Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2016-08-02TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Shirley A. Raffensperger Board Room, Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. August 2. 2016 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Rothschild Place, 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard. 7:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place building located on the Ithaca College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41 .-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. Rothschild Place (formerly called the Administrative Annex) was originally approved in 2004 as a temporary modular office facility, with a time extension approved in 2009 which shall expire in September 2018. Ithaca College is requesting to make this a permanent building. There are no exterior changes planned. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Steve Dayton, Director of Planning, Design, and Construction, Agent. 7:20 P.M. SEQR Determination: Sleep Inn Hotel, 635 Elmira Road. 7:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Sleep Inn Hotel located at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35.-1- 21, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing structures to allow the construction of a 3-story, 37,000 +/- square foot hotel. The facility will include 70 hotel rooms, an indoor swimming pool, an outdoor gazebo, 70 parking spaces, stormwater facilities, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. Ahir Hotels Corp., Owner/Applicant; Adam M. Fishel, PE, Marathon Engineering, Agent. 8:30 P.M. Preliminary presentation regarding the determination of adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Maplewood Apartments Redevelopment project located between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63.-2-10.2, 63.-2-1, 63.-2-2, 63.-2-14, and 63.-2-3, High Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing Maplewood Apartments housing complex and redeveloping the +!-17 acre site with up to 500 residential units (studios and 1-4 bedroom units) in a mix of townhomes, stacked flats, and multi-family apartment buildings. The project will also include some small retail, new interior streets, parking areas, pedestrian facilities, open spaces, storm water facilities, and a community center. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; EdR Trust, Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning & Design, LLC, Agent. 6. Persons to be heard 7. Approval of Minutes: July 19, 2016 8. Other Business 9. 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 SPOI.t KC'^TOWN.ITHACA.NV.I S. (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 (lilt|}://\vww.to\vn.ithaca.nv.us/mcetiiiu-aucndas). TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday. August 2.2016 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, August 2, 2016, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:00 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place building located on the Ithaca College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41.-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. Rothschild Place (formerly called the Administrative Annex) was originally approved in 2004 as a temporary modular office facility, with a time extension approved in 2009 which shall expire in September 2018. Ithaca College is requesting to make this a permanent building. There are no exterior changes planned. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Steve Dayton, Director of Planning, Design, and Construction, Agent. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed Sleep Inn Hotel located at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35.-1-21, Neighborhood Commercial Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing structures to allow the construction of a 3-story, 37,000 +/- square foot hotel. The facility will include 70 hotel rooms, an indoor swimming pool, an outdoor gazebo, 70 parking spaces, stormwater facilities, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. Ahir Hotels Corp., Owner/Applicant; Adam M. Fishel, PE, Marathon Engineering, Agent. Said Planning Board will at said time 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, July 25,2016 Publish: Wednesday, July 27,2016 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 bv the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall. 215 North Tioga Street. Ithaca. New York, on Tuesday. August 2. 2016 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: July 25, 2016 Date of Publication: July 27, 2016 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 27^*^ day of July 2016 Notary Public - -DEBORAH KELLEY - Notary Public, State of New York "■ - V Nor 01KE6025073•Qualified in Schuyler County .di Commission Expires May 17,20 i— tRE ITHACA JOURNAL WEDNESDAY. JULY 27, 2016 TOWN OF ITHACA - ; PLANNING BOABP NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARINGS Tuesday, August 2,2016 By dfECtion of the Chairper son of the Planning Board. NOTICE IS HERKY GIVEN that Putilic Hearings w9l be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Wtaca on Tue^ d^, August 2, 2016, et 21^ North Tioga Street, Itheca, N,Y,. at the foliowing lltitea and on the following matters: 7:00 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary aid Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place bulldng located on the College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Towm of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 41 ,-1-30,2. Medium Den sity Resideiitid Zone. Roths child Place (formerly c^led the Administiative Annex) was ori^naUy approved In 2004 as 3 temporary modular office fecillty, with a time ex- ifenskm approved in 2009 i«hich ^ exf«re in Septem- Iber2018. Ithaca College is Requesting to make this a bermaient building. There «e no exterior changes plan- jied Itheca Cottege, Owner/AppGcam: Steve Day ton. Director of Planning. De- si^ and Constnjctiori. Agent. 7:20 P-M, Con^deiation of Preliminay SRe Plan Appro val and Spedal Permit for thd propoaed Sleep Inn Hotel lo cated at 635 Brrdra Road. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No, 35,-1-21, Neighboftiood Commercial Zone. The pro posal involves demolishing the existing structures to al low the construction of a 3- story, 37,000 *!■ square foot;hotel. The facility v^l mdudd: 70 hotel rooms, an IndoohBviimming pool, ari outdoor gazebo, 70 parking spaces, stormwater Facilities, outdoqr- iigntrng, and landsc^^ Ahir ffeteis CorptrOwner/Applicant; Adwn Mi Rshel. PE, Marathon En^ neering. Agent. Said Planning Board will at sM bme and place hear dtpersoiw in aunim^ of such mafttera or objetiions there to. Arsons may appear by agent or in person. Individu ate with visual Impairments, fearing impairments or other ^leci^ needs, will be provid ed vwth asstetance as neces- asy. upon request. PereonsdeairiDQ asslkance must make sudi a request not less dian 48 hours prior to tfie dine of the pubic hearinQ. SosanRitier Pifecior of Planning ^3-1747 Dated: Monday. July 25.2016 7/2T/2016 Town of Ithaca Planning Board Sign-in Sheet Date: August 2, 2016 Print Name Address e-mail 7 7:^ 1[ cA) r f AlP/cey-^aO^ 7 'cy ^ ^25 in.r..Uw(^t X"f ^ ^-f"- // y FINAL TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, August 2, 2016 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Town Planning Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox (Chair), Linda Collins, Yvonne Fogarty, Liebe Meier Swain, Catherine Herleman Town Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning; Chris Balestra, Planner; Mike Smith, Planner; Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Dan Thaete, Town Engineer; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; Debra DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination: Ithaca College Rothschild Place, 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard Tim Carey, associate vice president, Office of Facilities, IC, said they erected the building in 2004- It was known as the Administrative Annex and was since renamed Rothschild Place. In 2009, the planning board provided an extension of the temporary occupancy permit, which expires in 2018, but the applicants are now requesting permanent status for the facility. It is on their preventative maintenance list; they've made some improvements. Some critical departments are housed in Rothschild, particularly disability services, since it's on a part of the campus that is flat and centrally located. Mr. Wilcox commented that it's a beautiful campus, and asked why they want such an unattractive building. Mr. Carey responded that they have a diversity of buildings on campus, which makes that building not as unfriendly to the eyes as one might think. Ms. Meier Swain asked about the building meeting the energy code, adding that the board has been discussing energy a lot. Mr. Bates said it is an existing structure, and since they're not changing anything, they're not required to update it. Ms. Collins said that since every room has its own heating and cooling unit, she assumes it isn't as efficient as having a centralized system, but it is what it is. Mr. Bates said that heating a single room is more efficient and energy saving than heating several other rooms at the same time with one big unit. Also, the units are becoming more energy efficient. Mr. Carey added that they are in the midst of a significant deferred maintenance upgrade and are looking carefully at all systems. This year, they're spending their entire capital allotment of $20 million primarily on deferred maintenance. There are no major buildings going up or major gut and Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 2 of 11 renovation; they're taking care of their roofs, windows, and mechanical systems, and paying great attention to the energy components. PB Resolution No. 2016-040: SEQR, Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval & Special Permit, Ithaca College Rothschild Place, 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Tax Parcel No. 41.-1-30.2 Moved by Linda Collins; seconded by Catherine Herleman WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place building located on the Ithaca College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boule vard, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41.-1-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. Rothschild Place (formerly called the Administrative Annex) was originally approved in 2004 as a temporary modular office facility, with a time extension approved in 2009 which shall expire in September 2018. Ithaca College is requesting to make this a permanent building. There are no exterior changes planned. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Steve Dayton, Director of Planning, Design, and Construction, Agent, and 2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is the lead agency in the environmental review, with respect to site plan approval and special permit, and 3. The Planning Board, on August 2, 2016, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form (SEAF) Part 1, submitted by the applicant. Parts 2 and 3 pre pared by Town Planning staff, a letter from Timothy R. Carey, Associate Vice President, dated June 6, 2016, a location map titled "Rothschild Place - Location on Campus", date stamped June 28, 2016, photographs with labels of the existing building, date stamped June 28, 2016, 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 1 and for the reasons set forth in the EAF Parts 2 and 3, and, therefore, a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be required. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Fogarty, Meier Swain, Herleman AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place building located on the Ithaca College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 3 of II Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41.T-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. Rothschild Place (formerly called the Administrative Annex) was originally approved in 2004 as a temporary modular office facility, with a time extension approved in 2009 which shall expire in September 2018. Ithaca College is requesting to make this a permanent building. There are no exterior changes planned. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Steve Dayton, Director of Planning, Design, and Construction, Agent Mr. Wilcox called the public hearing to order at 7:12 p.m. Hearing no one, he closed the public hearing at 7:13 p.m. PB Resolution No. 2016-041: Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval &. Special Permit, Ithaca College Rothschild Place, 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, Tax Parcel No. 41.-T30.2 Moved by Catherine Herleman; seconded by Yvonne Fogarty WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the Rothschild Place building located on the Ithaca College campus at 320 Grant Egbert Boule vard, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 41.T-30.2, Medium Density Residential Zone. Rothschild Place (formerly called the Administrative Annex) was originally approved in 2004 as a temporary modular office facility, with a time extension approved in 2009 which shall expire in September 2018. Ithaca College is requesting to make this a permanent building. There are no exterior changes planned. Ithaca College, Owner/Applicant; Steve Dayton, Director of Planning, Design, and Construction, Agent, and 2. This is a Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, as the lead agency in the environmental review with respect to site plan approval and special permit has, on August 2, 2016, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after reviewing and accepting as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Parts 2 and 3 prepared by Town Planning staff, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on August 2, 2016, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a letter from Timothy R. Carey, Associate Vice President, dated June 6, 2016, a loca tion map titled "Rothschild Place - Location on Campus", date stamped June 28, 2016, photo graphs with labels of the existing building, date stamped June 28, 2016, and other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby finds that the Special Permit standards of Article XXIV Section 270-200, Subsections A - L, of the Town of Ithaca Code, have been met, specifically that: a. the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community in harmony with the general purpose of Town Code Chapter 270, Zoning are being promoted, because for all public buildings Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 4 of 11 and educational buildings wherein the principal use is research, administration, or instruction, the same is presumed to exist, and b. the premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use, and such use will fill a neighborhood or community need, because all publicly owned or educational buildings are deemed to be adapted to the proposed use and are deemed to fill a neighborhood or community need, and c. the proposed use and the location and design of the existing building is consistent with the character of the district in which it is located, as the proposed use, location and design of the existing building are not changing, and d. the proposed use will not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devalue the neighborhood property or seriously inconvenience the neigh boring inhabitants, since the existing building is located in the middle of campus and is not visi ble from any public road or adjacent landowner, and e. the presumed benefit of such a use is not outweighed by the objectionable impacts of such use on nearby properties, for the reasons noted above, and f. community infrastructure and services, including but not limited to protective services, roadways, garbage collection, schools and water and sewer facilities are currently, or will be, of adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed use, and g. the proposed use, design and site layout comply with all provisions of Chapter 270, Zoning, and, to the extent considered by the Planning Board, with other regulations and ordinances of the Town, with the Building Code and all other state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and with the Town Comprehensive Plan, and h. the proposed access and egress for all structures and uses are safely designed and the site layout provides adequate access for emergency vehicles, and i. the presumed benefit of such use is not outweighed by the detrimental effect of the proposed use upon the health, safety, and general welfare of the community, for reasons noted above, and j. the lot area, access, parking, and loading facilities are sufficient for the proposed use and access, parking, and loading facilities are adequately buffered to minimize their visual impact, and k. natural surface water drainage is adequately managed in accordance with good engineering practices and in accordance with any applicable Town local law or ordinance, and existing drain- ageways are not altered in a manner that adversely affects other properties, and I. the proposed use and structure comply with all the criteria applicable to site plan review set forth in Town Code Chapter 270, Zoning; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 5 of 11 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 determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in a significant alteration of neither 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 Ithaca College Rothschild Place, located at 320 Grant Egbert Boulevard, as de scribed in the materials listed above, and 3. The Planning Board rescinds the condition in its April 21, 2009 resolution (PB Resolution No. 2009-034) requiring the removal of the building by September 15, 2018. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Fogarty, Meier Swain, Herleman AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination: Sleep Inn Hotel, 635 Elmira Road Adam Fishel said the updates from the sketch plan are the addition of screening shrubbery along the front to screen the headlights of the parked cars, foundation plantings along the front of the building, and an update to the facade to incorporate stone and natural materials as well as architectural shingle and pitched roof in an effort to break up the facade of the building. The main tower is proposed at 54 feet with the main ridgeline of 44 feet. The port cochere for the main entrance will provide for sheltered drop-off and pick-up of guests. There is adequate access for emergency vehicles, limos, coach buses, and trash pickup. Stormwater will be addressed via three stormwater management facilities by way of bioretention as well as two underground stormwater infiltration areas. Site lighting is LED. Ms. Herleman said her primary concerns at sketch plan were addressed with the added landscaping. Ms. Fogarty commented that this project is too big for the piece of property: it's too high, too wide, there's not enough setback - all requiring variances. There's no good way to get around the building; fire trucks have to back out. It's still architecturally ugly. It is not what we asked the applicant to bring back. There are already six hotels on this road. She was on the site at 11:30 that morning and had to wait for 49 cars to go by before she could get out of the driveway. On Sunday at 1:00, she had to wait for 35 cars to exit the driveway on the other side of the road. The road is busy. To pretend that clients leaving in the morning won't want to turn south is unrealistic. She said she can't see this project happening on this piece of property the way it's configured. Ms. Brock said that the ZBA has jurisdiction over variances, so the planning board decision should not be based on the need for variances, which are height, square footage, and the encroachment to the front yard setback. Ms. Collins said that in terms of the overall design of the building, we had a long discussion during the sketch plan review on the aesthetics of the building and how it would fit in in with what the comp plan calls a "semi-rural environment." We talked about four-sided design, creativity, how the building Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 6 of 11 would be massed, how the parking could be integrated into the design in a different way. She was extremely disappointed to see this new plan. She acknowledged that they used brick and more residential-style windows, but the back looks like a prison. It's one-sided design. She understands the business model of these corporate hotels and buildings with their cookie-cutter approach, and it's all about the bottom line. She understands it, but doesn't buy it. She feels the applicants didn't listen to the board when we asked them to come back with something more creative and more interesting and that fits into the Ithaca environment. She's particularly troubled with the massing. She thinks the building is just too big for the lot. She's also concerned about the sky glow with the overall amount of lumens, saying that although each individual lighting fixture may be in keeping with the lighting law, the overall impact when all lights are added up might be too much. She's also concerned with light flowing over into property next door. Mr. Thaete said they discussed avoiding wetland disturbance on the steep slopes. They'll be putting in rip rap down the embankment, but the contractor is going to be forced to work from the top of the slope down, which is opposite of the norm because the property line is at the base of the slope. His two concerns are fire department access and traffic. Mr. Fishel said he has spoken with the fire department, and their only comment was to install an additional fire hydrant along the front of the building. Mr. Thaete said he is familiar with the traffic in that area and knows it's fairly difficult to get out. He asked Mr. Fishel if they've talked to the DOT and whether they've looked at the plan and given any indication of turning lanes. Mr. Fishel said he made a formal submission to the NYS DOT for the commercial driveway, which included peak-hour traffic, times of day, and traffic volume anticipated for the project, and have received initial comments. DOT did not request a traffic study, deceleration lanes, or any mitigation along the state road. They requested that the applicant expand the radii of the driveway from 25 feet to 33 feet to provide curbed radii along the driveway apron. They have not indicated that the driveway location itself is unacceptable; to the contrary, they have agreed that the location is accepta ble. He agreed that there are delays when turning left out of the volunteer fire department or Seven Mile Drive, but pointed out that the hotel will be on the other side, and the afternoon peak is going south. Mr. Thaete said his concern is the lack of gaps in traffic at any time of day. The location is far from a traffic signal, so you lose the natural gaps in traffic. We still need to work out some minor issues regarding how the drainage will be working with infiltration devices and underground basins. Any time you see an underground basin, it indicates that there's a lack of room. It's an expensive way to build stormwater management on a tight site. There's nothing inherently wrong with having the basins underground. That's why operation and maintenance agreements are so important. Mr. Wilcox asked him to explain the steep slope. Mr. Thaete said it's been his experience that on a steep slope, you take the heavy equipment and drive it to the base of the slope, working down because the material wants to fall down the hill. When you start placing rip rap or rock or structures, you work from the base up. Because the property line is at the base of the hill and because there's wetland at the base of the hill, they might need an offsite Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 7 of 11 easement and they might disturb wetlands. It will be more cumbersome and costly the way they have to do it. Mr. Fisbel said there won't be any disturbance below the tow slope, beyond the property line, or within the federal wetlands. Ms. Meier Swain asked bow many trees would be removed and replanted, pointing to a question in the EAF asking whether anything would be removed that acts as a light barrier or screen: removing trees can potentially remove screening. Mr. Fisbel was not sure of the numbers. He said the vegetation they're removing is around the existing buildings. Mr. Wilcox said there isn't much there that's worth keeping. Ms. Balestra said there are several trees on the property and none are really large. The demolition plan shows trees that need to be removed. Along the northern edge of the property, there's a driveway and a fence. On the southern side there's brush, meadow, and lawn; the same for the slope. There's a range of sizes and species of trees that are scattered around the property, including two large trees. It's a requirement in our law to have plantings surround the place to visually shield the project from other properties. When a commercial zone abuts a non-commercial zone, you need to put in a planting strip to provide screening. Mr. Fisbel said they're showing a screen fence on the north side of the property facing the residential parcel in lieu of a vegetative buffer, because there wouldn't be enough room to adequately provide screening by way of vegetation. Ms. Balestra said staff were concerned that the fence might not be tall enough to shield the neighbor ing property from the light pole. Ms. Herleman wondered where they were planning to quarry the natural materials from, since the applicant said they would be locally sourced. One way to minimize the carbon footprint is to use local materials, thereby minimizing the trucking of materials. Mr. Fisbel said that would be up to the contractor. Mr. Wilcox said regarding the fire department access, he relies on the experts, just as he relies on Mr. Thaete for stormwater information. If the fire chief said it's appropriate, he believes it. The building doesn't strike him as being consistent with community character. If there's a will, there's a way. The way is to break up the massing. Another hotel chain he's seen has more undulations in the facade. He's concerned about the three stories because there's nothing else in the neighborhood that's three stories. The Country Inn and Suites on South Hill asked for three stories and were turned down, so they brought it down to two. They have a way of dealing with the mass with dormers and architectural details. He is not concerned about traffic. People generally arrive in the late afternoon and evening, and they don't leave at 7:30 in the morning. He sees the single curb cut as a benefit because there are three curb cuts now, and said that if DOT is willing to give the work permit for the curb cut... He's Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 8 of 11 concerned about the soil on site because it strikes him that it's fill that's been dumped there over 30 to 40 years. Mr. Thaete agreed and said the applicant has done an extensive geotech report. He asked Mr. Fishel if they are determining any special needs for the foundation, etc. Mr. Fishel said they've done a number of borings and subsurface investigation work. It appears to be sandy, rocky, gravelly soil that's potentially fill and that's fairly consistent from the top of the boring to the bottom. If they find any subsurface contamination, they'll have to deal with it when it comes up. As it stands right now, the structural engineer feels the existing soils can sustain the loading with the shallow footings. Mr. Wilcox said lighting issues can be mitigated. He's less concerned about the back of the building: who's going to see it? It can be screened. For him, it comes down to community character. He can't see this in the town. Joe Turnowchyk, project architect, said all corporate hotels are basically ugly. This is the smallest version of the Sleep Inns. He drove around and looked at all the state parks in the area and noticed that they're all canopy structures. It was his intent to try to break the megastructure up with material panels. Just that day, he received approval from Choice Hotels to add three hip dormers, or projec tions of one foot, on the front of the building. He passed around a photo of this design feature. When you look at a building, it depends on the situation you're in. If you're walking down the street on a sidewalk past a row of shops, you're going one mile per hour. On this site, you're going 45 miles per hour and you'll pass it in three seconds. Speaking off-the-cuff, he can see a way to provide multiple canopies, as are seen in the state parks, along the front, from the portico to the left, that would cover up the front of the building and that could provide covered parking. That way, the massing would be broken down with a separate structure and it would break the materials up. Two stories wouldn't work with the applicant's economics. He thinks if they're going to put more money into the front of the building, they shouldn't need to address the rear. He said he would ponder a different prototype with fresher ideas. He's done prototype hotels at the entrances of Yellowstone Park. Mr. Wilcox mentioned Holiday Inn Express and Country Inn and Suites as examples of hotels with architectural details such as dormers. There's a hint at that along the roofline with the new design Mr. Turnowchyk passed around. He can deal with the tower because it's relatively small. The photo Ms. Balestra provided of a Sleep Inn in Arizona might not be appropriate in Ithaca, but it shows what can be done. Ms. Herleman thought the dormers in the new design were a significant improvement and she liked the idea of the canopies. She appreciated Mr. Turnowchyk reminding the board of the context: tired people arriving with their bags and people driving by at 45 mph have a different experience. As someone in business, she's sympathetic with the return on investment of this property. The advantage of this project is that it's already been risked financially, so if the owner and architect can work together to come up with a reasonable result using the architectural elements Mr. Turnowchyk described... And although she agrees that the 45-mph context is significant, there will also be other people standing still, such as the clients they're serving. She likes the canopy from a standpoint of accessibility since we get so much snow in this area. Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 9 of 11 Ms. Collins said she was encouraged by Mr. Turnowchyk's comments and that she agrees with Mr. Wilcox and Ms. Herleman that we're moving in the right direction. She doesn't agree that the new design is significantly different and thinks we'll have to move a lot farther. Hotels should be more than just a box for people to sleep in. She liked hearing him say that he drove around and took note of the iconic architecture in this area and if this building could become more like that, she would feel more positive about the project. She brought up four-sided design as something that our comp plan encourages. She pointed out that the back of the building is not insignificant because people will see it from the Black Diamond Trail, which is very prized by the community. Ms. Herleman said that designing for 45 mph takes away from the design elements; it's in the same way you need to scale signage so the font size is large enough for people to read whether they're walking, biking, or driving. It makes the design more complex that they're designing for people and place and for the drivers. They're not mutually exclusive; they're two different sets of needs. Ms. Collins didn't disagree and understands the concept, but thinks that it can be done creatively. She thinks the non-functional 54-foot tower is just one way of doing it. Other examples show that it can be done creatively and still serve the purposes of the potential users as well as the company for its advertising purposes. Most of the people who will be driving by the hotel will be commuters. Ms. Herleman agreed with the comment about the tower, but the hotel needs to have large, lighted elements. Ms. Collins thinks that in these days of the smart phone, visually dramatic things on buildings might not be as necessary as they used to be. Mr. Wilcox said he's trying to make a hotel look like a big residential structure, and maybe that's not a Sleep Inn but another hotel within the Choice Hotels family. He said the tower doesn't bother him. It's a small tower. The IC athletic building has a big cooling tower on it. It's an architectural detail that breaks up the view. Mr. Wilcox said he had a sense from the board that the motion wouldn't pass and asked how people wanted to proceed. Mr. Fishel asked to table the action and said they could come back with a design that's more palata ble, possibly in a month. The board agreed and the action was tabled. Ms. Ritter mentioned that the town received grant money from Empire State Development for a corridor study of the Inlet Valley between the two state parks. It will be an economic development study and a strategic planning effort. The idea is for the consultants to determine whether what we've proposed in the comp plan - to make this area centered on tourism, agriculture, and small-scale businesses - will make it a more attractive corridor and to help us devise zoning to go along. It will also look at possible pedestrian connections. We'll be sending out the RFPs soon. When Herb Engman was supervisor, he sent a letter to the DOT asking them to consider a traffic light at the intersection of Route 13 and Seven Mile Drive. They responded that it did not warrant a light. That might be pursued more as we look at this corridor. Prior to the recession, the DOT had money and they were having meetings to discuss that part of the corridor; they were going to be doing modifica- Planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page 10 of 11 tions and were asking what was needed. It is on their list, but they lack funding right now, so it's up to the town to think about what zoning we want in the area and what aesthetic improvements we might make with grant money. AGENDA ITEM Preliminary presentation and discussion regarding the determination of adequacy for public review of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Maplewood Apartments Redevelopment project located between Maple Avenue and Mitchell Street, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 63.-2- 10.2, 63.-2-1, 63.-2-2, 63.-2-14, and 63.-2-3, High Density Residential Zone. The proposal involves demolishing the existing Maplewood housing complex and redeveloping the +/' 17 acre site with up to 500 residential units (studios and 1-4 bedroom units) in a mix of townhomes, stacked flats, and multi-family apartment buildings. The project will also include some small retail, new interior streets, parking areas, pedestrian facilities, open spaces, stormwater facilities, and a community center. Cornell University, Owner/Applicant; EdR Trust, Applicant; Scott Whitham, Whitham Planning Design, LLC, Agent Mr. Wilcox noted that the agenda initially showed a discussion of this item, but he was against having another discussion on Maplewood at this point. He's concerned about planning board fatigue on this project. We will listen to a presentation, but there will be no back and forth. Ms. Herleman left the meeting at 8:20. Mr. Witham said there is one thing forthcoming regarding utility issues. The only additional page will be a potential chart. Otherwise, the draft EIS is complete. Mr. Resetco stated that they've heard the board and the community, they've taken lots of notes, and they've tried to respond in detail to all the items brought up to them. He thinks the response is adequate to the level of detail they've been asked to put forth. Mr. Vogel, Taitem Engineering, spoke about energy issues that have been included in the EIS. A representative from Torti Gallas gave a presentation about neighborhood character and architec ture. Mr. Wilcox said the planning board's next action will be to determine whether the document is adequate for public comment. Ms. Balestra said the board has 45 days from the receipt of the EIS to make that determination. Mr. Wilcox said that once we make that determination, then we begin accepting public comments and making our own comments. Those comments and the responses from the applicant help us go from the draft EIS to the final EIS, and if that is accepted and approved, then that forms the findings that we use to base our decisions with regard to site plan review. Ms. Brock said that once we've determined that it's ready for public review, we publish a notice of completion; then the public comment period on the draft EIS is 30 days. If we hold a hearing, it has planning Board Minutes 08-02-2016 Page II of 11 to commence no less than 15 calendar days and no more than 60 calendar days after the filing of the notice of completion. Ms. Ritter said the document will be available for the public to review, probably via the town's web site; there is also a physical document. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that the document will be available to review even before we have made the determination that it's adequate for public comment. Ms. Ritter said people should be cautioned that the document could change, and they may want to wait until it's been deemed adequate; until then, there is no reason to comment. If someone does provide comments, those comments will not go into the final draft and won't go into the final response. Ms. Brock said the planning board's determination simply means we will be going through the scoping document, which tells us exactly what they're supposed to be looking at, and comparing it to the EIS to determine whether they're covering the things the scoping document told them to cover. The board is not making a determination that they agree or disagree with statements and analyses. That will come after they determine whether it's adequate for public review and after they've received all the public comments. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard - No one came forward to address the board. AGENDA ITEM PB Resolution No. 2016-042: Minutes of July 19, 2016 Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by Linda Collins RESOLVED, the Planning Board approves the minutes of July 19, 2016. Vote Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Meier Swain, Fogarty AGENDA ITEM Adjournment Upon a motion by Ms. Meier Swain, the meeting adjourned at 8:58 p.m. Respectfully submitted, A. Ji ^ Debra DeAugistiWrDeputy Tou irk