HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2002-06-18PLANNING BOARD
a JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
FILE "'"""' APPROVED - JULY25 2002 - APPROVED
DATE TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 2002
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, June 18, 2002, in Town Hall,
215 N. Tioga St, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Fred Wilcox Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board
Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of
Planning (7:56 p.m.); John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of
Planning; Dan Walker, Director of Engineering (7:59 p.m.); Michael Smith, Environmental Planner;
Christine Balestra- Lehman, Planner.
EXCUSED: Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member.
ALSO PRESENT: Orlando Turco, 307 Eastwood Ave; Valorle Rockney, 304 Linn St; Ray Foote,
Ithaca Volunteer Veteran's Association; Randy Hall, Quick Cash Auction House; Joe Allen, 417 N
Cayuga; Bill Goodhew, 674 Coddington Road.
Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:35 p.m, and accepted for the record the
Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the
Ithaca Journal on June 10; 2002, and June 12, 2002, together with the properties under discussion,
as appropriate, upon they Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of -Danby, upon the Tompkins
County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and
upon the applicants and/or agents, as appropriate, on June 12, 2002. (Affidavit of Posting and
Publication is hereto attached as Exhibit #1.)
Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York
State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control.
AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:35 p.m:
Chairperson Wilcox - If there is a member of the audience who wishes to address the Planning Board
this evening on an issue 'or item of topic that is not on this evening's agenda, we ask you to please
step forward to the microphone, give us your name and address and as always we will be very
interested to hear what you have to say this evening. There being no one, we will move on to the
next item.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:36 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination., EcoVillage Second Neighborhood Group, Rachel Carson
Way.
OChairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting p g gat 7.36 p.m.
1
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Valerie Rockney, 304 Linn St — I am one of the people who are going to be moving in to EcoVillage.
am buying a house there. So what we are asking the board to approve, is we had in the northwest
quadrant, we had a duplex in the original plan that was stacked one on top of the other. Basically,
nobody wanted to buy it. We do have a buyer or two buyers, one myself if we can make them two
side by side. It has adequate space between the buildings. It doesn't infringe on anyone's view.
The second thing is we would like to add two more structures in the parking lot, two more carports.
Once again, it fits within the Town's guidelines.
Chairperson Wilcox - Are you aware of any environmental issues with regard to these modification?
Ms. Rockney - No. It doesn't seem to change the environmental status at all. Everything will be
exactly the same.
Chairperson Wilcox - I know that you are filling in for Rod. Rod Lambert it not here. The carports will
be placed where cars were originally going to be parked in a gravel area?
Ms. Rockney - Exactly. It is all within the same parking lot. In fact, it is as if you took the carport and
plopped it down on a pair of parking spaces. So it doesn't change the parking configuration in any
way. It just puts coverage over the parking.
Chairperson Wilcox - Questions anybody?
Board Member Thayer - I'll move the SEAR.
Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by Larry Thayer. Do I have a second on the SEQR?
Board Member Conneman - I'll second.
Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by George Conneman. Any further discussion? There being none,
all those in favor please signal by saying aye.
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - There is no one opposed. The motion is passed unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:38 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -064 - SEQR, Modification of Site Plan Approval, EcoVillage Second
Neighborhood Group, Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1-
26.8.
MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by George Conneman.
WHEREAS:
2
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
1. This action is consideration of Site Plan Modification for EcoVillage Second Neighborhood
Group located off Mecklenburg Road on Rachel Carson Way (a private drive), on Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres, Special
Land Use District # 8. The modifications include changing the design of residential units 205
and 206 from a "stacked" duplex style to a "side -by- side" duplex style, and adding two new
carports that would accommodate 13 vehicles (increasing the total of carport spaces from 15
to 28). The project was originally approved by the Planning Board on September 18, 2001.
EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner; Rod Lambert, Agent.
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively
determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval,
and
3. The Planning Board, on June 18, 2002, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by
Planning staff, a drawing entitled "Site Layout Plan" (C101) dated 8110101 and revised 9121101
and 5120102, prepared by T. G. Miller, P. C., and other application material, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental
significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed. Therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form nor an
Environmental Impact Statement will be required.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox - We are ahead of schedule. Legally, I can't open the public hearing until 7:40
p.m. So we could just kind of sit here for a few minutes.
AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Minutes: May 21, 2002.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -065 - Approval of Minutes - May 21, 2002.
MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty.
RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the May 21 2002 minutes as
the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meeting as presented.
91
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
THERE being no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote.
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Thayer.
The motion was declared to be carried.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Site Plan Modifications to the Second Neighborhood
Group by EcoVillage at Ithaca, located off Mecklenburg Road at Rachel Carson Way (a private
drive), on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a total of 176
+/- acres, Special Land Use District # 8. The modifications include changing residential units
205 and 206 to a side -by -side duplex style (the units were stacked in previous approval) and to
increase the number of carports from 15 to 28 vehicle spaces. The project was originally
approved by the Planning Board on September 18, 2001. EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner; Rod
Lambert, Agent.
Chairperson Wilcox - Ladies and gentlemen, if there is a member of the public who wishes to address
the board this evening on this particular agenda item, we ask you to come to the microphone, give us
your name and address and as always we will be very interested to hear what you have to say this
evening. Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:40 P.M. There being none, I will close
the public hearing at 7:41 p.m., and bring the matter back to the Planning Board.
Susan, comments?
Ms. Ritter - I'm fine.
Chairperson Wilcox - Staff? Would someone like to move...?
Board Member Howe - I'll move it.
Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by Rod Howe. Do I have a second? Seconded by Kevin Talty. Any
proposed changes? There being none, all those in favor please signal by saying aye.
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - There is no one opposed. There are no abstentions. The motion is passed.
We're all set.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -066 - Modification of Site Plan Approval, EcoVillage Second
Neighborhood, Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel Nos. 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8.
MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Kevin Talty.
M
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
1. This action is consideration of Site Plan Modification for EcoVillage Second Neighborhood
Group located off Mecklenburg Road on Rachel Carson Way (a private drive), on Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a total of 176 +/- acres, Special
Land Use District # 8. The modifications include changing the design of residential units 205
and 206 from a "stacked" duplex style, to a "side -by- side" duplex style, and adding two new
carports that would accommodate 13 vehicles (increasing the total of carport spaces from 15
to 28). The project was originally approved by the Planning Board on September 18, 2001.
EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner; Rod Lambert, Agent.
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency
in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Modification has, on June 18, 2002, made a
negative determination of environmental significance, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on June 18, 2002, has reviewed and accepted
as adequate for approval of site plan modification, a drawing titled "Site Layout Plan" (C101)
dated 8110101 and revised 9121101 and 5120102, prepared by T.G. Miller, P.C., and other
application material, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for approval of
Site Plan Modification, as shown on the checklists, having determined from the materials
presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration 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 Site Plan Approval for the proposed
modifications to the EcoVillage Second Neighborhood Group as shown on the drawing titled
"Site Layout Plan" (C101) dated 8110101 and revised 9121101 and 5120102, prepared by T.G.
Miller, P.C., and other application material, conditioned upon the following:
a. submission of an original final site plan on mylar, vellum, or paper to be retained by the
Town of Ithaca.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination, Meldrum 2 -Lot Subdivision, Troy Road.
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:42 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox - I think you know the drill, name and address, brief description and any
environmental issues that you are aware of.
61
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Joe Allen, 417 N Cayuga — I am the attorney representing the Meldrums, who are requesting
consideration of a subdivision. We are representing tonight the second half of the subdivision we
discussed earlier before this board. There are no environmental matters that are different than as
stated in the previous application.
Chairperson Wilcox - Questions with regard to the environmental issues only? Would someone like
to move the SEQR motion, please?
Board Member Conneman - I'll move it.
Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by George Conneman. Seconded by Larry Thayer. Any further
discussion? All those in favor please signal by saying aye.
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - Is there anyone opposed? No one is opposed. There are no abstentions. The
motion is passed.
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:43 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -067 - SEQR: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Meldrum 2-
Lot Subdivision, Troy Road & East King Road, Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26.
MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Larry Thayer.
WHEREAS:
1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed
two -lot subdivision located at Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
49 -1 -26, Residence District R -30. The proposal is to subdivide the 76.529 +/- acre lot into two
parcels of 7.156 +/- acres and 69.373 +/- acres. Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26 previously received
subdivision approval on May 21, 2002, to subdivide a 3.889 + 1- acre lot from the northern
portion of the parcel. William F. Meldrum and Betty Jane C. Meldrum, Owners; Joseph W.
Allen, Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively
determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision
Approval, and
3. The Planning Board on June 18, 2002, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part II prepared by
the Town Planning staff, a survey map entitled "Survey for William and Elizabeth Meldrum,
Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Scott Edsall, Williams and
Edsall Land Surveyors, dated April 18, 2002, and other application materials, and
101
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
4. The Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental
significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an
Environmental Impact Statement will be required.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox - Again, we are ahead of schedule. We will give you a chance in a second. I
don't want to get into the meeting time.
(The board talked amongst themselves while waiting for the public hearing)
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 142 Troy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26,
Residence District R -30. The proposal is to subdivide the 79.529 +/- acre parcel into two
parcels of 7.156 +/- acres and 69.373 +/- acres. William F. Meldrum and Betty Jane C. Meldrum,
Owners; Joseph W. Allen, Agent.
Chairperson Wilcox - Any questions of Mr. Allen at this point? There being none I will give the public
a chance to speak. Ladies and gentlemen this is a public hearing. If there is a member of the
audience who wishes to address the Planning Board this evening, we ask you to please step to the
microphone, give us your name and address and as always we will be very interested to hear what
you have to say this evening. Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:46 p.m.
Bill Goodhew, 674 Coddington Road — We still have an unresolved property line dispute. I've been
doing a lot legwork on this thing this last month and I must say I'm disappointed with answers from
town. I've always had my survey recorded properly. The Town agreed with Mr. Allen. I went down
and got the page and drawer number and attorney witness recorded survey in clerk's office. It was all
recorded there. I don't know why you couldn't find it. We still have unresolved property line dispute.
don't know how that will affect Planning Board's decision.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody else this evening? There being none, I will close the public hearing at
7:49 p.m. Mr. Barney, I guess we turn to you. You have in your possession a Xerox copy of Mr.
Goodhew's survey as was filed in the County Clerk's files.
Attorney Barney - (Comments not audible)
7
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Mr. Goodhew - (Comments not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - I will give you the chance to speak, but you have to come to the microphone.
Attorney Barney - It may have been recorded. It says it was recorded in 1994, but it was recorded at
a time when the name on it was not yours. If I were to look for the survey, I would be looking under
Mr. Goodhew's name. I suspect that it didn't turn up because it was not under your name. We're not
denying that it is there, but you indicated some fault on the Town ... (comments not audible). Having
said that, there are discrepancies on the boundaries. There is about a 26 -foot discrepancy along one
line. I really do not want to get into relative representations of surveyors here. (Comments not audible
about 2 minutes) In terms of the subdivision ... I don't think I have a problem with accepting the
subdivision map that was presented here as an accurate map. It could very well be that ... (comments
not audible) I would suggest that probably ... (comments not audible) I quite frankly don't know of any
reason to not approve it. Ultimately, it is between Mr. Goodhew and Mr. Meldrum.
Chairperson Wilcox - Between the lawyers. When I was looking at, and it is easier to see on the
larger version of Mr. Goodhews and I think you brought it up, I don't see that the survey has been
certified as correct to Mr. Goodhew. That strikes me ... in fact; it wasn't even certified to a previous
owner. That is something that I would look for. That there is a certification on it from the surveyor
usually to the owner of the property and sometimes to the bank or mortgage holder that the survey is
correct to the best of their knowledge. The other thing is, I went to the Office of Professions website,
which is a division of New York State Education Department. You can actually type in the person's
name for any license occupation in New York State. That wasn't my purpose because if there was
some question about the original survey and whether the gentleman was licensed or not, it was so
long ago that I didn't think it would show up. I found the following and I'm going to read it: What if my
neighbor's property survey line shows that their property line appears to be on my property? First,
verify the location of the property lines is based on a survey for you by a licensed land surveyor and
not one done for a former owner of the land. If it is one done for a former owner, you should have a
survey made. That is not legal advice, but it is from the New York State Department of Education
site. Then is says if you can't come to an agreement, then the lawyers will talk to each other that is
essentially what it says.
Board Member Thayer - Interesting.
Chairperson Wilcox - Interesting... yeah. It is interesting. What is the board's mind this evening?
Board Member Thayer - According to what John said, we shouldn't get involved.
Chairperson Wilcox - If we didn't have a property dispute, what would our reaction be to this
subdivision proposal I think is the way that we need to look at it.
Attorney Barney - The question is whether the discrepancy in the line is sufficient to turn down the
subdivision. (Comments not audible) You have a real, quite current survey done in the last month or
so. It would appear to be reputable surveys.
E:3
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Goodhew, would you like to make a comment or not. I will give you that
opportunity if you want to do it at the microphone.
Mr. Goodhew — I don't know what you are looking for on the certification.
Chairperson Wilcox — I am looking for, I can't read it on the small one. On this one, you will find it
hard to read. Here is says, "I hereby certify "... again, on this copy it is hard to read. This is where
the survey certifies to the owner possibly to the mortgagee that the survey is correct. We don't have
that on here. We have someone saying it is approved. We have a survey over here that doesn't list
his license number. So, judging upon that... Again, we are not here to pass judgment on that
surveyor or what.
Mr. Goodhew — To the best of my knowledge, when property transfers, the owner of that property has
a survey done. Before you come to the closing, you don't know that you are going to close.
Somebody proposing, who is going to the bank, does not normally provide the survey of the property
that they are proposing to buy. You have the survey provided for you, which is what I had done in
1994. 1 had done that previously with about a dozen properties that I bought. Then 1997,1
refinanced my property. That is recorded in my name on the files that you have with Town Hall. It
refers back to this as recertification in 1997.
Attorney Barney — Refinancing would be ... we wouldn't have anything to do with that.
Chairperson Wilcox - The County has that, not the Town.
Mr. Goodhew - But you went to the computer file to verify that I have this recorded.
Attorney Barney - We went to the computer files, I assume. I didn't do it so I don't know. I assume
that whomever did it went to find the index that relates to the map. The map with your name on it.
None exists. The only map that we have is...
Mr. Goodhew - I went down to the Clerk's office. The clerk provided me with a computer file. It does
have me listed in 1997 as this transferred in 1994 from David Carr. On the refinance, it goes back
through and puts me up forward.
Attorney Barney - I'm not arguing that you are the owner of the property. All I am saying is that a
question at the meeting was about the survey.
Mr. Goodhew - I'm just trying to clarify...
Attorney Barney - Excuse me. Let me finish. You had a survey done for you by TG Miller's office.
Mr. Goodhew - I did not have this survey in front of me. I was trying to recollect.
Attorney Barney - I understand, but that was the representation that you made at that time. As a
result of that representation, Mr. Allen and the Town went and looked through the index to if there
was a map there with your name on it. There wasn't. That is why initially we come up with it ... we
we
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
have it now. The problem is the map itself isn't certified. Its not certified to us. Since the time this
map was done, it is not even clear if the surveyor is the one who has the license. It says over here on
the left, "approved by... ". It was surveyed in 1985 and then resurveyed in 1994. It doesn't say by
whom.
Mr. Goodhew - How far back do your certifications go? When the certification process began?
Attorney Barney - The certification that you have here on this map was certified on April 13, 2002.
Mr. Goodhew - When did certification processes originate in the State of New York?
Attorney Barney - They would have been there in 1997.
Mr. Goodhew - This came forward from 1978. This is a map...
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't want to get into it. Debate doesn't solve anything.
Mr. Goodhew - It is not a debate. It is a clarification. I'm asking a question and I'm not getting an
answer.
Attorney Barney - I'm giving you an answer right now. By 1994, they had the certification process in
place. I do not recall whether they had it in 1985. They didn't have in 1978. By 1994, certification
was a fairly standard practice. It doesn't mean that it happened on every occasion. Generally it
happened. The problem we have is that we have a current survey with a current surveyor saying that
he certifies that this is the way the land lays out. Given today's modern... Given the fact that we have
a very current certification, a very current map using clearly much more accurate instruments than
were probably used in 1978... its not clear in my mind that anybody ever went out there and recertified
or resurveyed it since 1978. I'm inclined to take the modern ... (comments not audible) From the Town
Planning Board standpoint, they are being asked to accept this subdivision. Given the relative ages
of the two surveys and the certifications, there is no reason why they would deny ... (comments not
audible)
Mr. Goodhew - Okay. Who do I question about the tax ramifications of this is there is in fact this
discrepancies are real? They are representing that they've got 90some acres. The Town and County
had recorded that they have 88 acres. There will be discrepancy charges to them and discrepancy
charges to me on tax base. Who do I go to for that?
Attorney Barney - The Assessment office.
Mr. Goodhew - Thank you very much.
Chairperson Wilcox - Would someone like to move the motion or not? So moved by the chair.
Board Member Thayer - Second.
[D]
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by Larry Thayer. Any further discussion? All those in favor please
signal by saying aye?
Chairperson Wilcox, Board Member Conneman, Board Member Thayer, Board Member Howe - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody opposed? One opposed. Kevin Talty. There are no abstentions. The
motion is passed 4 to 1.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -068 - Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Meldrum 2 -Lot
Subdivision, Troy Road & East King Road, Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26.
MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Larry Thayer.
1. This action is Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed
two -lot subdivision located at Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
49 -1 -26, Residence District R -30. The proposal is to subdivide the 76.529 +/- acre lot into two
parcels of 7.156 +/- acres and 69.373 +/- acres. Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26 previously received
subdivision approval on May 21, 2002, to subdivide a 3.889 + 1- acre lot from the northern
portion of the parcel. William F. Meldrum and Betty Jane C. Meldrum, Owners; Joseph W.
Allen, Agent, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency
in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has on June 18, 2002, made a
negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as
adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part
II prepared by the Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board adjourned the Public Hearing held on May 21, 2002 insofar as it related to
Parcels 1 and 2, after a question was raised at the hearing relative to the accuracy of the
boundary line along the east side of Parcel 1 shown on the preliminary plat. The Planning
Board granted subdivision approval for Parcels 3, 4, and 5 only at the Public Hearing held on
May 21, 2002, and
4. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on June 18, 2002, has reviewed and accepted
as adequate a survey map entitled "Survey for William and Elizabeth Meldrum, Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Scott Edsall, Williams and Edsall Land
Surveyors, dated April 18, 2002, and other application materials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary
and Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Subdivision Checklists,
for Parcels 1 and 2, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will
11
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies
enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for Parcels
1 and 2 of the proposed five -lot subdivision at Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26, as shown on a survey map entitled "Survey for William and Elizabeth
Meldrum, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York State," prepared by Scott Edsall,
Williams and Edsall Land Surveyors, dated April 18, 2002, subject to the following conditions:
a. Submission of one mylar and three copies of the approved subdivision plat, signed and
sealed by the licensed surveyor who prepared the survey, for signing by the Planning
Board Chair prior to filing at the County Clerk's Office, such signing to be limited to
approval of Parcels 1 and 2, and
b. Any future driveways for Parcel 2 shall be located off of Troy Road in order to preserve the
large stream located on the south side of the parcel facing East King Road, subject to
obtaining curb -cut approval from the Tompkins County Department of Public Works.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED.
That the Planning Board finds that there is no current need for any parkland reservation created by
this proposed subdivision, and hereby waives the requirement for any parkland reservation, as long
as there is no further subdivision of the subject site. If lots are proposed to be subdivided from Parcel
1 in the future, then the Planning Board reserves the right to consider the reservation of parkland, or
fees in lieu thereof, based on the size of each of the individual parcels.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe.
NAYS: Talty.
The motion was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: SEQR Determination, Quick Cash Auction House, 635 Elmira Road.
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 8:03 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox - Randy, if I could have a name and address, professional address will do and
then a brief overview of what you are proposing this evening.
Randy Hall, 635 Elmira Road — I am the owner of Quick Cash Auction House.
Chairperson Wilcox - A brief description, please, of what you are proposing this evening.
Mr. Hall - Basically, most of us were here last time around. We are looking to get approval for the 4
storage trailers that I need for that business as well as 2 kiosks. They will be located on lot. Also for
12
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
a new door to be put in, in front of the building. The biggest issue was if trailers could stay where
they are.
Chairperson Wilcox — Environmental concerns that you are aware of?
Mr. Hall — None aware of whatsoever. It was mentioned in the SEQR. Right here it says that while
the site is located within a Unique Natural Area, the land to the southeast is located within the Cayuga
Inlet Flood Plain Unique Natural Area, UNA 147, it is not anticipated that this proposal would have
any impact on the neighboring UNA. That is the property that is behind the property that I own.
There is a steep bank and then the wetlands down below there.
Chairperson Wilcox — Questions of the applicant from the board with regard to the environmental
review?
Board — none.
Chairperson Wilcox — I think the one consideration is the view of the trailers as traveling north on rte
13 towards the city. Mike, you did point that out in the memo accompanying the short form.
Mr. Hall — I met briefly with Jon this afternoon. We were out on the property looking over the
situation. Jon had suggested that quite possibly...I hadn't thought about it because I didn't know it
would improve that looks that much, but Jon seemed to think that perhaps it might if the trailers were
setback further instead of facing perpendicular to the road, facing parallel to the road. If that were the
case, I could move them back further on the lot. It would take them a few yards deeper in to the lot.
Then down the road put a fence ... there is a fence there now that is somewhat deteriorated. It is one
of my next projects probably to renew the fence or put up a new one. If the fence did go across there,
say a wooden fence for example, it would help block the site of trailers. That is something that I
would be willing to work with you on.
Chairperson Wilcox - Any other environmental concerns at this point? Staff? Mike, you're all set?
Okay. Would someone like to move the SEQR motion? So moved by Rod Howe. Seconded by?
Board Member Conneman - I'll second.
Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by George Conneman. If there is no further discussion, all those in
favor please signal by saying aye.
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anyone opposed? There are no abstentions. The motion is passed.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 8:08 p.m.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -069 - SEQR, Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval, Quick Cash
Auction House, 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 35 -1 -21.
13
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by George Conneman.
1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed
modifications to the Quick Cash Auction House at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 35 -1 -21, Business District "C ". The proposed modifications include renovations of a
portion of the existing building for a retail shop, beauty salon, or offices, placing four storage
trailers on the rear of the site, and placing two display carts in the parking area near the road.
Randy Hall, Owner /Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively
determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval,
and
3. The Planning Board, on June 18, 2002, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by
Town Planning staff, plans entitled "Proposed Site Plan Modifications — Quick Cash Auction IF'
dated June 10, 2002, and other application material, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental
significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed, and, therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be
required.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the
proposed modifications to the Quick Cash Auction House at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 35 -1 -21, Business District "C ". The proposed modifications include
renovations of a portion of the existing building for a retail shop, beauty salon, or offices,
placing four storage trailers on the rear of the site, and placing two display carts in the
parking area near the road. Randy Hall, Owner /Applicant.
Chairperson Wilcox - Questions of the applicant with regard to site plan? I know that we are going to
have some discussion about the trailers. We can either do that now, or we can hold off until we hold
14
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
a public hearing. If there are no questions no, Randy, you may have a seat. I'm sure we'll want you
back up there at the microphone. This is a public hearing ladies and gentlemen, or sir as the case
maybe. I think you heard me before. If you will just give me your name and address and then tell us
what you came here tonight.
Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 8:08 p.m.
Raymond Foote, Secretary to Ithaca Veteran Volunteer Firemen, 638 Elmira Road — Read from a
prepared statement. See Attachment #1.
Chairperson Wilcox - Any questions at this point?
Board Member Thayer — Where on east side would you like the trailers? Would you be willing to
have the trailers...?
Mr. Foote — On the other side of the building. Not on that side there. We are trying to get name on
national registrar for a museum. Our name will be published all over the United States and in Europe.
We have people coming from California and all over the Midwest to see our firematic.
Board Member Thayer - I remember when we approved that.
Board Member Howe — Is it right next door ... the building that we are talking about?
Attorney Barney — It's across the street...
Chairperson Wilcox - Any other questions at this point?
Mr. Foote - Back when we first bought the property out there on Elmira Road, there were trailers on
the other side where I showed this gentleman here, before.
Chairperson Wilcox - Do you know what business was there at the time? Was that Maguire
Gardens?
Mr. Foote - I think it was Lyke New Furniture.
Attorney Barney - What lies immediately to the north? If they were relocating trailers...?
Board Member Talty - There ARe 4 maple trees behind there.
Attorney Barney - Who owns or what is the property next north that would then be looking at the
trailers?
Board Member Talty - Good point.
Mr. Hall - A residence.
15
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Attorney Barney - You have an existing apartment on your property, right? Now you go across the
boundary line to the property next north. What is there?
Mr. Hall — Looking at this site plan drawing here, you see where the apartment itself is. To my left of
that apartment is where residence is. Then of course in front of it is Route 13. Then behind it is
partial drive and partial lawn and back beyond that is the nature preserve.
Attorney Barney — Do you know approximately how far north?
Mr. Hall - There is a fence line down through there. I think it is probably 20 or 30 yards away.
Chairperson Wilcox — 60 to 90 feet.
Mr. Hall - I would say so.
Board Member Thayer — It doesn't look like there is enough room for the trailers back there without
going into the side yard setback unless the trees are disturbed.
Chairperson Wilcox — Or the existing parking lot is enlarged.
Board Member Thayer - It still would be beyond the setback limits if you put the trailers there.
Chairperson Wilcox - It would be nice if we had a nice big one up someplace where we could all point
to. Could the four of them fit?
Board Member Thayer - They would, but you are taking the trees down.
Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah, I was just looking at the ones back here on the hill.
Board Member Thayer — The glass building that is attached to your building was a greenhouse type
thing.
Mr. Hall - It was plastic. It is now galvanized.
Board Member Thayer - Oh, you have changed it to galvanize. So that is an important part of your
storage or business?
Mr. Hall - Absolutely.
Board Member Thayer - It looked temporary the last time I saw it.
Mr. Hall - It definitely is not temporary now.
Board Member Thayer - You have improved that then.
Mr. Hall — That space is now filled with major appliances that we currently sell out of there now.
101
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Ooh, they can't sell major appliances, can they.
Board Member Thayer - I have no objection.
Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Kanter, good evening.
Mr. Kanter — Good to be back. This might help a little bit. What I did after looking at the site today
because I hadn't seen it in a while. After talking with Randy at the site, I just kind of did a little cutting
and pasting to see what were possible alternative locations. What I did was that I split them. There is
no apparent reason and I asked Randy this, why all 4 trailers had to be together. If you want to take
a look at two different possibilities, it is possible that two might fit in that area.
Chairperson Wilcox - Randy have you seen these?
Mr. Hall - Jon explained to me. This is basically what he had explained to me I believe.
Mr. Kanter - Well, there may not be room for 4 trailers on that northeastern part of the property, it
looks like you could possibly get two of them in there, which is accessible off the gravel parking lot.
Both of the alternates show two of the trailers just on the south side of the building next to that tree. It
looks like they would be screened a lot better there than the current location.
Mr. Hall - I didn't know exactly that is where you meant when you said that, but you are absolutely
right. With that big tree, that tree is elevated on an elevated area. They did kind of a nice job there
where they built that elevated area for it. So it does lift that tree up. If two of those trailers were back
in there, I think I would have to ... its not a big deal because it has to come down anyways...I would
probably have to take that fence down to get them in there. That would definitely screen those
trailers from the ... or at least 90 percent of it from the Vet's Firemen building.
Mr. Kanter - Since I wasn't sure about the two on the northeastern part of the property, the alternative
I shows the other two trailers at the south corner of the property. That will be set well back more so
than they are now. I am not quite sure what the visibility from the Vet Firemen's building would be
from there. Certainly, there is a lot more screening from Elmira Road. Also, just the way the angles
of the configurations would make them less conspicuous. Anyway, those were just two possibilities.
Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you, Jon.
Board Member Howe — Plus all along haven't we been talking about these being temporary no matter
where.
Chairperson Wilcox - One of the issues ... when I reviewed the minutes of when you were here in
February, I believe you mentioned that they were temporary.
Mr. Hall - Yeah. They are temporary. I said back then and I'll say it again now, as soon as I can
afford to put a building on that lot I will do so. Right now capital restraints are restraining me from
doing that for a few years. At the very first chance I get, in order to enhance my business and to
improve the value of the property, I do plan on putting a large building up there.
17
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - In reviewing the minutes from February 19th of this year, many members spoke
about a year maximum of having those trailers. At least one member talked about a year from
Tuesday, February 19th. We are already 4 months from February 19th to today.
Board Member Thayer — Our resolution amends that.
Chairperson Wilcox - Well, at least the draft one that we have been given.
Board Member Thayer - So the alternative I and II would be a temporary alternative. Is that the way
we should read this, Jon?
Mr. Kanter — Yes. That is what my thinking was, however you want to define temporary.
Chairperson Wilcox - Someone brought up the fact that we were going to grant Mr. Hall up to a year,
and then he could come back in 9 months, the 3 months before the year is up. One of the things we
don't want is for someone to come back for an extension at the last minute. That would sort of help
and the applicant to know that something was proceeding. Having said that, let me get the
discussion going by saying on paper, alternative II looks the best.
Board Member Conneman - Which is 11?
Chairperson Wilcox - Two is this one. I'm sorry. They are labeled at the top. I say that, not being on
Elmira Road and looking at visibility, but you can look at the trees. You can look at the house. Also,
this one, which is alternative I may be a bit of a hardship putting the trailers that far away from the
building.
Board Member Thayer - Plus they are visible there.
Mr. Hall - May I say something?
Chairperson Wilcox - Go ahead.
Mr. Hall - First of all, on the one being I and II, probably I is a much better proposal for our business.
Being that there is room in that big lot for trucks to back up to those trailers to load and unload where
in the other side of the building it is somewhat restricted. The other thing I take into consideration as
a landlord is that I would be sticking those trailers in my tenant's back yard basically as well as plain
view site of my neighbor's yard, which I've had a very good relationship with that neighbor. If it comes
down to it, I would appreciate it if you would heavily consider proposal I. Also, I would be willing to as
soon as I could afford to do some type of screening. Whether I could plant some good size trees
around it or possibly a fence. The other thing that you were just discussing there for a minute about
the one -year limitation thing, I appreciate it if you could do that. What I would like to ask though,
rather than stand here and say a year is fine and all that; I would really like you to consider two years.
Two years would give me ample enough time to build some funds to do something different with this
storage space. Right now I am a little under the gun financially because when I bought the property I
had to set it up on two big balloon payments the first two years. I have made the one, but I have to
IFQ
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
make that second one. I am actually already late on it and it is several thousand dollars. That is a
financial restraint that I have to face along with some other ones. That is why 12 months would be a
little too short for me.
Board Member Conneman - What I was going to ask was that under II, would these be viewed from
this other house? The answer is yes. Is that right?
Mr. Hall - Yes, sir, they would.
Board Member Thayer - The trees wouldn't screen it? It looks like the trees would screen it from the
apartment, too, but that's not the case?
Mr. Hall - Well, I think here they have showed ... (comments not audible)
Board Member Thayer - You can't get in there from the parking lot to back into those?
Mr. Hall - I can go up in through here and then it starts to tighten up a bit with trees and stuff there.
Board Member Thayer - What about shielding from the apartment as far as the visual concern?
Mr. Hall - That is my concern.
Board Member Thayer - Those trees don't do that?
Mr. Hall - Ya know what, their not really trees. I guess there are one or two trees in there. They are
actually kind of big bushes.
Board Member Thayer - It appears that they are big enough to shade the trailers.
Mr. Kanter - The trees certainly wouldn't restrict face line of the trees. In fact, they may not provide all
that much screening either. There might be room in there to plant...
Chairperson Wilcox - I need to do one thing. Carrie has reminded me that I haven't closed the public
hearing. So I need to do that officially at 8:30 p.m.
Board Member Thayer - Could we ask Mr. Foote if he would be happy with either of these
alternatives?
Chairperson Wilcox - Be my guest.
Board Member Thayer - How about that?
Mr. Foote — From what I can gather from ... our main concern is that you can see them from the road
and our property. That is our main concern. We don't want to see a 20 -foot fence up in the air to
hide them.
Wel
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Thayer - How about the alternatives? Is there either one of those that would be
satisfactory to you?
Mr. Foote - Well, over here on the back side it says 15 parking spaces with the other two trailers are
behind them.
Board Member Thayer - That is alternative 11.
Mr. Foote - You couldn't put those two trailers in there?
Board Member Thayer - That is what we are asking you. If you would be satisfied if they were there.
Mr. Foote - That is where I originally wanted them to go. That would be on the other side of the
building. All 4 trailers on the other side of the building.
Board Member Thayer - Well, they have two on one side and two on the other as you can see in
alternative 11. Can you still see them from your property?
Mr. Foote - Sure.
Board Member Thayer - All 4 or just the 2.
Mr. Foote - We can see all 4 of them right now.
Chairperson Wilcox - No. Hear each other.
Board Member Conneman - With this diagram, could you see those from your property?
Chairperson Wilcox - Alternative 11.
Mr. Foote - These trailers here are all right. These we will.
Board Member Conneman - Suppose those were moved on the other side like in this diagram?
Board Member Thayer - In other words, would these two bother you in that location?
Mr. Foote - Probably no so much as they do right now.
Board Member Thayer - Oh, really.
Board Member Talty - Can we have an alternative III, a combination of both? I think what I'm hearing
there is if we look at alternative 11, lets say number 1 and number 2...1 mark them on my sheet.
Mr. Kanter - By the way, if anyone wants to put down the cookie cutter cut -outs that I used to try any
ideas of your own...
11]
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Talty - Why don't we combine these together? Leave those two there and put these
two here? Take these two and move them over, blend these two together. There are no more in the
middle.
Board Member Conneman - It would look like that right.
Chairperson Wilcox - Hold on. I want to make sure that we don't get into let's make a deal. I want to
make sure that everyone understands the following. I think we all understand that Mr. Hall has a
business and we don't want to necessarily make it more difficult for him to run his business. On the
other hand, I think this board, at least from those of you who were here in February realize the fact
that these trailers on unsightly. The board could say that the trailers go and your responsibility is to
get rid of them or hire a lawyer. The board seems willing to allow you to keep the trailers. It doesn't
mean that Mr. Foote is going to get exactly what he wants either. I admire the board, I admire Mr.
Foote and I admire Mr. Hall for trying to work this through because it is a small group we can see if
we can work through this and see if we can come with something that is comfortable to the board
while at the same time allows Mr. Hall to run his business, gives Mr. Foote something as much as we
can and still gets rid of these trailers in some period of time.
Board Member Conneman - Part of the other issue is the Kiosks...
Board Member Thayer - Which we haven't got to yet.
Chairperson Wilcox - Can we stay with the trailers?
Board Member Conneman - I just don't want to...
Chairperson Wilcox - We won't forget the Kiosks.
Board Member Conneman - So I guess you are asking the question of if this arrangement was done
and there was some plan to remove the trailers in some period of time.
Mr. Foote - I think that would be satisfactory.
Chairperson Wilcox - Are you all done talking, Kevin?
Board Member Talty - Yes.
Mr. Hall - I think actually keeping them beyond there would serve them better...I think it would be
better off with this one staying behind the trees. That tree is pretty big.
(Comments not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - I am sure we will discuss over the next few minutes how long those trailers will
be there.
Mr. Foote - Our objective is not to take hurt.
21
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - We agree that they are unsightly and I will speak for myself and don't want them
there. I think collectively that the board has said in a previous meeting that they are unsightly and we
don't want them there. It is unfortunate that they got placed there without the necessary approvals.
We would, just like we are working with you, we would like to work with Mr. Hall to see if we could
come up with something that is reasonable for all parties.
Mr. Foote - (Comments not audible)
Attorney Barney - (Comments not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - He has already mentioned that the two on the east side are a problem in terms
of getting them back there and I suspect getting access to them.
Board Member Thayer - He also said it would be very visible from the house next door.
Mr. Hall - I don't think it would be too awful difficult to get them back there. I think that we can get
them back there. I think that it makes it a little more difficult for the cargo trucks to swing around in
there and get in and out. I'm not saying that it can't be done, but I'm just saying that it is a hardship. I
think that back to what that gentleman over there said, I think it was Mr. Thayer, that was a little bit of
my concern. I've had a real pleasant relationship with my neighbor to that side of the building. It is
not only sitting in my tenant's backyard, but now they are going to be able to see from their ... I believe
that they use the back of their property quite a bit there.
Chairperson Wilcox - I am not so worried about your tenant given that there is a retail operation going
on right next -door.
Mr. Hall - I was more concerned about the neighbors.
Board Member Thayer - Exactly.
Chairperson Wilcox - The one thing we do know is that you said your neighbor was, I believe you said
20 to 30 yards.
Mr. Hall - It was a guestimate.
Chairperson Wilcox - These trailers themselves would be roughly 40, 50 maybe even 60 feet from the
property line.
Board Member Thayer - I thought you said there was a lot of shrubbery there. It appears to be a lot of
shrubbery.
Attorney Barney - How frequently do you access the trailers?
Mr. Hall - Right now it is fairly limited. As we get that place open, we would frequent them a lot more.
Right now we did a furniture store and we pulled a lot of that out recently. Now it is being sold back
22
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
up with the stuff that ... (comments not audible) we are currently working stuff off of the trailers onto
the floor. Then as loads come in that is our place to put it until it sells off the shelves.
Attorney Barney - How frequently would say that ... (comments not audible)?
Mr. Hall - I would say currently, probably it maybe ... on the average of once or twice a week, but there
has been a couple of weeks last month that we were there three or four times a week.
Chairperson Wilcox - And these are your trucks?
Mr. Hall - Our trucks ... yeah. I hope we are not confusing the issue. The trailers are stationary, but
our trucks are going back and forth to load stuff in them.
Attorney Barney - The trucks that you use are what kind of trucks?
Mr. Hall - Actually, I have several. They are cargo trucks. They are box trucks. Actually, they call
them box vans.
Chairperson Wilcox - I think they are similar to some of your smaller delivery vehicles.
Board Member Thayer - I haven't seen them, but it sounds like it.
Mr. Hall - Is that Thayer Appliance trucks? Yeah.
Chairperson Wilcox - There was a picture ... the minutes referenced a picture. There was one parked
next to the four trailers in the picture we had in February.
Board Member Thayer - There was. It was a cargo van.
Chairperson Wilcox - They must be 12 or 15 feet deep in terms of...
Mr. Hall - Ten, 14, 16 and 25.
Chairperson Wilcox - You've heard of Thayer Appliance?
Mr. Hall - I have a good friend that works there.
Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Thayer.
Board Member Thayer - I'm not the Mr. Thayer at Thayer Appliance. My son is.
Mr. Kanter - It is a U -Haul type truck.
Chairperson Wilcox - So we have seem to have come to an alternative III, which would put two
trailers on the eastern side of the property and two in the ... on the far western side of the property.
23
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Howe - I actually like alternative I still. Partly, I don't know how often you would see
cars parked in that existing parking spot on the northeast side. Would they be in the way when you're
trying to get trucks delivering material in and out?
Mr. Hall - On the northeast side?
Board Member Howe - Would you expect cars to be parked in that parking lot at times?
Mr. Hall - Yeah, I would anticipate the tenant's car or their company's car in there. Then the other ... I
guess where it says existing parking right here is where there is some space allocated for whatever
business would go where I want to put that front door to that walkway. So there would be cars in that
area right there.
Board Member Howe - Would people be going back and forth more in that area than where the trucks
would be on the other side? I think part of it is also just thinking about where you have them ... you
want to reduce the idea of hitting people or doing property damage. I guess that I why I like
alternative I. There is better access to the ... and maybe it is a different time frame for the trucks that
stay behind the tree versus the trucks that stay off in the kitty- corner.
Board Member Thayer - I think that what you are saying is if that parking lot was full of cars, could
you still access the trailers?
Mr. Hall - If they parked properly, yes... probably so.
Board Member Thayer - You could get in there then?
Mr. Hall - Yeah, I think so.
Chairperson Wilcox - Can we get a consensus here?
Board Member Thayer - Nope.
Chairperson Wilcox - I've got to see if we do. Rod, right now you like alternative I.
Board Member Howe - Correct.
Board Member Thayer - I would say that, too, just strictly because the other ones are so visible to the
house next door.
Chairperson Wilcox - You like alternative I?
Board Member Thayer - Yeah.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody else? One seems to be the nod here. You can think whatever you
want.
24
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Talty - Exactly. One question though, looking at this picture, you see where I and II
is ... the one that is visible for your neighbors, could they be put right there?
Mr. Hall - No.
Board Member Talty - They can't?
Mr. Hall - I don't think I could back them up in there.
Board Member Talty - It would be right back in there.
Mr. Hall - Yeah, I know exactly where you are talking about. Right in there is a ... (not audible).
Board Member Talty - Okay. So it is not geographically possible. Okay. No more questions.
Chairperson Wilcox - Can we move onto the Kiosks?
Board Member Conneman - I would like Randy to describe them to us and tell us why they have to be
there
Mr. Hall - The Kiosks are 18 or 20 feet long by 8 feet wide. At one time they were used as a produce
type stand or cart. I have completely redone those. I hired a contractor to go in and build a rack
system inside of there so that I actually have shelves now that are adjustable. Also, I did some safety
factors built into them where roof on these Kiosks. The walls come up all the way around the cart,
except for the end. One end actually has a plateau that fold down. On the sides of the cart, there are
three doors on each side. Each three doors prop up. Originally, I didn't feel it was very safe the way
it was. It was propped up with poles. It seemed to me that someone could bump into a pole and the
lid could come down and hit them or the wind could catch it or something like that. So a very
ingenious carpenter that I was introduced to built a very nice system in there that actually has these
folding brackets. So they fold down flush when the door is shut. When they are up, they come down
and catch the studs then they lock into the studs so that the roof is stable and cannot blow with the
wind. It eliminates the pole. It is really a quite nice concept that he came up with for me. They are
on hinges. So what you have really is a shaded area to walk around the Kiosks to shop for the
antiques and stuff. The idea is that we would like to have those available to us to draw business into
the business. We feel that those Kiosks ... we don't plan on junking them up. I think Jon was down
there today. I already had some flower... hanging on them. We repainted them. When I first bought
them they had a little bit of a circus affect to them. They were red and white stripes kind of type thing.
I didn't think they were very attractive either. So I did hire a painter to come in and repaint those. He
painted them a solid color and then trimmed out the edges in red. I feel as though they are
tremendously more attractive now than they were. I think they will be very attractive once I am able
to stock them with the proper merchandise.
Board Member Thayer - Are they on wheels?
Mr. Hall - Yes, they are.
25
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Conneman - What kind of merchandise?
Mr. Hall - I want to put antiques on them.
Board Member Howe - Would you see them out just during the summer much or how much of the
year?
Mr. Hall - I'd like to do it year round if I can.
Board Member Conneman - Antique what, Randy? Antiques mean a lot of things to me. Are they
antique lamps? Are they antique bottles? Are they antique...?
Mr. Hall - That is a good question. I wouldn't be able to display furniture on them because of the size
of them and stuff. It would probably be a lot of antique glassware. Primarily vases and things of that
nature. Maybe even antique tools or just basically anything that is collectable or old.
Board Member Conneman - Jonathan, I have a question. Do we have any other comparable kind of
display in Kiosks type things any place in the Town of Ithaca?
Mr. Kanter - I can't think of any. The reason we don't have them is really because they are not
permitted in a business zone. Anyone who is doing it presumably would have to get a variance. We
are actually thinking about changing that in our proposed zoning by allowing outdoor displays in
certain type of businesses. We actually went down through the list of businesses and tried to pick out
the ones that would be more typical of having a display. In fact, the one I think we did approve that
hasn't been built is Monkemeyer Garden Center up on Danby and East King Road where he showed
some outside displays. It was approved as part of the site plan. Then it went to the Zoning Board of
Appeals and it was approved. It hasn't gotten built yet. That is the only one that I can think of that we
have actually authorized.
Board Member Conneman - So it is currently illegal then.
Mr. Kanter -Yes.
Chairperson Wilcox - How would these Kiosks operate in the winter? I can't think of people pulling
into the parking lot, getting out of their car and then walking around the Kiosks and looking at the
materials or the items that are for display in the middle of the winter unless we have a wonderful 50-
degree day. The reason I say that is I am worried about the Kiosks but I am also concerned about
whether it is a way to advertise the location without actually having a sign. The items for sale on the
Kiosks are there to get people to come into the store. Therefore, it acts as a sign. Something to
bring people in without it actually being a sign.
Mr. Hall - The lot will be kept cleared all winter long just as it was this past winter. I had hired a
contractor to do that as well. Currently, our business right now where we are located now, we have a
tremendous amount of outdoor products. That product gets shopped all year long. In the winter, in
the summer, what have you. So, my experience has been if you got a decent product like that they
will stop and look at it. They will shop it. No, they probably are not going to spend as much time
1401
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
shopping around the cart on a bitter cold day as they would in the summer time. They will definitely
stop and look and hopefully buy something off of it. Then come on inside the store where they are
going to be able to ... (not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody else?
Board Member Conneman - Does Mr. Foote want to make a comment?
Chairperson Wilcox - I know he wants to make a comment. I will give him a chance. I just want to
get through all the items if I can.
Board Member Thayer - I would hate to create a farmer's market type atmosphere. I'm not really in
favor of them.
Board Member Howe - I don't have a problem with them.
Chairperson Wilcox - We're going to have fun crafting this one, aren't we?
Board Member Conneman - I don't think they are particularly pretty. I don't think they are the types of
things that make the Elmira Road very pretty.
Chairperson Wilcox - There was some concern about rubbernecking of drivers on Route 13.
Board Member Thayer - If they are valuable antiques, I would think that inside would be a better place
for them anyway.
Board Member Conneman - Or in this new building ... (not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - We're going to have fun here crafting a resolution. Any issue with the door?
don't think there is an issue with the door. One thing that I wanted to bring up is there was mention of
the fact that there are no auctions going on at the present time, but you couldn't state that there would
not be auctions in the future. In fact, the name of the place is Quick Cash Auction. I looked at the
site and I don't think it has the parking to support auctions based upon what I am used to in terms of
household goods being auctioned off. The parking spaces total...
Board Member Thayer - Twenty on one side and...
Chairperson Wilcox - Nine on the other. Well, one document says six and the other one says nine.
Lets say there are 29 spaces. I don't think it is enough to hold an auction.
(Male Voice) - Excuse me.
Chairperson Wilcox - Please, I will give you your opportunity. So I was thinking about putting in
something that says there should be no auctions at this particular site.
27
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Mr. Hall - The number of spaces that you are counting, you are counting spaces that George Frantz
put on the site plan as paved area. Jon was out there today. There is a huge ... 2.2 acres. Most of it
is parking. That is on the right hand side of the building. There is a tremendous amount of room for
cars at an auction in that area. Just to put it in to perspective, there is probably more parking there
than the Vet's have across the street for bingo. I don't think that would be fair to put that limitation on
it.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't see any notation of those parking spaces on this diagram.
Mr. Hall - I talked to George about that when he drew the diagram. He gave me some kind of
explanation of why he set it up the way he did. That was one of the things that I did point out to
George, that gee, George, there is a tremendous amount of room over here. As a matter of fact,
where your proposal I there where the trailers are, this whole area is all parking. It is all mowed. It is
all gravel. There is just grass grown up through it. It is all solid. It is not muddy. What you have here
in parking spaces, Mr. Chairman, is the actual paved area. My point is that if indeed I did want to do
something of that extent that I would have plenty of parking to do that.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't know that for a fact. Maybe there is more room there, but I don't
know ... what I am concerned is that cars will be parked on the Elmira Road, which will block the view
of oncoming traffic. I am concerned about an auction and the inability for us to predict how many
people will show up whether it is 20, 40 or 50 or 100 cars. Unless I personally see something that
indicates the number of spaces total that are there... parking spaces don't have to be lined
necessarily. They could be shown on a site plan. The other thing is that you generally don't get as
many parking spaces in an area when they are not lined. People do not park as close together for
example. You lose some of the parking capacity.
Board Member Thayer - Even if there is a 100, is that enough?
Chairperson Wilcox - Who knows. Any thing else that we haven't covered? I'm not sure that we've
come to an agreement on anything, but we'll see what we can do on that part.
Board Member Conneman - I think the other thing is that we agreed there would be some limit as to
when these trailers...
Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you very much. Length? How long will the trailers stay? In February,
the consensus was a year. We are now four months after that.
Board Member Thayer - I would agree with the resolution.
Chairperson Wilcox - The draft resolution says one year.
Board Member Conneman - The 18th of June 2003.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody want to offer a different length of time shorter or longer?
N:3
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Conneman - I would also like to say that in 9 months Mr. Hall come in front of us with
some sort of ... (not audible)
Board Member Talty - On the coat tails of what George has said because I was going to say the
same thing. If you come in front of us ... say the time limit is 12 months and you come in front of the
board in the 9t" month and you have a plan of attack I would like to recommend that we could extend
it if there is a plan of attack or maybe that particular time limit of 12 months wouldn't fit into his
strategic plan and he would need a couple extra months. I would not be opposed to that as long as
the plan comes prior to that 12 month time.
Attorney Barney - (Comments not audible)
Mr. Kanter - The office trailer at Wilson Lab originally?
Board Member Talty - Exactly.
Attorney Barney - Five years and the board extended it...
Mr. Kanter - One 5 year period and then another 3 years until the new parking lot was constructed.
Attorney Barney - I am not suggestion 8 years, but ... (not audible)
Chairperson Wilcox - How long have they already been there?
Mr. Hall - Not that much longer before I was here the first time I believe. I think that they just got put
in there not too much longer...
Chairperson Wilcox - The problem is if we go a long time then we want start wanting to talk about
screening of some sort whether that is trees or something else.
Board Member Howe - Maybe one solution is the one year for those closest to the building and two
years for those that are farther out in the corner.
Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Troy didn't have a problem with it.
Attorney Barney - Mr. Troy and I occasionally disagree. I don't know if Mr. Hall made his point...
Chairperson Wilcox - Well, no, but he certainly made his point tonight that he is looking at two years
down the road. Two years down the road, and then I want evergreen trees or something.
Board Member Talty - For the two in the corner?
Chairperson Wilcox - No. Just in general to screen. The two in the corner are probably okay. I don't
want him to spend the money to put up evergreen trees and then...
Board Member Talty - I think that that is a waste.
•'7
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Or a fence. That is why a year sounded reasonable.
Attorney Barney - (Comments not audible)
Board Member Conneman - It is still the way that you come into Ithaca. The trailers are not very
attractive.
Attorney Barney - You moved the trailers from where they were before. Plus, if you want to talk about
the attractive things coming into Ithaca, what about the bridge you approve to put across Route 13.
Board Member Talty - I voted against that.
Chairperson Wilcox - Wait a minute. Lets not go there.
Board Member Talty - The bridge to nowhere.
Ms. Whitmore - I sometimes come through Ithaca. I have never seen the site.
Board Member Thayer - There is so much traffic there.
Ms. Whitmore - I have never seen it coming in or out of there. Unless you are looking for it, you don't
really see it.
Board Member Thayer - So a Kiosks wouldn't stop you either, would it?
Ms. Whitmore - No. I've never seen the trailers.
Board Member Conneman - That is not true of all members of our family.
Chairperson Wilcox - Do you have any other comments at this point?
Mr. Hall - Like I say, I would like to try to work with you to solve the problem. I appreciate the time
you have given me tonight. The trailers are definitely something that I need down there. I would like
you to consider a longer period of time than a year because ... just because of the financial restraints.
The suggestion that this gentleman made over here, Talty, that maybe in a year's time or so I can see
a little light at the end of the tunnel where I can say okay, this is the size of the building that I would
like to put in here. This is probably the company I'm going to work with to put it in here. This is the
time period in which I'm probably going to have a down payment for that building and maybe go that
route or something of that nature. I came in here with a two year... thinking that you guys were
looking at 9 months or a year. The truth of the matter is, financially and everything, I mean I am still a
new business. It is going to take me a couple of years to build up the cash flow to do the things I
want to do. I take Mr. Foote's concerns not lightly. I don't think they look the greatest there either,
Mr. Foote. I think you would agree that since I've owned the property, the property looks 100 percent
better than it did a few years ago. The landscaping that has been done. Some dead trees removed
9111
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
as well as keeping it mowed and plowed and painted and flowers around it and everything definitely
has improved the sights of that property of 100 percent.
Chairperson Wilcox - Do you have any final comments?
Mr. Foote - The Vet Firemen's doesn't want to put a hardship on Randy Hall. We would like to see
those carts not be parked down by the road and left there from now to eternity. I just wanted to let
everyone know that we don't want to cause a hardship. We will work with the board and with Randy.
Chairperson Wilcox - Okay. Sit tight. We are now going to try to craft a resolution. Any other
comments from staff? Mr. Kanter?
Mr. Kanter - Maybe another possibility in drafting up a temporary type of condition... since we are not
exactly sure what any of these variations will look like from the Vet Firemen's building, one possibility
would be to have the applicant return to the board in 6 months and revisit the question of those
locations. They are not permanent buildings. They don't have a foundation. It may not be totally
easy to move them, but if for some reason when the applicant came back in 6 months or whatever
time, it became obvious there were still problems with visibility or aesthetics, that would give the
board the opportunity to re- address it at that point. Just another variation of a temporary condition.
I think either alternative is going to have fewer impacts than the current situation. All of them have
some visibility.
Chairperson Wilcox - Would someone like to move the draft resolution as written?
Board Member Conneman - Why don't we draft one?
Chairperson Wilcox - You're going to make it difficult on me, aren't you?
Board Member Conneman - I think it makes a much better process.
Chairperson Wilcox - Okay.
Attorney Barney - I would suggest a new "a ", modification of site plan with the configuration shown on
the revised plan entitled "Trailer Locations Alternate I" by July 18, 2002. Then change the original "a"
to "b" and then "b" to "c ". I would recommend that you ... another six months.
Chairperson Wilcox - Which would be 18 months.
Attorney Barney - I can't get a read on what your feeling is in respect to the Kiosks.
Board Member Howe - If anything, that is the one that I can see coming back and revising in 6
months to see how the Kiosks works.
Chairperson Wilcox - Lets get a read on the Kiosks. I've got a couple of people who have already
said they don't like them.
31
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Thayer - I said that.
Board Member Talty - Are these permanent? I understand what I'm looking at here, but when you sit
them down, is that it because that was the concern.
Mr. Hall - No. They can be moved.
Board Member Talty - Is that your intention? To bring them back and forth?
Mr. Hall - It's not, but if it would help the situation I could probably do that. It would probably make it a
heck of a lot easier if I had a 4- wheeler or something like that because they have a hitch on them. If
we were able to get something like that or maybe even a garden tractor. At the end of the business
day or something, back them back out. George has situated the carts in a different area on the site
plan so that they wouldn't be a traffic hazards. If they felt those were still unsightly being out into the
lot, I could like I said, make some type of arrangement. If it meant doing that and being able to use
that as a tool to build my business, then yes I would do that. To answer your question, they are on
wheels and yes they do have a hitch to them.
Board Member Conneman - When you build the building, will they disappear? The Kiosks'?
Mr. Hall - Yeah. I would say so. I wanted to comment because you made a nice comment about the
building. The idea of the building that I had would have an awning coming off of it so that it could
display and could show stuff so that things could be seen from the windows or the shelves versus the
Kiosks, absolutely.
Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you, Mr. Conneman. I think that solves our problem. I was concerned
that we weren't going to get a consensus here. I think what George has just said is that if we put a
time limitation on the Kiosks as well...
Board Member Conneman - I would think Randy would want a building that displayed his antiques.
You build that business and then you have antiques.
Chairperson Wilcox - So are we comfortable with the same time limit on the two Kiosks as on the
storage trailers?
Board Member Conneman - What was the date that John put on it?
Chairperson Wilcox - He just mentioned an 18 month date, which is December 18, 2003. That is the
date that we have right now. We can still change it.
Board Member Talty - It is a meet you halfway type of thing.
Board Member Conneman - Does the resolution say that he will come back to us?
Chairperson Wilcox - We're getting there. I brought up the issue of auctions.
32
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Talty - I don't have an issue with it. This is the business that he's in.
Chairperson Wilcox - Rod doesn't have an issue.
Board Member Thayer - I don't.
Board Member Conneman - What are the rules about parking along Elmira Road? Is that illegal?
Attorney Barney - It probably is not illegal.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't have any support there on that one right now.
Board Member Thayer - How often do you think you will have an auction, Randy?
Mr. Hall - I'm not really sure that I will. It wouldn't be that often. There have been several auctions on
that property in the past when Lyke New had the property. They held one about every 6 or 3 months
or somewhere around there. I just can't believe that parking would be a problem to be honest with
you.
Board Member Conneman - If the purpose of the auction is to sort of bring down your inventory...?
Mr. Hall - Sometimes it is. Right now I am over inventoried quite a bit. Yeah, that is what happens in
this business. Sometimes it is feast or famine. There could be several estate calls that we have to
make or liquidation of businesses. We have liquidated some of the CFCU banks and some hotels.
When that happens, I guess I don't have any place to put it then I am probably going to have to have
an auction.
Chairperson Wilcox - I'll withdraw that. I don't have the support.
Board Member Talty - On the Kiosks, I'm not a big fan of diagonals, by the way. If you straighten
them out so that they are running the same direction as Elmira Road, I guess that is what I want to
say. Currently the Kiosks are diagonally placed, they are at a 45- degree angle. I would much prefer
to have them run parallel to Elmira Road. Ultimately, you are not going to be able to see what most
of the items are on the inside of the Kiosks anyway, but you will understand that they are there and
you are going to have to get out of your car and go up and visit them anyway. My concern is the
concern of this board. How will they look along the road? I think if they are side by side they will look
a lot better than angled at 45 degrees away from each other. I could be mistaken.
Board Member Thayer - I don't have a problem either way.
Board Member Howe - I like the 45- degree angle.
Board Member Conneman - At some point I would like to ask Mr. Foote if these things...
Chairperson Wilcox - Can we craft a resolution right now?
Ky.3
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Conneman - Mr. Foote came and he made some objections.
Chairperson Wilcox - I agree, but I would at least like to craft a resolution. I will be glad to give them
one more chance to speak.
Board Member Thayer - We're getting there.
Chairperson Wilcox - We're getting there. Position of the Kiosks?
Board Member Howe - I don't feel strongly one way or the other.
Chairperson Wilcox - Does anyone feel strongly either way other than Kevin.
Board Member Thayer - No. I don't.
Board Member Conneman - I think it is a good idea, but I don't feel strongly.
Chairperson Wilcox - So...
Board Member Talty - Its all fun and games until you come back and you go, "yaw know, Kevin, you
were right ". That's all I want to say.
Chairperson Wilcox - Then no one else cares. So let's reorient the Kiosks so that they are parallel to
Elmira Road.
Attorney Barney - I thought Rod said he did care.
Chairperson Wilcox - No. He cares strongly and no one else cares.
Board Member Talty - You make them parallel and I'll give up because I don't like the trailers on
alternative I. So that is a little negotiation.
Attorney Barney - So we are revising the plans to show the configuration except the Kiosks are to be
made parallel to Route 13.
Chairperson Wilcox - All right. Bear with me. Let me just check my notes here.
Attorney Barney - I can I go back to the auctions for just a moment. We had some discussions, the
Zoning Enforcement Officer and myself, about whether auctions were permitted period under our
Ordinance because we don't specifically authorize them. As I sit here I can't quite recall the
conclusion we came to. I think we concluded it was a form of retail sales and retail sales are
generally permitted. However, you might want to suggest that there be an interpretation since you
have to go the Zoning Board of Appeals any way. It might be wise to include that this be granted an
interpretation of the ordinance.
9n,
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - We've got Kiosks. Any screening on the trailers or are we comfortable given
their locations? Okay. We have reoriented the trailers. Is it important that... normally when we
approve a site plan and in fact the original site plan, we can send the Zoning Enforcement Officer out
or whoever to make sure the trailers are where they are supposed to be. I thank Mr. Kanter for this,
but it doesn't have quite that accuracy. So is it important to allow a little leeway in terms of exactly
where they are shown on this alternative I and where they will finally be placed. Is that necessary
here?
Attorney Barney - If you want to give leeway greater than the Zoning Ordinance.
Chairperson Wilcox - Which is three feet, right?
Mr. Kanter - These were not intended to be accepted as the site plan. They were intended to be
concepts. So certainly one thing we want to do is have the site plan, I think we said this already to
modify the site plan show the new location. I think you could probably add that within some number
of feet plus or minus in terms of the location. They are not permanent structures.
Chairperson Wilcox - The intent is for the eastern most trailers to be pushed as far south as possible.
Push them back on the property line.
Mr. Kanter - And keeping within the yard setback.
Chairperson Wilcox - It is the same with both trailers. Push them as far south as we can.
Board Member Thayer - Back in toward the building.
Board Member Conneman - I would like you to state for me the dates and the procedure for the
trailers and the Kiosks to be gone. I want to hear it, okay?
Attorney Barney - The procedure would be that on December 18, 2003 they won't be there unless this
board grants an extension.
Board Member Conneman - Is there a date that is included in that that says six months before that
Mr. Hall comes to us and tells us what his plans are for the building?
Attorney Barney - You could put something in like that, but I'm not sure it is necessary
because ... (comments not audible)
Board Member Talty - I would hope that the applicant would understand that by granting an 18-
month, we are meeting you half way type of time period. In the event that things did not materialize
as fast as you anticipated, that you would come back to the staff and indicate that.
Mr. Hall - I gathered that when you were talking before. You said that probably the proper amount of
time would be about three months in advance. I made note of that.
9161
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - That was part of the issue of we saw you in February and we didn't see you
again for 4 months. Would someone like to move the motion? So moved by Kevin Talty as revised.
Second?
Board Member Thayer - I'll second.
Chairperson Wilcox - Seconded by Larry Thayer. We've got that done. Any final words? We haven't
done anything else.
Attorney Barney - It is better to say nothing.
Mr. Hall - Is there any chance that with all that has been said and done tonight that we can lift this
thing so that I can put a front door in. That has been on hold because I've got a violation of property
according to Andy Frost.
Attorney Barney - That is one thing.
Mr. Hall - I sent in a building permit to put in a front door. I was not able to do that because according
to Mr. Frost that no permit could be issued while my property was under violation. Therefore, that has
held up that end of my business to get that done. I was wondering if the board could possibly get
that taken care of? I have the door.
Chairperson Wilcox - That is up to Mr. Frost and he is the Enforcement Officer.
Mr. Hall - He says its up to you guys.
Board Member Talty - By us passing this resolution this evening, does that relieve that?
Attorney Barney - It doesn't really because we still have the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Zoning
Board of Appeals is really dealing with the display carts, which is probably totally unrelated to the
door anyway. I was just trying to think of why we might...?
Mr. Kanter - I think the reason Andy was holding up the building permit was so that this could go
through the site plan approval process.
Attorney Barney - So you think that once he has done that even though the variance...
Mr. Kanter - It will be up to Andy, but I believe once the site plan is approved then they will be in the
position to issue the permit.
Attorney Barney - Supposing we add a provision in the display cart segment that the granting by the
Zoning Board of Appeals a required variance to allow the display carts within the setback and if no
such variance is obtained in a couple of months, then the Kiosks be removed back out of the front
yard setback area. That would make that an independent issue. Then I think at that point he could
issue a building permit for the door. This resolution read the way it is right now is everything is
conditional on that Zoning Board of Appeals decision.
KZ01
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Is that chance acceptable, Kevin and Larry?
Mr. Kanter - Could I make a slight modification of that suggestion? We didn't really address in our
draft resolution the need to get even just an original Zoning Board of Appeals approval for the outside
display, which is not permitted in a business zone. I would suggest maybe putting that part first. The
granting by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the required variances to allow outside displays in a
business district.
Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Foote, any final comments?
Mr. Foote - On the auction part.
Chairperson Wilcox - On the auction part, yes.
Mr. Foote - I was there when Lyke New furniture had auctions. Again, I'm not trying to hurt Randy.
People were parked all over the road. This is a safety issue. They open their doors right in traffic.
Stepped out into the road in traffic. I almost had the front end of my car taken off trying to get out of
the parking lot. There is an awful safety issue unless you have the proper amount of parking for that.
That is one of my concerns. And like I say, I'm not against Randy or anything.
Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you.
Board Member Thayer - Okay, back to your concerns.
Chairperson Wilcox - One of my concerns. Change anything?
Board Member Talty - Well...
Attorney Barney - September 1St okay for the variances?
Chairperson Wilcox - That gives them two shots at the Zoning Board of Appeals. July and August.
Are we all done? Is there any further discussion? Any other changes? There being none, all those
in favor please signal...
Mr. Hall - I have something I would like to say. Is it my turn?
Chairperson Wilcox - It is always the applicant's turn. Sometimes it is appropriate to be quiet but go
ahead.
Mr. Hall - First of all, you would have to explain to me what I have to do next as far as this appeal
thing because I'm not real educated on the process here. Is there something I have to fill out again?
Is this something you guys take from here and give to somebody and then they get back to me?
Attorney Barney - Once this passes, you need to get with Andy. Andy will put you on the schedule for
the Zoning Board of Appeals.
37
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Mr. Hall - This information now goes to Andy, is that correct?
Attorney Barney - (comments not audible) you need to get with Andy to make an application to the
Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Hall - So that is the Zoning Board of Appeals?
Attorney Barney - Zoning Board of Appeals. That is assuming that this board votes in favor of the
resolution.
Board Member Conneman - If you are going to have an auction or a public event, do you have to tell
the State Police or can anybody...?
Mr. Hall - We could do that. We could ask for some cooperation from one of the local departments. I
don't think I've ever had an auction that I needed that type of participation in. I think that if this is a
concern, what I find down in that area, the traffic flow through there is quite heavy. If we start
measuring oranges to oranges here, you've got 100 cars coming out of that bingo hall every week. It
is catastrophe. It is tough for them to get out. It is tough for traffic.
Board Member Conneman - But they don't park on the road.
Mr. Hall - No they don't. I don't plan on having the auction people park on the road either. My point is
that they've got a business over there that they run. They have a traffic problem with 100 plus people
at their bingo hall. Yes, I might have an auction in the future one or two a year or something of that
nature. Yes, there probably would be a certain amount of traffic coming out of my lot. Yes, if need be
I could ask for the Sheriff's Department of the State Troopers. Sometimes they will cooperate in a
situation there if they think there is going to be a traffic problem. I would certainly address that at the
time.
Chairperson Wilcox - I have a motion. I have a second. Is there any further discussion? There being
none, all those in favor please signal by saying aye.
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody opposed? None opposed. There are no abstentions. The motion is
passed. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Foote. I appreciate your input. It's like pulling teeth as one of
my old bosses used to say.
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration to change the Planning Board starting time from 7:30 p.m. to
7:00 p.m. and have an ending time of 10:00 p.m. (Day and location will remain the same).
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 9:28 p.m.
Board Member Thayer - I'm questioning, like Eva did, the ending time.
91.01
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - State your feeling and I will state mine.
Board Member Thayer - Well, it is difficult when you are at quarter to 10 and you have a resolution
that you are discussing. This one went for an hour longer than I thought it was going to go. It could
happen then, too.
Board Member Conneman - What we said last time that we would take a vote at quarter to 10 and
decide what we are going to do. If it were going to be so much confrontation and take another hour,
then we would probably adjourn.
Chairperson Wilcox - I actually would rather we change it to 10:30. 1 think 7 to 10:30. We've been
going 7:30 to 11, 11:30, 12. I'm not suggesting that we want to go to 11:30 or 12, but I think 10:30 is a
reasonable time to stop and still leave ourselves that option of deciding that we want to go later.
Board Member Talty - I can assure you that this board member won't be voting for anything passed
10:30. So it you want to stick it to 10 and go to 10:30 and do what we proposed, but if it comes to
10:30 and we are going on and on, I'm going to vote no.
Board Member Howe - If you think we need 3 and half hours, why not start at 6:30.
Board Member Talty - Exactly. There is logic.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't have a problem with starting time. The only issue with starting time I
think is for those members and staff, lets not forget Town staff and employees and John Barney, is do
you want to be able to go home after you worked all day and either get in dinner or some face time
with your kids and family and then come down here or do you want to come right here. That is really
the starting time issue.
Board Member Thayer - How do they feel about it? What do you think about 7 o'clock, Jonathan?
Board Member Talty - Or 6 :30 or whatever.
Mr. Kanter - We all talked about 7. 1 think we all agree that 7 will be fine. To me personally, we didn't
talk about earlier, but 6:30 for me would not work. Many times I'm staying in the office until 5 just
because I haven't really been able to focus on the Planning Board packet until 4. Any earlier than 7,
really I don't think it would allow us time to get home and do what we need to do. It is easy to say that
you leave at 3 because you know there is a meeting, but that just doesn't happen because you have
things happening all day long. The Town Board does meet at 5:30. I've always thought that was a
terrible time in terms of my staff involvement. It is so in between that you can't really do... I've tried
eating late lunches to compensate and then you get home and I'm still eating at midnight anyway. I
think 7 is fine. I think earlier than that.
Board Member Conneman - Seven to 10.
Board Member Thayer - So we'll leave it as is.
gue
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Board Member Conneman - But we might be willing to go to 10:30 that there was an issue that we
were definitely going to resolve.
Board Member Talty - No question about it.
Chairperson Wilcox - What I am hearing it 7 o'clock. The board by majority vote of the members
present at that meeting could extent the meeting until 10:30.
Board Member Talty - To whatever is mentioned by the chair.
Chairperson Wilcox - To whatever or to 10:30? You seem to be very adamant.
Board Member Talty - If it is quarter to 10 and we have a guy who hasn't even appeared. He's on the
docket, but...I don't want that individual ... I don't know how we'll do it but, they come down here. They
have their battle plan. They work with staff and all of sudden they are sitting. I don't want them to
have to come back two weeks later.
Chairperson Wilcox - The board by resolution... by majority vote of the members present could by
resolution extend the meeting time to whatever they want. I think if we have a resolution that says we
will stop at 10.
Attorney Barney - I might want to suggest that we modify that resolution by adding the proviso unless
the members vote at the meeting to extend the meeting beyond 10.
Chairperson Wilcox - I want to it clear that we don't need a majority of the whole to extend; we need
just the majority of the members present. If we've got 5 people here and we get a 3 to 2 vote to keep
going, I think we should be able to keep going.
Attorney Barney - The only problem with that is if two people disagree vehemently enough, they could
walk out the door and you've lost your quorum. I think if you are voting 3 to 2 you probably don't want
to keep going.
Board Member Thayer - Quite often staff would know, the particular individual that is working on the
resolution would know more about what the discussion might be than us.
Chairperson Wilcox - But if we only get a 3 to 2 vote to extend the meeting is that sufficient or do we
really want a majority of the whole with is always 4 to keep going. The point is well made. The
people who vote against it could decide to just leave. Then we don't have a quorum and we have to
stop any way.
Attorney Barney - I don't think you really want to deviate too much from the majority of the whole.
Chairperson Wilcox - Now, one issue that comes up is if we don't finish our business and either we
decide to continue at the next meeting or we adjourn some public hearings for the next meeting or
some discussion, what if that meeting is already full. Then we get into the issue of either scheduling
special meetings, a third meeting in a month or delaying applicants more than we would want to.
He]
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
That puts an additional burden on us for a third meeting in a month plus an additional burden on staff.
These are salary people who are here because we need them and because they like their job. I don't
want to talk about compensation, but they are here. Do we want a third meeting and who is preparing
the materials that get sent out to us? There is that as well.
Board Member Conneman - I think Kevin's point was that most of us don't do to well after about...
Chairperson Wilcox - You're right. After about 11 o'clock ... for me after 11 o'clock I start to go down
hill.
Board Member Conneman - When we did the Burger King we had long public hearings, but we didn't
make a decision. We listened and then we came back at another meeting to discuss it.
Chairperson Wilcox - I also know that some people get up earlier in the morning than others. People
have long distances sometimes to travel. Some people have babysitting concerns. I understand that.
Attorney Barney - I don't know that you could adopt now a policy for everything that comes up. I think
you could set your normal time as being 7 to 10. Then when a situation arises, you look at
it ... (comments not audible) I don't know if you want to try and sit here until 10:30 tonight what you are
going to do in an event of a situation.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't either, but I am concerned about the workload that we have in our own
regular jobs and in our life and maybe wanting to not go from 7 or 7:30 to 11:00 or 12 or 12:30. Once
we met until 12 or 12:30 and came back the next day.
Board Member Howe - It was north campus.
Chairperson Wilcox - I am also concerned about staff and the cost to the Town.
Board Member Talty - What does staff think?
Attorney Barney - What do we think about what?
Board Member Talty - In regards to the discussion that we are having going from 7 until 10 and then
taking a vote.
Attorney Barney - I think it is a good idea.
Mr. Kanter - John would like it to end at 9 o'clock.
Chairperson Wilcox - The question really is two long meetings or three short ones.
Attorney Barney - Why do you need to worry about that right now? Isn't that a determination you are
going to make when you have a project in front of you? At that point, you need to look at what is
coming up. I don't know why we need to bother getting into that.
41
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - I want to know if we are setting up a situation...
Attorney Barney - You don't know if there is an actual situation.
Mr. Kanter - There is a reason for discussing it. I discussed it a little bit with Fred. That is one of my
concerns. That is why I want to discuss it even if it takes until 10 or 10:30.
Chairperson Wilcox - I'm going to cut you off.
Mr. Kanter - There are ramifications and I think the board should be aware of them. There are times
and Fred mentioned that especially during the spring it is the heavy time. It is sort of the time when
projects are getting organized to build later on that year. We will tend to have heavier agendas
March, April, May and June.
Board Member Talty - But that's okay.
Mr. Kanter - The board should definitely be aware that there will be certain times of the year where
there may very well need to be a third meeting of the month. There are definite ramifications of that
for staff. I wanted you to be aware of that. Some cases, even in terms of giving approvals under the
mandatory deadlines established by State laws. Those are things you need to be aware of at least.
Those can always be extended with agreement by the applicant, but maybe you won't have an
agreeable applicant to extend the project. Those are things to consider. Generally, I don't have a
problem with establishing general time frames for meetings to be completed. I think it will give the
board something to shoot for. Maybe it will help you to become, not that you're not, more focused on
getting at some of the key issues. Sometimes the board does get side tracked on certain items.
Maybe it will help ... there are some positives about it. I definitely have concerns that if we stick too
closely in some cases to a 10 o'clock ending time that we may often find ourselves more often than
we want having third meetings. Summer time I don't think it will be a problem at all. The fall, we
usually see late thought types of things coming in. Sometimes Cornell may come up with a huge
project. When we get some of those big ones, I think we are going to have to figure it out of
accommodating the large applications and still fit in the small applications. Some of it might mean
some shuffling around of how we schedule meetings. Those are all things...
Chairperson Wilcox - If we have an issue, you will talk to me about it?
Mr. Kanter -Yes.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody is welcome to communicate with me. If we are comfortable
communicating directly, that's fine. If you would rather go through Jon, that is fine too.
Board Member Howe - This can always be revisited.
Chairperson Wilcox - Would someone like to move the draft resolution as revised by Mr. Barney?
Board Member Conneman - I'll move it.
42
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - So moved by Mr. Conneman. Do I have a second?
Board Member Howe - Seconded.
Chairperson Wilcox - All those in favor?
Board - Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - All those opposed? There are none. The motion is passed.
RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -071 - Town of Ithaca Planning Board, Changing Meeting Time
MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Rod Howe.
RESOLVED, that for the remainder of its schedule of Regular Meetings for the Year 2002, the
Town of Ithaca Planning Board adopts a new meeting starting time of 7:00 p.m. (previously was 7:30
p.m.) and have an ending time of no later than 10:00p.m. unless the board votes at a specific
meeting to extend that particular meeting beyond 10:00 p.m.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 9:41 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: Other Business.
Chairperson Wilcox - Any other business Mr. Kanter or...?
Ms. Ritter — Mark Macera, Ithacare, contacted us. He is interested in putting a pavilion in the north
lawn. They have a recreational walkway and things that they have been planning. They would like to
put in a pavilion. He is hoping to apply for a grant and then get some interns to work this, perhaps,
they have to go back to school. So it is a little bit of a time issue. He didn't give me a size. He does
not believe he can come to this board with architectural details. He thinks what he can do is come in
and give us the precise location of the pavilion, the size of the pavilion and the concept of the style of
the pavilion. I told him I thought that was doable, but I wanted to check with the board that you did
not want the architectural details to approve this.
Chairperson Wilcox - Where is the pavilion?
Ms. Ritter - It will be in the north lawn, which is behind Ithacare where they have that walkway. They
have come in a few times for different things.
E91
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JULY 2, 2002 -APPROVED
Chairperson Wilcox - Unfortunately, every time they do anything to that because of the SLUD they
have to come to this board. We haven't seen anything, but does anybody have a problem?
Board Member Thayer - NO.
Chairperson Wilcox - I assume it is a rather small pavilion.
Ms. Ritter - It is a normal size pavilion.
Chairperson Wilcox - I don't know what a normal size pavilion is. Thank you. Anything else.
Mr. Smith - I was going to mention if anybody has time I could take the ID pictures.
Chairperson Wilcox - Wait until next time.
Board Member Talty - So the next meeting is going to be 7 o'clock.
Chairperson Wilcox - Absolutely.
Ms. Ritter - That will be July 2nd
Mr. Kanter - Can I make a request? Not all the board members are here. To me, that will implies that
board members will try their darnest to make it here by 7 so that we can actually start at 7.
Board Member Thayer - Good point.
Chairperson Wilcox - Good point, nonetheless, I generally don't start them depending upon what the
first application is we get stuck. We do the SEQR in 2 minutes and then sit here a twiddle our thumbs
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Kanter - You know what I meant.
Chairperson Wilcox - We did fine today, even though I am concerned about where Eva is. Lets hope
she's not feeling ill.
Mr. Kanter - I got here late so I couldn't tell you. I did get a call from Eva. She is not here because
she has a brand new grandchild. So she is babysitting the 2- year -old grandchild so the parents can
get together there.
Chairperson Wilcox - Keep that exactly the way he said it. Any other business? Do I have a motion
to adjourn?
Board Member Conneman - Yes.
Chairperson Wilcox - From Mr. Conneman. We are adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
.,
PLANNING BOARD
JUNE 18, 2002 MINUTES
APPROVED - JUL Y 2, 2002 - APPROVED
I ],
AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT:
Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the June 18, 2002 meeting of Town of Ithaca
Planning Board duly adjourned at 9:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
fa ie Whitmore,
Deputy Town Clerk
C.
45
Ithaca Veteran Volunteer Firemen's Association
638 Elmira Road
Ithaca, NY 14850
Raymond Foote,
Secretary
Ithaca Veterans Volunteer Firemen's Assoc.
June 18, 2002
Public Hearing Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 35 -1 -21 Business District "C"
635 Elmira Road Quick Cash Auction House
The members of the Vet Firemen's do have a problem with the trailers and the display carts that are stored in their
yard i.e. parking lot. It not only makes.their property look bad but also is an eyesore in the Town of Ithaca and to the
vet firemen's and the many people that visit our building to see the 1896 horse drawn steamer.
The vet firemen's has invested between nineteen and not more then twenty five thousand dollars in the glass enclose
to store the steamer so it can be view from the road that faces 635 Elmira Road.
*we do not want to see a twenty -foot fence go up to hide the trailers from the public, but we would not object to
putting the storage trailers on the eastside of their property out of view of the public
The two display carts in the parking area near the road, we would also object to these carts being put there. Once they
are there they will never be moved and will be a continues eyesore in the Town of Ithaca.
We would like to thank the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for hearing our objections to 635 Elmira Road
Sincerely
Raymond Foote
Secretary
I*
ATTACHMENT #1
•
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
AGENDA
7:30 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes).
7:35 P.M. SEQR Determination, EcoVillage Second Neighborhood Group, Rachel Carson Way.
7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Site Plan Modifications to the Second Neighborhood
Group by EcoVillage at Ithaca, located off Mecklenburg Road at Rachel Carson Way (a private
drive), on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a total of 176
+/- acres, Special Land Use District # 8. The modifications include changing residential units
205 and 206 to a side -by -side duplex style (the units were stacked in previous approval) and to
increase the number of carports from 15 to 28 vehicle spaces. The project was originally
approved by the Planning Board on September 18, 2001. EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner; Rod
Lambert, Agent.
7:45 P.M. SEQR Determination, Meldrum 2 -Lot Subdivision, Troy Road.
7:46 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 142 Troy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49 -1-
26, Residence District R -30. The proposal is to subdivide the 79.529 +/- acre parcel into two
parcels of 7.156 +/- acres and 69.373 +/- acres. William F. Meldrum and Betty Jane C.
Meldrum, Owners; Joseph W. Allen, Agent.
7:50 P.M. SEQR Determination, Quick Cash Auction House, 635 Elmira Road.
8:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the
proposed modifications to the Quick Cash Auction House at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 35 -1 -21, Business District "C ". The proposed modifications include
renovations of a portion of the existing building for a retail shop, beauty salon, or offices,
placing four storage trailers on the rear of the site, and placing two display carts in the parking
area near the road. Randy Hall, Owner /Applicant.
8. Consideration to change
the Planning Board starting
time from
7:30 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and have
an ending time of 10:00
p.m. (day and location will
remain the
same).
9. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary).
10. Approval of Minutes: May 21, 2002.
11, Other Business.
12, Adjournment.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY MARY BRYANT AT
273 -1747.
(A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.)
•
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, June 18, 2002
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, June 18, 2002, at 215 North Tioga
Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters:
7:40 P.M. Consideration of Site Plan Modifications to the Second Neighborhood Group by
EcoVillage at Ithaca, located off Mecklenburg Road at Rachel Carson Way (a private
drive), on Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and 28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a total
of 176 +/- acres, Special Land Use District # 8. The modifications include changing
residential units 205 and 206 to a side -by -side duplex style (the units were stacked in
previous approval) and to increase the number of carports from 15 to 28 vehicle spaces.
The project was originally approved by the Planning Board on September 18, 2001.
EcoVillage at Ithaca, Owner; Rod Lambert, Agent.
7:46 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed two -lot
subdivision located at 142 Troy Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26, Residence
District R -30. The proposal is to subdivide the 79.529 +/- acre parcel into two parcels of
7.156 +/- acres and 69.373 +/- acres. William F. Meldrum and Betty Jane C. Meldrum,
Owners; Joseph W. Allen, Agent.
8:00 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed
modifications to the Quick Cash Auction House at 635 Elmira Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 35 -1 -21, Business District "C ". The proposed modifications include
renovations of a portion of the existing building for a retail shop, beauty salon, or offices,
placing four storage trailers on the rear of the site, and placing two display carts in the
parking area near the road. Randy Hall, Owner /Applicant.
Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections
thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing
impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons
desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings.
Dated: Friday, June 10, 2002
Publish: Wednesday, June 12, 2002
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
C7
•
C
The �Athlaca JbdurnaI
Wednesday, J.ume12, , 2 002
TOWN OF ITHACA
PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, June 18 2002 By
direction of the Chairperson
1 of the Planning Board, NO.
'TICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that
Public Hearings will be held
by the Planning Board of the
Town of Ithaca on Tuesday,
,June 18, 2002, at 215
North Ti ,go Street, Ithaca,
N.Y., at the following times
'and on the following mat-
ters:
7:40 P.M. Consideration of
(Site Plan Modifications to
the Second Neigghborhood
Group by EcoVilloge at
Ithaca, located off Mecklen-
burg Road of Rachel Carson
Way (a private drivelI, on .
Town of Ithaca Tax ffarcel
No.'s 28 -1 -26.2 and
28 -1 -26.8, consisting of a
total of 176 +/- acres, Spe-
Iciol Land Use District # B.
The modifications include
changing residential units
205 and 206 to a side -by- i
side duplex style (the units
were stacked in previous ap-
proval( and to increase the
number of carports from 15
to 28 vehicle spaces. The
project was originally ap-
proved by the Planning
Board on September 18,
2001. EcoVilloge at Ithaca,
Owner; Rod Lambert,
Agent.
7:46 P.M. Consideration of
Preliminary and Final Sub-
division Approval ,for the
Proposed two-lot subdivision
located at 142 Troy Road,
4own of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 49 -1 -26, Residence Dis-
trict R -30. The proposal is to
subdivide the 79.529 +/-
acre parcel into two parcels
of 7.156 +/- acres and
69.373 +/- acres. William
F. Meldrum and Betty Jane
C. Meldrum, Owners; Jo-
seph W. Allen, Agent.
8:00 P.M. Consideration of
Preliminary 'and Final Site
Plan Approval for the pro-
posed modifications to the
Quick Cash Auction House
at 635 Elmira Road, Town
of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.
35 -1 -21, Business District C.
The proposed modifications
include renovations of a por-
tion of the existing building
for a retail shop, beauty so-
Ion, or offices, placing four
storage trailers on the rear
of the site, and placing two
display carts in the parking
area near the road. Randy
a Hall Owner /A plicont.
Said Planning Board will at
said times and said place
hear all persons in support
of such matters or objections
thereto. Persons may appear
by agent or in person.
Individuals with visual
impairments, hearin
impairments or other speciag
l
needs, will be provided with i
assistance ' as necessary,
upon request. Persons desir-
ing assistance must make .
such a request not'less than'
48 hours prior to the time ofil
the public hearings.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP;
Director of Planning'
273 -1748.
June 12,_2002 _
® TOWN OF ITHACA
PLANNING BOARD
SIGN -IN SHEET
DATE: June 18, 2002
(PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME
PLEASE PRINTADDRESS /AFFILIATION
U
/lam St Gi d/u l'c k Oli, 7 V-I zlr ll /V 04-1 `r
J
•
I�
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Sandra Polce being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign
board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local newspaper,
The Ithaca Journal.
Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca
Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday June 18, 2002 commencing
at 7:30 P.M., as per attached.
Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio ag Street.
Date of Posting
Date of Publication:
June 10, 2002
June 12, 2002
Sandra Polce, Senior Typist
Town of Ithaca.
STATE OF NEW YORK) SS:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 12th day of June 2002,
Notary Public
DEBORANSKELLEY
Notary Public, State, of. New York
No.:Ot KE6025073 .
Oualifi6d,in'86huyler County
Commission Expires May. 1,7, 20 o3