and turned into lawn. Most of the stormwater is sheeting off the parking lot to the west.They're proposing to catch some of that stormwater with a new stormwater practice. The overall site disturbance is an acre, so they will do a full SWPPP. Impervious surface will be reduced by about 10 percent. Roof runoff will be piped to the north and south to existing roadside ditches. There are multiple hydrants around the site. Planning Board Minutes 09-15.2015 Page 2 of 6 Ms. Collins asked whether there was any thought about constructing a bigger building to accommo- date future growth. Rev.Joe Marcoux, pastor of St. Catherine, responded that the building will be smaller, but the usable space for programs will be bigger. He pointed out that the existing building has a huge amount of garage space that wasn't used for programs, and they've captured that square footage for more program space in the new parish center. They've gone from 500 to 600 families and their children's programs are very big. The existing parish center is over 50 years old. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that there will be no state environmental review because it's a Type II action, replacement in kind. Ms. Brock said that when you're replacing a building, as long as it's on the same site, it doesn't have to inhabit the exact same footprint. Ms. Meier Swain asked why there's a 15-space reduction in parking for a growing parish. Rev. Marcoux responded that one of the things they noticed since Hanshaw Road has been improved with sidewalks is that most of their members that live in the area are walking. In really inclement weather, it might be different. They put in a bicycle rack, and more people are using that also. Mr. McElhiney said the posted occupancy of the church is 400, and they'd like to be able to seat the congregation in the classroom area, so it would be one group, not 400 people in addition to the seated congregation. Ms. Balestra stated that when she and Mr. Bates looked at the zoning code and the town's parking requirements, they considered the number of seats for each use: the church can seat 400; the parish center can seat 240. She asked what would happen if there was an event with more than 400 people. How would you provide parking?Those numbers show that there's not enough parking for all those uses. Staff calculated a need of 156.25 spaces, and you're providing 151. So the planning board needs to authorize a percentage reduction in parking. Mr. Wilcox said that when the board is being asked for a reduction in parking spaces, they generally want the drawing to show where they might put additional parking - an area marked "Reserved for future parking." It just indicates that you thought about it. Ms. Collins asked about excavation - how much fill they'll have to take off site. Mr. McElhiney responded that there will be very little excavation because there's no basement. They're really just cutting for the footings. They will need to cart off what's left of the old building and they'll need to do some grading. Their intention is to keep as much fill on site as possible to reuse it. They hope to complete the project for occupancy by Christmas of next year, but the new parking lot on the north side will have to wait until asphalt is available in the spring. He said that there are a lot of LEED elements, but that they're not pursuing LEED certification. They are reusing materials from the old building and using a very energy efficient variable frequency refrigerant flow (VRF) system. The reason is because sometimes the building is occupied by ten people and sometimes Planning Board Minutes 09-15.2015 Page 3 of 6 by 400 people, so it's a very scalable system and very efficient even when there are few occupants in the building. Ms. Collins pointed out that they'll need a planting plan. Ms. Brock disclosed that while she's not a member of this parish - she's a member of another Catholic parish in the county - she does attend mass and other services and functions at St. Cathe- rine from time to time. Mr. Haefeli said that for every event, people will walk through the parish hall to the church. Mr. McElhiney said there is parking on the east side. There are pathways coming from the north and south, so you can get into the church from another location. But they think it's part of the intention for people to gather and run into each other, get coffee and donuts. Rev. Marcoux said that one reason the existing building fell into such disrepair is that people would just get out of church and head for their cars. Unless you were intentionally going to the parish center for a reason, many of the parishioners never went there. They want the teaching part of the church and the worship part of the church to go together, so they're forcing people to go through this new building. Mr. Haefele asked if they plan to someday expand the building. Mr. McElhiney said that they do. One of the rationales for the way the building is laid out - by creating a linear structure for the classroom and for the offices - is that they can expand off the ends. Ms. Balestra noted that there may be some readdressing at the building permit stage because both the church and the parish center are currently 302 Siena Drive, yet the entrance to them is St. Cathe- rine's Circle. Mr. Haefeli asked where dumpsters are kept. Mr. McElhiney responded that there's a trash room on the north end of the building. Trash is kept in wheeling bins, not dumpsters. One of the reasons they're keeping the St. Catherine's Circle entrance is because that's where the trash is picked up. AGENDA ITEM Nomination and Election of Vice Chairperson PB Resolution No. 2015-036:Nomination and Election of Planning Board Vice Chairperson Moved by John Beach; seconded by Linda Collins RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board does hereby nominate and elect Liebe Meier Swain as Vice Chairperson of the Planning Board for the remainder of 2015. Planning Board Minutes 09-15.2015 Page 4 of 6 FURTHER RESOLVED, that said election shall be reported to the Town Board. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Haefeli, Beach Abstentions: Meier Swain AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - Nobody came forward to address the board. AGENDA ITEM PB Resolution No. 2015.037: Minutes of August 4, 2015 Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Linda Collins RESOLVED, the Planning Board approves the minutes of August 4, 2015, as submitted. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Meier Swain PB Resolution No. 2015-038: Minutes of August 18, 2015 Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by John Beach RESOLVED, the Planning Board approves the minutes of August 18, 2015, as submitted. Vote Ayes:Wilcox, Collins, Haefeli, Beach, Meier Swain AGENDA ITEM Other Business Proposed Verizon Cell Tower on Mecklenburg Road The purpose of the discussion is for the board to tell staff what might be missing from the packet. Ms. Balestra identified two things that are missing from the application: 1) a landscaping plan around the fence that will surround the electronics, and 2) a visual analysis or simulation of the site. Ms. Balestra said the applicant told her they like to come before the board first to find out what they like to see for a visual simulation. Ms. Balestra told them that if they do that, the 30-clock will have expired and the board would not have the authority to ask for the visual simulation they'd need. She would send them a letter to make it clear. Mr. Wilcox suggested raising a balloon to the 100-foot level and taking photographs from different points. Ms. Balestra said they have to be in the public right of way; she based them on the town's scenic inventory and included that inventory in all the documentation she has already emailed them. She said that it will be the shortest tower that we have at 100 feet. The attorney told her that Verizon had Planning Board Minutes 09-15.2015 Page 5 of 6 been sued by several municipalities in the past because they would ask a board for a 150-foot tower and the municipality would ask them why they couldn't build a 120-foot tower. So now they'll put up more towers, but they'll be shorter. Ms. Brock pointed out that that is what we've always asked for, but since they view them as vertical real estate, they can sell space on the tower to other people, if they can make them tall, they can make more money. Ms. Balestra asked whether the board would like a balloon fly or whether a photo simulation would suffice; i.e., the height of the tower at scale against whatever background we choose. The board was fine with either one, as long as it was realistic and representative. Mr. Haefeli asked what our code says about colocation. Ms. Brock responded that it requires that new towers be designed to a have at least two other providers collocate. This tower is being proposed so that three other providers can collocate. She suggested that for the simulation, the board would want them to show the tower with all the equipment - antennas, microwaves, catwalk. Often that is more intrusive than the pole itself. Ms. Balestra said they had a question about escrow because our law says they're supposed to put money in escrow in case we need to hire an expert. The planning board hired an independent RF and cell tower expert to verify the information for the first cell tower the town ever reviewed, and we haven't done it since. She doesn't see the need for it in this case. For the first-ever cell tower, staff were a little nervous and they wanted to make sure that the data was correct. Ms. Brock stated that they have some pretty technical explanations as to why this is needed in this location, and she tried to understand it but couldn't. She thinks that their map showing the coverage that will be provided will make certain people suspicious that the reason they're really doing it is so they can hit the other side of East Shore Drive, maybe, and they'll say, Why don't you put it over there or in Lansing. Ms. Balestra has been told that it's not a coverage issue but a capacity issue. Mr. Wilcox said that in reading the technical stuff, they were talking about how,when the tower and the phone are barely communicating - you have only one bar - the tower and your phone have to work much harder to stay in communication,which takes up tower bandwith and makes it so that it can't deal with other phone calls because it's trying to maintain contact with your phone. Mr. Haefeli pointed out that the more towers, the stronger the signal, and the more phone in your hand turns down its power. Ms. Collins thought the escrow was a good idea.They get the money back with interest. Why not do it? Ms. Balestra said that there was an attorney who represented us in the first cell tower proposal who stated that the provision in our law regarding escrow was illegal, but he complied with it anyway. But Planning Board Minutes 09-15-2015 Page 6 of 6 we haven't had a chance to look at it. The current attorney said that if we're going to ask for escrow, we'll do it at a later time. We did not ask for money in escrow for the Cornell monopole. The amount is $5000. Mr. Wiicox said that there was a lot of controversy around the Five Mile Drive cell tower, anci it was useful for the planning board to hire an independent authority to review and judge the quality of their submission and the need for a tower at that location. Ms. Brock said that because this is close to EcoVillage, there could be a lot of public opinion on its location, and she thinks we should ask for the escrow. We may not use it, but it would be nice to have the ability to use it. She wondered why they're not collocating on the EcoVillage water tower. The town has antennas on some of its water towers. Mr. Wiicox said that there was no response to the inquiry. Ms. Brock pointed out a page in their materials that was cut and pasted from another project, and she worried that there might be many more instances of that. We want them to go through it all again to make sure it applies to us. Ms. Balestra said she suggested that the applicant go through sketch plan to get the board's feedback, but they wanted to go straight to preliminary. Ms. Brock said that the problem with that is that if we don't put it in writing within 30 days that our law requires something that their application is missing, we can't ask for it later. Ms. Balestra pointed out that the 30-day clock starts as soon as they submit any materials at all. Our policy has always been that when we get a complete application, we schedule them for the planning board meeting. In this case, the 30-day clock starts when they submit anything, which was right before the long Labor Day weekend. AGENDA ITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Ms. Meier Swain, the meeting adjourned at 8:21 p.m. Respectfully submitted, DeAugistine, Deputy (ro\^m Clerk