Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1986-05-22 QTOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD ;17• MAY 22 , 1986 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in special session on Thursday, May 22 , 1986 in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Chairman Montgomery May, Carolyn Grigorov, Virginia Langhans, Edward Mazza, James Baker, Lawrence P. Fabbroni (Town Engineer) , Susan C. Beeners (Town Planner) , Laura Predmore (Temporary Recording Secretary) . ALSO PRESENT: Town Attorney Richard Ruswick, A. C. Hall, W. L. Hall, Robert Berggren, Louis Michael, Gloria Michael, Walter Lane, David Herrick, Walter Eckert, Esther Eckert, Name (illegible) , John H. Weiss, Deborah Dietrich, Larry Rhonemus, Sam Matychak, Frank R. Liguori. Chairman May declared the Meeting duly opened at 7 :00 p.m. and accepted for the record the Clerk' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on May 14, 1986 and May 17, 1986, respectively, together with the Secretary' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Administrator, upon the Chairwoman of the Tompkins County Board of Representatives, and others with interest, and upon each of the applicants and/or agent, as appropriate, on May 15 , 1986. Chairman May read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. ADJOURNED PUBLIC HEARING (from May 20 , 1986) : CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF "SCHEMBRI-HOLLISTER ESTATES" , STAGE I -- THREE BUILDING LOTS, OPEN SPACE, AND REMAINING LANDS -- AT 118 COMPTON ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6--36-2-4 .2 . ROBERT AND THERESA BERGGREN, OWNERS . Chairman May declared the Adjourned Public Hearing in the above-noted matter duly opened at 7:04 p.m and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as previously posted and published. Mr. Berggren appeared before the Board and explained that he had already received Preliminary Subdivision Approval and was now seeking Final Subdivision Approval. Final Subdivision Approval was contingent upon several things to be provided to the Town Planning Board. These things were: all site utilities, culverts, drainage features, direction of flow of all water courses, calculation of drainage area ( above the point of entry for each water course. The drainage plan, as prepared by a licensed engineer, will show all the point grades within Planning Board 2 May 22, 1986 the drainage courses on the site. It was also debatable whether a culvert would be put in to cross Compton Road. We are asking for Final Subdivision Approval of the three front building lots; there will be a 20 ' easement across the back to the open space. That is Stage I; Stage II would consist of the back area. The open space will be kept open for as long as possible because I have horses there. Mr. Berggren introduced Mr. David Herrick of T.G. Miller Associates P.C. , Engineers and Surveyors, who had prepared the Drainage Plan, dated May 22, 1986 , and which was appended to the bulletin board. Mr. Herrick explained that the total drainage area for this development, excluding lots 1 and 2 , is about 28 acres. Lots 1 and 2, based on this drainage proposal, would drain to the west to a shallow existing swale, which would in turn drain to Compton Road, then west down to Route 96B (Danby Road) . After reviewing this area, it appears that the best way to handle drainage of the upper development would be to take it down the existing water course . The existing course runs along the Matychak property. This is a natural drainageway, which is sort of filled in in some areas. Mr. Berggren stated that everyone associated thinks that the best way would be to drain along the back. It would mean digging a small ditch. Mr. Herrick continued, stating that it would only need to be dug out about 100 ' to blend back in with the original ditch. I have predicted the expected peak flow which would occur from a twenty-five year storm; it is roughly 28 cubic feet per second. Based on the twenty--five year storm, I have sized it with a 30" corrugated metal pipe culvert with headwalls to be installed on this new road which would adequately pass a twenty-five year storm. You can get an idea, from the topo shown on the drainage plan in which direction the water flows. Mr. Mazza asked if Mr. Herrick went to the site to calculate this topography procedure or did he take this off of the USGS map? Mr. Herrick replied that this was done by Lockwood Support Services out of Rochester. The contours were all done within the past two weeks. I did calculate this drainage area, using USGS maps. The total development will only cover 17.2 acres of the total 28 acres . Mr. Louis Michael, 116 Compton Road, spoke from the floor and stated that the water is presently draining into his back yard. Mr. Herrick explained that what is there now is a ditch coming to the west down to within 10 or 12 feet of Mr. Michael 's property line, then it is going south . We are going to eliminate that by taking the water back north about 1001 , then down an existing drainageway on the Matychak property. The water will not come down the Swale any longer onto your property. Planning Board 3 May 22, 1986 Mr. Mazza asked how what Mr. Herrick is proposing to do is going to hurt Mr. Michael -- it seems like that is going to help. Mr. Michael asked, when are they going to put a drain in across the road? Mr. Herrick replied, now we do not plan to put one in to cross the road; there does not seem to be any reason to. Mr. William Hall, 131 Compton Road, spoke from the floor and stated that he received a phone call from Mr. Berggren and that Mr. Berggren had threatened him. Mr. Hall stated that Mr. Berggren told him that if he attended the Public Hearing, his property assessment would go up another $20 ,000 . I want to know what this has to do with the assessment on my property. Chairman May replied that he would say nothing. This Board has nothing to do with that matter. Mr. Sam Matychak, 1180 Danby Road, spoke from the floor and asked, who is going to take care of the water draining down below? If you cleaned the ditch out, it would not be bad and it should flow through smoothly. Mrs . Langhans asked it the ditch goes all the way down to 96B? Mr. Herrick replied, yes. Mrs. Langhans asked if it were deep enough? Mr. Herrick replied that it is not a deep trench, but I believe originally that is where all the water ran. Over the years, the water has slowed down, the silt has settled out and it has gradually filled in. Mr. Fabbroni stated , I do agree that it seems like the water came down this hedgerow from the eastlands, and spoke of the pines across this property. When it reaches Mr. Michael's property, there is a very ill-defined waterway that goes both ways. They are proposing, on their land, to establish a meaningful waterway that would hit into the head end of that drain. If Mr. Matychak was amenable to them continuing to clean out onto his land 30 or 40 feet it would make the connection that much more positive. The idea is to keep water where it has always gone. My general observation is that that waterway gets wider and deeper as it approaches 96B. I understand that the culvert there has become plugged in the past. That is the major travel of flow. If you brought it down to Compton Road, it will all wind up in the same place. Mr. Michael disagreed, stating, not if they cross the road. Mr. Fabbroni continued, stating that it would be better to take it straight through to remove it from the houses on Compton Road. When you go down to the corner, the actual size of the culvert is probably no more than an 18" pipe. The creek near Mr. Matychak' s house is much wider and deeper and the culvert pipe is larger, 36" . Mr. Michael stated, if you put a ditch in back, you still will Planning Board 4 May 22, 1985 not divert all the water. Mr. Fabbroni explained, if Mr. Berggren puts the ditch in the back, you will not see any more water than before he did his ditch work back in the Fall. The field that you own across the street is part of the culprit, the water just sits there. Mr. Matychak asked, why could you not split it up, diverting some to the south side of Compton Road and the rest across my property? Mr. Fabbroni stated, once you take it to the south side of Compton Road and flood out that house there, then you have bigger problems. Mr. Michael asked, what about my house, which is being flooded now? Mr. Fabbroni stated, I keep saying, you will see less water than you see today. Chairman May asked Mr. Fabbroni, basically you are in agreement with this proposed drainage plan? Mr. Fabbroni replied, basically, it is the best way. You cannot, within reason, divert water from one water course to another. Mr. Herrick stated, the ditch has always existed here, it has always silted in. The new ditch is actually required. Mrs . Grigorov stated, the only thing that can happen is some improvement; the ditch will not create any more water. Mr. Fabbroni added, if Mr. Matychak would allow them on his land to define the connection even more on the east end, it would improve the conditions. Mr. Walter Lane, 112 Compton Road, spoke from the floor and asked, where is the ditch located, and stated that, the water was also draining onto his land. Mrs . Langhans remarked, if nothing is done, you will still have water. Mr. Matychak stated, the other thing would be to open the ditch all the way through. Mr. Berggren stated, I would hate to bear the cost, but I will do what I can. Mr. Fabbroni and I walked the ditch a few days ago, in the rain. The ditch is there and well defined. Chairman May closed the Adjourned Public Hearing at 7 :31 p.m. and asked for Board comments or questions. Mrs . Langhans stated, if nothing is done, you will have the same Planning Board 5 May 22, 1986 problems. Mr. Matychak stated, if the entire ditch is re-opened, I am agreeable to this proposal. Mrs . Langhans asked, where is the 36" culvert located? Mr. Fabbroni replied, it is on 96B. Mr. Berggren stated, you could open the entire ditch to 96B, but that would create very fast water movement and erosion. Chairman May commented, I think what Mr. Fabbroni suggested, 30" or so, would be in the best interest. Mr. Fabbroni added, there may be some selected spots that also need cleaning out. There is a lot of natural growth there that slows down the water flow, naturally. Mrs . Grigorov stated, this proposal seems to be the best logical solution. This could only make a positive difference. Ms. Beeners clarified, we are looking at Lots 1 , 2 , and 3 , open space to be set aside which is 1.47 acres, a transfer of .45 acres to Tax Parcel No. 6-36-2-4 . 1 which is currently occupied by Mr. Berggren and a 20 ' easement from Compton Road to the open space. Also included is provision of a 60 ' right-of-way between Lots 2 and 3 and a 9. 79 acre area for future development. MOTION by Mrs. Carolyn Grigorov, seconded by Mrs . Virginia Langhans : WHEREAS: 1. This action is a request for Final Subdivision Approval of Stage I of "Schembri-Hollister Estates" , located at 118 Compton Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-36-2-4 .2. Stage I consists of the following: Lot 1: 1. 66 acres; Lot 2 : 1.54 acres; Lot 3 : 1. 48 acres; Transfer of 0 .45 acres from Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-36-2-4 .2 to Tax Parcel No. 6-36-2-4 .1; Open space reservation of 1. 47 acres; Provision of a 60-foot right of way from Compton Road; Area for future development of 9 .79 acres; Provision of a 20-foot right of way to the open space reservation. 2. The Planning Board reviewed a SEAR Short Environmental Assessment Form for Stages I and II of this subdivision, at Public Hearing, on October 29 , 1985 , and made a negative determination of environmental significance. Planning Board b May 22, 1986 3 . The Planning Board granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval for this Subdivision, at Public Hearing, on October 29, 1985. 4 . The Planning Board, at Public Hearing, on May 22 , 1986 (adjourned from May 20 , 1986) reviewed proposed Stage I of this Subdivision as shown on the following maps: a . "Subdivision Map, Robert G. & Theresa L. Berggren -- Developer, Schembri-Hollister Estates , Compton Road, Military Lot 86 , Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York" , dated September 16 , 1982 , amended March 27, 1985 and July 29 , 1985, by T.G. Miller Associates, P.C. , Engineers and Surveyors. b. "Drainage Plan, Robert G. and Theresa L. Berggren - Developer, Compton Road, Military Lot 86, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York", dated May 22, 1986, by T.G. Miller Associates, P.C. , Engineers and Surveyors . NOW THEREFORE, IT IS RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final Subdivision Approval to Stage I of "Schembri-Hollister Estates" as shown on "Subdivision Map, Robert G. & Theresa L. Berggren - Developer, Schembri-Hollister Estates, Compton Road, Military Lot 86, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York" , dated September 16 , 1982 , amended March 27 , 1985 and July 29 , 1985 by T.G. Miller Associates, P .C. , Engineers and Surveyors, and as described in (1. ) above, subject to the following condition: a. that drainage improvements be developed in accordance with those improvements shown on "Drainage Plan, Robert G. and Theresa L. Berggren - Developer, Compton Road, Military Lot 86, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York" , dated May 22 , 1986 , by T.G. Miller Associates, P.C. , Engineers and Surveyors, and to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer. There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - May, Grigorov, Langhans, Mazza, Baker. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairman May declared the matter of Final Subdivision Approval of Stage I of the Berggren Subdivision duly closed at 7:38 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF CERTAIN LANDS OF TOMPKINS COUNTY, ALSO KNOWN AS THE BIGGS COMPLEX, PRESENTLY ZONED RESIDENCE DISTRICT R30 , AS A SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICT (LIMITED MIXED USE) , LOCATED AT 1283 AND 1287 TRUMANSBURG ROAD AND ON INDIAN CREEK ROAD, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-24-3-2 . 2. TOMPKINS COUNTY, OWNER; Planning Board 7 May 22, 1986 FRANK R. LIGUORI, P.E. , TOMPKINS COUNTY COMISSIONER OF PLANNING, AGENT. AND CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF CERTAIN LANDS OF TOMPKINS COUNTY, LOCATED AT 1283 AND 1287 TRUMANSBURG ROAD AND ON DUBOIS AND INDIAN CREEK ROADS, TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 6-24-3-2.2 . TOMPKINS COUNTY, OWNER; FRANK R. LIGUORI P.E. , TOMPKINS COUNTY COMMISSIONER OF PLANNING, AGENT. Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above-noted matter duly opened at 7 : 43 p.m. and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Mr. Liguori appeared before the Board and explained that some time during December the County had the opportunity to rent a portion of the base center to a private sector entity (Odyssey Associates) . At that time, they wanted to move in by January lst and the County Board advised me to come to the Zoning Board of Appeals and apply for a variance to allow that move. The reason the variance was required is, although the land is zoned R30 and the current County usage is authorized under the present zoning, it is not authorized for private sector use. The Zoning Board told us we would have to apply for a mixed use zoning. The County' s primary interest is to make it possible for them to rent unused space. Mr. Peter Lovi, former Town Planner, suggested that we include additional lands with potential for development. Lot P2 , at one time, a Doctor was interested in, but at the present time, the County is not contemplating the sale of this land. The County owns a total of a little over a hundred acres on this parcel. The application is for the Board' s consideration for rezoning a portion of the parcel for mixed land use. The same kinds of uses will be as in the past and presently are in use, such as, County Offices, Private Sector Offices, Professional Offices, including Medical Offices. Also in this area, is the Tower area which has been used for residential single and multi-family. We also have a request in that you consider part of it as research and development activities. We are talking of possibly using some of the basement areas for rental to fledgling industries , where they could get started at fairly low rent. There has been talk of establishing a Day Care Center, so we have asked that that be included. We will, undoubtedly, want to consider the possibility of adding banking services -- perhaps a gift shop -- definitely a cafeteria or some sort of food service for occupants. An Environmental Lab has approached us with the possibility of the use of the Laboratory in the old hospital. Their laboratory would test soils, air, water and wastewater. Also, it would be used for public assembly -- primarily for County activities. There is no way that the County can at this time determine how much space can be set aside for private sector use. The portion of the building rented to the private sector will have to pay a portion of the taxes. At present, less than 10% is rented to private sector Planning Board 8 May 22 , 1986 enterprises. I would guess, that under no conditions would we exceed 25% of the total building. The property itself is very well self-contained. The County with the Hospital Corporation currently owns the utilities. The service road coming in is co-owned by the Hospital Corporation and the County. We are under active discussion with all parties concerned for a relocation to the west of that service road that exists and, possibly, this will occur this summer. The Town may possibly take over that road. We are also under active discussion with the Town of Ithaca for Town take over of the utilities. Presently, there are 352 parking spaces available. We feel this is quite adequate for our existing needs. There is a possibility of additional parking area along the back service road. We could add to the existing 60 spaces there, with the Town' s permission, later on. We understand and agree that if the County wishes to sell any of the vacant land to a developer, a plan will have to be submitted to the Town for approval which would include the entire gamut of approval. Chairman May asked if anyone from the Public wished to speak . Mrs. Deborah Dietrich, of the County Board of Representatives, District 12 , spoke from the floor and stated that Mr. Lovi may seem to think that rezoning of 47 acres is necessary but the people in her District feel differently. The rezoning of the empty land, many people feel is premature . Chairman May asked how the members of the Board felt about requesting that the back line along Indian Creek Road be moved back 250-300 ' so that there would be a definition between this and the residential area. Mr. Liguori stated that he could see no objection to removing parcels 5A and 5B, in that area. Mrs . Langhans asked, if the area in P2 has been offered to some doctors before, when it was not a mixed use area, what is to stop them from trying to use it again with the R30 zoning? There would be no reason, then, to change it to mixed use. Mr. Fabbroni stated that offices are permitted by special permit. Chairman May suggested, you should take out areas P5A and P5B to maintain the buffer along Indian Creek Road. Mr. Liguori stated that he could not speak for the County, but he saw no reason why they would object to that. Planning Board 9 May 22, 1986 Ms. Beeners stated that one of her initial feelings was to preserve the buffer along Indian Creek Road, and, another of her concerns would be where the future access would empty out onto Indian Creek Road. Chairman May stated that the buffer would be left at R30 zoning for the present time. Mr. Liguori stated that he did not think the County would have any objection to that. Mr. John Weiss, 105 DuBois Road, spoke from the floor and stated that his property was right beneath PI and wanted to know what the possible uses of the P2 area would be. Mr. Liguori repeated that the County has no offers, but feels that this area should be included as a part of the "campus" . Mr. Weiss asked, then under the present zoning, why is there a need for a change? Mr. Liguori stated that the County does not want to stir up the neighborhood about possible uses of this land, because we do not yet know how it will be used. What we are really interested in is the possibility of renting space to the private sector. There is another use, there is a former major dietary kitchen in this building, which could possibly be used as a part of the County Nutrition Program. Mr. Larry Rhonemus, 103 Indian Creek Road, spoke from the floor and asked, on the northwest corner, where is it located as far as some definition, and where is this in relation to where Indian Creek goes under Indian Creek Road? Mr. Liguori replied that he did not think that Indian Creek runs on the County's property significantly. Mr. Rhonemus stated that it does, in the area marked Pl. Chairman May stated that he probably would take out any area that included Indian Creek. Mrs. Dietrich stated, I also feel that P2 is a more desirable building space, and I feel that they should apply again at a later date, if building in that area is desired. It would be better for them to come back to the Town for further approval when they have something in mind. Ms. Beeners clarified that the special land use rezoning has not directly addressed the research and development and the non-environmental lab areas (e.g. , current light industrial uses) -- maybe that is a misnomer to put light industrial as the term. Mr. Rhonemus stated, I am not opposed to this development. I am concerned with Indian Creek and with the bad condition of the roads carrying these heavy trucks. Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 27 p.m. Chairman May Planning Board To May 22, 1985 stated that he would suggest that this matter be brought back to the Board for a recommendation to the Town Board. We can look at the SEQR form and see if there are any comments to send on to the Town Board. In the portion listed as light industry, we may want to change that to high-tech. Any industry or office space will include truck traffic. Mrs. Langhans asked, do the roads have to meet specifications for size of trucks? Mr. Fabbroni replied, as this building space is filled, it is inevitable that there will be more use of the road. It is already happening. We will have to face the upgrading of Indian Creek Road, not to encourage use, but just to support the current use. Mrs . Langhans commented that the more you improve the road, the more traffic you will get. Mr. Mazza stated that he was concerned with including the vacant lands of PI East and P2 in this, at this time. It seems that this is a large enough parcel and if, at any time they have a use for it, they could ask for rezoning at that time. I understand the rezoning for the buildings in use at this time. I feel uncomfortable about rezoning vacant land. Also listed as vacant lands are areas P5A and P5B. P1 West should be included in the rezoning. Mrs. Langhans agreed to the removal of parcels Pl East, P2 , P5A and P5B from the rezoning. Mr. Fabbroni remarked, we should add that they will, at the north line, go no closer than 200 ' to Indian Creek Road. Ms. Beeners recommended that the type of action for the proposed rezoning be recommended as Type I and the type of action for the proposed subdivision be Unlisted, mainly because it does not involve, at this time, a physical alteration of one to ten acres. All involved agencies have been notified and have thirty days to confirm Town Board Lead Agency status. Mr. Liguori asked, who the involved agencies are? Ms. Beeners replied, The Appalachian Regional Commission because of Section 239-m and the possibility of an ARC Grant, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Southern Tier East Regional Planning and Development Board because of responsibilities under Section 239-m of the General Municipal Law with respect to a higher Planning Commission, New York State Department of Transportation, Tompkins County Health Department and Tompkins County Highway Department. Mr. Liguori remarked that the Southern Tier East Regional Planning and Development Board has no permit issuing authority. Town Attorney Ruswick commented that there is a jurisdictional question that he would like to discuss with Town Attorney Barney Planning Board 1. 1 May 22, 1986 before recommendation to the Town Board. Mr. Mazza asked, what about a conditional recommendation to the Town Board? MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans, seconded by Mr. Edward Mazza : RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board make and hereby does make a recommendation to the Town Board, as Lead Agency in the environmental review of Type I rezoning actions, of a conditional declaration of negative environmental impact in the matter of the proposed designation of certain lands of Tompkins County as a Special Land Use District (Limited Mixed Use) . There being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Aye - May, Grigorov, Langhans, Mazza, Baker. Nay - None. The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously. Ms. Beeners recommended that, considering the type of project, the preliminary subdivision application be resubmitted at a later date with a Short Environmental Assessment Form, with changes as recommended, in the subdivision map. Chairman May commented that the Short Form EAF for the subdivision is massing also. We have to have that to make a recommendation. It would be inappropriate for us to grant Preliminary Subdivision Approval without first dealing with this form. This would involve a new hearing for subdivision. We should drop this application. Mr. Liguori stated, I do withdraw this application and will resubmit it as a "Final" with the Short Form. Chairman May declared the matter duly adjourned at 9 : 02 p.m. ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion, Chairman May declared the May 22 , 1986 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9 :05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Laura Predmore, Temporary Recording Secretary, Town of Ithaca Planning Board.