Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1977-05-03 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MAY 31 1977 A regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board was held on Tuesday , May 3 , 1977 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ;) , Ithaca , N . Y . PRESENT : Chairman Liese Bronfenbrenner , Henry Aron , Montgomery May , James Baker , Eva Hoffmann , J . W . Reece , Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) . ALSO PRESENT : Mr . and Mrs . Arthur Parkin , Danby Road ; Mr . Stan Greene , 720 Elm Street ; Mr . Ken Wbrmser ; Mr . Scott Anderson ; Mr . Steve Brouwer ; Emilie George ; Robert Johnstone ; Sharon Staz ; David B . Gersh , Esq . ; Edward Whitlock ; Evan N . Monkemeyer ; Herbert N . Monkemeyer ; E . L . Rose Gostanian ; Robert O ' Malley ; Barbara Holcomb ; Robert I . Williamson , Esq . ; Bruce Bean ; Fled Stolz ; John Jarrett , WTKO ; Mary Norton , WHCU ; Alan Goodman , Ithaca Journal . Chairman Bronfenbrenner declared the meeting duly open at 7 : 33 p . m . REPORT OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR Mr . Fabbroni reported that three permits were issued for new one -. family homes and two accessory buildings and one moving of an existing home to a new foundation for a total of $ 109 , 150 . 00 in April 1977 , as compared to nine one family homes and seven accessory buildings for a total of $ 311 , 500 . 00 in April of 1976 . • Mr . Fabbroni reported that he and his staff are in the process of quite a comprehensive policing of the Zoning Ordinance with regard to the use or occupancy provisions of the ordinance where it applies to single or two family homes ; there will be more specific news on this in the months to come . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the major project is the Town Barn . The coordination with the contractor on the job has been quite successful because of the weather . They expect to move materials into the facility by June lst . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the other major project is the sewer application and grant package for the five - area sewer extensions . It has been reviewed by the State and sent to EPA . He stated that the grant notification should come in the fall . Mrs . Eva Hoffmann reported on the County Planning Board activities and stated that Mr . Ray Hemming had talked about zoning in the City of Ithaca . He reported that the City wants to try to redefine a " family " and is proposing only a relationship . Their present ordinance allows 6 unrelated persons . They also are trying to deal with parking problems near Cornell University . There was discussion of Mrs . Raffensperger ' s comments in the minutes of the County Planning Board about spill over into the Town if the City tightens up their zoning . 16 Mr . Fabbroni discussed car problems and " guests " problems in any one house . Planning Board - 2 - May 3 , 1977 PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF FINAL CLUSTER APPROVAL OF PHASE III , LONGHOUSE DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE , INC . , ELM STREET EXTENSION , TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 28 - 1 - 28 . 4 . Chairman Bronfenbrenner declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 52 p . m . , and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Noticeof Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on April 26 , 1977 , and April 28 , 1977 , respectively . Mr . Steve Brouwer appeared before the Board and stated that he was requesting approval for the third building at what is marked " site 2 " on site plan . He stated that the only change is that they want to have it be a two - unit structure and not a three - unit structure as shown . Mr . Stan Greene , 720 Elm Street , appeared before the Board and stated that at the first meeting on this , some lady said it was legal and ' bang ' it was all over . Mr . Fabbroni stated by way of clarification that Mr . Greene was referring to a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals where a request for a barn for this property was sent in error by him . He stated that it was indeed an approved use in an R- 30 zone and the Zoning Board found that it was legal and took no further action . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked Mr . Fabbroni if he had issued a building permit for the barn . He replied that he had . Returning to the matter under discussion , i . e . , Phase III of Long - house , Mr . Fabbroni stated that this site was approved in 1974 for the building of 4 of the type of buildings that they have up there now on 19 acres . He stated that they built the first two buildings and every time they want to build an additional building they have to come back for approval , up to 4 . He said this is done to keep in line any errors that might have taken place . Mr . Greene told the Board to come and look at what this development is . He stated that there is nothing to be done about the two that are there already . He said he is just asking the Board to look at it now . He urged the Board not to put in any more . He stated that they were told that it was going to look like Eastwood Commons - - it does not . Mrs . Hoffmann asked Mr . Greene what his objection was . Mr . Greene stated that it just does not fit with the character of the neighborhood . Mrs . Hoffmann stated that she was up there the other day and she thought it was very pleasant . Mr . Fabbroni introduced the aerial photo taken in April of 1976 just prior to the construction of the second building . Mr . Greene stated that at the Zoning Board meeting on the barn the whole neighborhood came out in opposition . • Mr . May restated Mr . Greene ' s statement and said that his ( Greene ) objection is that the buildings are not the same as the buildings that are around it . Mr . Greene said it is an eyesore . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner said she did not think the Board can rule on aesthetics . Planning Board - 3 - May 3 , 1977 Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked Mr . Brouwer to describe these buildings . Mr . Brouwer stated that they are three - unit townhouse buildings - - six units total , occupied and owned by members of the Cooperative . There 4P( are two retired women and one professor at Cornell . They meet the needs of the people who are going to live there . He said there are 20 acres of land , most of which is open and each of the three units is incorporated into the structure . They are constructed of board and batten vertical siding made of hemlock . Four of the units are families and the others are single people . He stated that it is a different sort of building from the rest . He commented that they do look different from a single family ranch house . Mr . Greene stated that there should be some civic pride . on the part of the owners . He asked that they mow it , improve it , take care of it . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if the proposed building meets the requirements . Mr . Fabbroni replied that it complies with the Building Code - we do not have an electrical code in the Town . Mr . May asked if it meets with Health Department approvals . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he was just going to ask that . Mr . Brouwer stated that they have the original approval and added that they have met the requirements of the County Sanitary Engineer by having a common water supply - - there is a shed that has the common well . . Mr . Reece commented that he would gladly trade Longhouse for the 100 apartments across the way from them ( West Village ) . Mr . Reece asked Mr . Brouwer if it would be inconvenient for him to have the Board defer decision for about two weeks until the next meeting ? Mr . Brouwer replied that they would like to apply for a Building Permit this month , but that they would not be building in two weeks . Mr . Brouwer stated that they realize that it is a different type of development and , speaking to Mr . Greene , said that their closest building is about 1 , 000 feet from his property ; Mr . Denmark being closer . Mr . Brouwer added that they took great pains to build way back from the road. . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if there was any more discussion . Mrs . Hoffmann said that she would suggest that the Planning Board members should go and visit the site before any decision . Mr . Henry Aron told the Board members that the last uniform thing he has seen is the barracks in World War II . He stated that this is all irrelevant as long as it meets all the requirements and has not changed the site plan as approved by a previous Board . He noted that Mrs . Hoffmann went up to visit the site and she thought that it was very nice . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Henry Aron : • RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board shall delay its decision in the matter of final approval of Building 3 of Longhouse Cooperative , now known as " Site 2 " , until the next meeting of said Board on May 17 , 1977 , and Planning Board - 4 - May 39 1977 FURTHER , that an elevation drawing of the proposed third building be presented . By way of discussion , Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that this develop - ment is under the Cluster concept and instead of 3 . 5 units per acre , the density is less than 1 unit per acre . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . CONSIDERATION OF SIGN APPROVAL FOR EAST HILL DEPOT RESTAURANT . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Messrs . Wormser and Anderson were reques - ting approval for a temporary sign which meets all the requirements of a permanent sign . The sign stands on a sawhorse and is 8 ' x 4 ' = 32 sq . ft . and reads " New Home of the East Hill Depot , Restaurant - Tavern , Opening Summer , 1977 , Serving : Soups , Stews , Sandwiches " . Mr . Aron asked how long is " temporary " ? Mr . Wormser replied - - two months . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner noted that there was writing on both sides . MOTION by Mr . J . W . Reece , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca approve and hereby does approve a temporary sign for the East Hill Depot Restaurant containing 32 sq . ft . , as presented via Application for Sign Permit dated April 19 , 1977 . By way of discussion , Mrs . Hoffmann stated that she thought the sign is too big and she does not like the way it looks . Mrs . Bronfen - brenner commented that the sign does meet the requirements . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . CONSIDERATION OF SIGN APPROVAL FOR BEAUJOLAIS CAFE , ELMIRA ROAD . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Mr . Robert O ' Malley was present to request Planning Board consideration of his application for a sign at his Beaujolais Restaurant at 602 Elmira Road , Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that this application meets the requests of the Planning Board set out at the last meeting that Mr . O ' Malley presented an application for sign permit ( January 4 , 1977 ) . Mr . Fabbroni noted that there was a variance for the set back and that the Planning Board cannot pass on a variance - type situation - - this is done at the Town Board level . Mr . May commented that this sign proposal is very much in compliance with the Board ' s recommendations . Mr . Reece commented that the applicant should be congratulated on Planning Board - 5 - May 3 , 1977 i his complying with the recommendations of the Planning Board . Mr . O ' Malley stated that he likesthe sign much better than the one he originally proposed . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Henry Aron : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board approval of the proposed sign for Beaujolais , 26 sq * ft . in area , and reading : " Luncheon Special $ 2 . 95 , Beaujolais , Full Course Dinners , Casual Dress , Informal Atmosphere , Open til 111 , as per application for sign permit dated April 10 , 1977 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED REZONING OF 8 . 05 ACRES FROM BUSINESS " C " AND RESIDENTIAL - 30 TO MIXED USE ( COMMERCIAL - MULTI - FAMILY ) DISTRICT , AND , PROPOSED REZONING OF 18 . 60 ACRES FROM RESIDENTIAL- 30 TO BUSINESS " C " , AND , PROPOSED ADDITION OF MIXED USE ( COMMERCIAL- MULTI - FAMILY ) DISTRICT TO TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE . TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 , EVAN MONKEMEYER , KING ROAD EAST . ® Chairman Bronfenbrenner declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 40 p . m . , and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on April 26 , 1977 , and April 28 , 1977 , respectively , together with the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon 24 of the various neighbors of subject premises on April 28 , 1977 . Chairman Bronfenbrenner noted for the record that a slight error was made in the publication notice , as printed above ; the words Residential - 30 in both cases should read Residential - 9 and - 30 . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed out that this does not change the proposal in any way . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner explained that the Planning Board can only recommend to the Town Board on a zoning change ; the Board can only re - commend an action by the Town Board , Attorney David B . Gersh appeared before the Board and stated that he and Mr . Monkemeyer are back with the Board for a Public Hearing , adding that he did not know why they are back for a public hearing . Mr . Fabbroni explained that there was no properly advertised Public Hearing for the April 19 , 1977 , meeting , and that is why they are re - turning . Mr . Gersh expressed his confusion that there was no public hearing at the last meeting , stating that he thought there was . Mr . Gersh distributed " Proposed Protective Covenants for Mountain Parkway Business Center " , and apologized for not having gotten them out sooner , st ^. ting that Radison and the mail did not come through . He said Planning Board - 6 - May 3 , 1977 that they went ahead with the covenants , this being the second revision and includes the suggestions made by Mr . Fabbroni . In this regard he referred to Item #4 , which states that no building shall be located nearer than 30 feet from Danby Fbad and King Road East . He stated that Item # 18 Conflict was added also , stating that the more restrictive provisions shall govern . Mr . Gersh stated that Mr . Fabbroni also asked specifically that they include a provision about curb cuts ; this was incorporated under Item # 11 . He stated that Item # 16 Duration was also added . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if Mr . Buyoucos has gone over these covenants . Mr . Gersh replied that he had not and that that is his ( Gersh ) responsibility . He said they will be working with Mr . Buyoucos under sections 264 and 265 of Town Law . The opinion was expressed that the Planning Board used inappropriate language at the last meeting where the intent was not preliminary approval but preliminary recommendation on a rezoning . Mr . Gersh noted that another matter that was raised at the last meeting was compliance with the Town Board and Planning Board regula - tions insofar as Springwood is concerned . He stated that the buffer is going in now . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that he has approval from some landowners to go on their land in connection with the ditch . He men - tioned possible legal action against him for raising the stream and pointed out that if he cannot get total approval from all the surrounding landowners , he will feel that he should not be responsible for cleaning it all out . Mr . Fabbroni suggested with regard to the stream that if Mr . Monkemeyer does have approval from the first three property owners , he ( Monkemeyer ) could take steps to contain the stream on his land so that it does not go on to the Staz property or the Whitlock property . Mr . Gersh asked Mr . Monkemeyer if it were acceptable to contain the water on his parcel as much as possible . Mr . Monkemeyer replied that he could run a ditch right down into the culvert on the Old King Road . He noted that there is an existing drainage ditch on the Staz property which diverts water into the King Road property . Mr . Whitlock stated that there is a ditch on the Staz property out as far as her line . He suggested a drainage ditch from the creek right straight down to the road . Ms . Staz wondered why there was a question of liability now and not at the time ? There followed a lengthy discussion of the ditch which resulted in a consensus that Mr . Monkemeyer will work the matter out with Mr . Whitlock and Ms . Staz . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if Mr . Dixon of the NYS Housing Review Office has looked at the seven unit building ? Mr . Fabbroni replied that Mr . Dixon has retired and no one else from the department has looked at the seven unit building , i . e . , the barn . Insofar as the State Building Code goes , Mr . Fabbroni said he knows that it has a sprinkler system . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if the sign is in compliance with the Town Sign Ordinance . Mr . Fabbroni replied that it was not . Planning Board - 7 - May 3 , 1977 Ms . Staz wondered if the Board were saying that the barn has never • been approved ? Mr . Fabbroni replied that that is correct . and described the history of the matter . He stated that the Town is citing Mr . Monkemeyer on the violation and that they have written a letter asking for compliance . He stated that Mr . Monkemeyer and his father , Herbert Monkemeyer , met with Mr . Buyoucos and himself to see what , if anything , could be done to bring this into compliance . He said that the fact was recounted that Mr . Monkemeyer had been before the Planning Board on May 4 , 1976 , and was instructed to work with him ( Fabbroni ) in the development of a land use plan and he ( Monkemeyer ) did not do so . Mr . Fabbroni said that it was Mr . Buyoucos ' opinion that at least the first step in the resolution of the matter would be for Mr . Monkemeyer to come before the Planning Board and go through the legal processes and decision that the Planning Board would come to ; as a result of that you see the proposal that we have before us now . Mr . Gersh stated that Mr . Fabbroni has correctly stated that rather than just come for a rezoning of the " Art Colony " itself , it is better to come before the Board with an overall land use plan ; the rezoning would accomplish both correction of legal defects of the Art Colony as well as mixed residential / commercial uses for the remainder . Ms . Staz expressed her doubts about the whole process , stating that we have heard for four years that Mr . Monkemeyer was going to get together with Mr . Whitlock and resolve the ditch question and we are hearing it again . She said she is hearing that the buffer is being taken care of and she is not aware of it . She said that the covenants have not been available to people as yet . She stated that the 25 - year clause exists , but people abiding by the covenants have the right to change them . She commented that if they can change them at any time , it does not make the covenants very strong . She said that the Board is being shown regulations that look nice but do not have very much strength behind them . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner read Items # 15 and # 16 of the proposed covenants , as follows : 16 . Duration . These covenants are to run with the land and shall bebindingon all owners and tenants or persons claiming under them of the land leased or sold until January 1 , 2002 , and shall terminate and be of no further effect on January 1 , 2002 . However , at any time prior to that date , the then owners of a majority of the area in square feet within Mountain Parkway Business Center may , by written declaration signed and acknow- ledged by them and duly recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office , extend such provisions for a period of ten additional years , and this right to extend for additional ten year periods by the then owners shall exist as long as the owners of a majority of the area in square feet within such Park affirmatively vote to so extend them . 17 . Amendment . Any and all of the provisions herein may be amended or rescinded at any time by written declaration of the then owners of a majority of the area in square feet within Mountain Parkway Business Center , signed and acknowledged by them and recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . Planning Board - 8 - May 3 , 1977 Mr . Gersh stated that this is a fair comment . He added that these covenants are not really necessary for a rezoning , he must say . • Mr . Fabbroni said they were not , strictly speaking , but one of the first comments Mr . Gersh and Mr . Monkemeyer made was their density requirements - - nothing that would change that density for that amount of land . Mr . Fabbroni stated that this is one change that would make a major difference ; signs , garbage disposal , etc . , would make much less of a change . Mr . Gersh suggested that they could change Item # 17 to read that any provision can . be changed with the exception of those that the Board wishes not to be changed without Planning Board approval . He stated that that would certainly be acceptable - - to modify it to say that only certain provisions can be modified or rescinded by users of the property . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that she understood , also , that it is possible to tie this rezoning to a particular piece of property . Mr . Fabbroni stated that this usually applies to a specific site plan and any change would make it revert to its original zone . Mr . Fabbroni suggested that Mr . Monkemeyer should ask for a clari - fication from Mr . Buyoucos ; the rights go with , the property rather than the owner . Mrs . Hoffmann stated that in her opinion there really are two questions : ( 1 ) Whether it would be a good idea for the Town to have in its zoning ordinance the mixed use zone ; and ( 2 ) Whether the parti - cular piece of land that Mr . Monkemeyer has is suitable for this type of zoning . Mrs . Hoffmann had a copy of the original covenant as presented at the last meeting , April 19th . She suggested that a timetable should be spelled out in the covenant as to when the residential part is to be built . There followed a lengthy discussion of whether or not the whole concept will " go " . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that he is sure it will " go " . Mrs . Hoffmann said that it is something to think about - - whether that part of the Town will develop . Mr . Reece commented that you can turn that idea around - - the com - mercial / residential could produce residential development at a later date . Mrs . Hoffmann discussed the parking , commenting that the parking seems to be over 507o of the land . She said that the " vast " green areas should be questioned ; they should be defined . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer stated that the landlord need not sell all the land that he has . Mr . Gersh stated that it was his opinion that that is probably an architectural concern and at the time that they will be before the Board. with a site plan , that type of matter will be dealt with . Mr . Gersh pointed out that the " preamble " is just that - - a preamble . It has no significance whatsoever ; it is an introduction ; it says why these covenants are being set up . Planning Board - 9 - May 3 , 1977 Mrs . Hoffmann commented that the Board can only know what it sees • before them . Mr . Monkemeyer described that the roads will be 80 ' instead of the usual 60 ' . Mr . Reece stated that he was trying to put this thing in perspec - tive . He noted that Mrs . Hoffmann has alerted him that it could be 50% buildings and parking lot . Mrs . Hoffmann stated that it was something to be aware of - - it could even be 50% parking . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that the minimum open space requirement has been overlooked - - what Mrs . Hoffmann says is true - - there could be 50% parking spaces unless a percentage of open spaces is required . Mr . Monkemeyer wondered why the 25% building coverage requirement does not take care of that ? Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked what percentage of the parcel would be roads ? Mr . Monkemeyer asked if she meant the private roads , which she did , and so , he stated that they do not have calculations on that , but the parkway is 3 - 1 / 4 acres or 10% . Mrs . Hoffmann stated that the Board would like it spelled out as • to open space . Mr . Monkemeyer said that the ratio should add up to what you are saying . Mr . Fabbroni stated that what Mr . Monkemeyer was saying is not true - - someone could come in to him with a proposal for three times the space and leave nothing for open space . Mr . May added that the worst case could leave a condition of 75% of the area used for parking and the buildings under roof . Mrs . Hoffmann commented that it could be more than two to one . Ms . Staz commented that she was hearing different things from the last meeting with regard to the integrity of the covenants - - now we hear about selling to other people for whatever they may want to do . Ms . Staz noted that it has been questioned whether this is an appropriate location for this type of development . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed out that sale or lease , subject to the covenants , is what she thought Mr . Monkemeyer had proposed . Mr . Monkemeyer pointed out that this proposal is a rezoning request - - the drawings are schematic . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca shall delay 41 any further action on these rezoning requests presented by Mr . Evan N . Monkemeyer and as set forth hereinabove , pending a definite action plan for solving the water problems at the Springwood Development and a final set of Covenants meeting the suggestions put forth at this Public Hearing of this Board , to wit : Planning Board - 10 - May 3 , 1977 1 . That minimum open space be set forth . 2 . That , with reference to Items # 16 and # 17 of the Proposed Covenants , certain paragraphs be restated very carefully , such as paragraph 1 , possibly paragraphs 3 , 11 , and any others which the developer feels appropriate , in order to be more definitive . 3 . That said Covenants be subject to the approval of the Town Attorney , Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that the Board has not talked about the makeup of the mixed use , Business " F " , or whatever you want to call it . He suggested that the applicant consult with the Town Attorney and come up with some draft of the proposed amendment to the Town Ordinance . Mr . May stated that he would be happy to move that as an amendment to his Motion , presently on the floor . MOTION TO AMEND MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . J . W . Reece : RESOLVED , that the foregoing Motion , having been duly seconded , be amended by adding a further paragraph , numbered 4 , as follows : 4 . That the developer in conjunction with the Town Attorney draw up a preliminary draft of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amend - ment pertaining to the mixed use , so - called Business " F " zone . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer stated from the floor that the water problem is not Ms . Staz ' s problem - - she is not near this ditch - - it is really Mr . Whitlock ' s problem . Mr . Whitlock stated from the floor that he did not agree with Mr . Monkemeyer . Mr . Gersh stated that it was his understanding that they ( Monkemeyer and Gersh ) proposed to do what Mr . Fabbroni has suggested , and that is to contain the water on Mr . Monkemeyer ' s property . Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer questioned the legality of tying Springwood matters into the rezoning request . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote on the Amendment to the Motion on the floor, Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The AMENDMENT to the MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . The Board now turned back to the entire MOTION as amended on the floor . By way of discussion , Mr . May stated that the Board is requesting the developer to review water conditions from Springwood but not putting it as a limiting factor . is Mr . May stated that he would like to move that the entire Motion presently on the floor , as amended , but not yet voted upon , be dropped , and that two separate motions be considered , separating Springwood from the rezoning / covenant matter . Planning Board - 11 - May 3 , 1977 MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Henry Aron : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board shall replace the AMENDED MOTION presently on the floor pertaining to the Monkemeyer matters by two separate motions , one concerning the drainage as it re - lates to Springwood , and the second concerning proposed covenants . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The Chair declared the MOTION to be carred unanimously . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that the floor is now clear of Motions . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Henry Aron : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board delay and hereby does delay any further action on the rezoning requests of Mr . Evan N . Monkemeyer pertaining to Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 , pending a re -writing of the proposed Protective Covenants , specifically in reference to Article # 16 and # 17 giving a majority of the area ' s owners the ability to change the Covenants with respect to Articles 1 , possibly 3 , 11 and any others that the developer feels appropriate , and further , THAT a minimum open space requirement be included therein , and ® further , THAT such Protective Covenants be subject to the approval of the Town Attorney , and further THAT the developer , in conjunction with the Town Attorney prepare a preliminary draft of the proposed amendment to the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance as to the mixed use area called Business " F " . After a brief discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The Chair declared the MOTION carried unanimously . Mr . Gersh , speaking for the record , stated that realistically the purpose to be achieved by providing for runoff problems , drainage problems , is desirable and certainly any developer should take of it . The methods used should be the most speedy , economical and expedient . Mr . Gersh continued stating that he did not think that the Town Board meant that a developer assume a municipal responsibility . He stated that if Mr . Fabbroni and Mr . Monkemeyer can agree on a method of mini - mizing runoff problems , or preventing them , it was his opinion that that is appropriate . He added that he did not think that the matter is ® relevant to the issue before the Board , but he hoped that the Board would accept any method or means by which such correction can be achieved . MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca would and hereby does strongly recommend that action be taken to complete the Planning Board - 12 - May 3 , 1977 work required for the channeling of downstream water from the Springwood development owned by Mr . Monkemeyer and located on East King Road , as set forth by the Town Board at its meeting of December 10 , 1973 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Mrs . Hoffmann said that in terms of the rezoning request for the Business " F " zone , this could mean that it would be a use within the Town and could be attached to other areas ; the Board must think in terms of that use being approved in other parts of the Town . There being no further discussion , Chairman Bronfenbrenner declared the Public Hearing duly closed . INFORMAL CONSIDERATION OF EASTERN ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION COOPERATIVE , INC . , SITE PLAN FOR EXPANSION . Robert I . Williamson , Esq . , Attorney for EAI Co - Op , appeared before the Board and wished to state for the record that he very much appreciates the efforts of the Town Planning Board , including the Secretary and the Engineer . Mr . Williamson described the Co - Op as a farm co - op located on Judd Falls Road just immediately to the north of the East Hill Plaza and the newly developed Depot restaurant and the newly approved apartments . Mr . Williamson informed the Board that Mr . Bruce Bean , Production Manager of the Co - Op was also present with him . Mr . Williamson stated that the Co - Operative ' s application for expansion of its facilities has been denied on the grounds that the facility is not a permitted use in an R- 30 zone - - the agricultural part is , but the lab part is not . He noted that if it were strictly an agricultural use it would be per - mitted . He stated that they will be making application to the Zoning Board of Appeals , under the expansion of a legal non - conforming use section . Mr . Williamson described the history and background of the Breeders . He commented that their product is sold throughout the entire world . They have a proposal for an addition to the rear , or , to the east , that is , with a lab in conjunction with the new facility to house bulls . He stated that the Co -Op presently has approximately up to 300 bulls there and has had for several years , actually since the 1940s . He stated that. this new proposal would update their facility ; they would have the capacity for 50 more bulls , but would probably only go to 325 ; the lab would be expanded and the office space . This new facility would also be a new barn for bulls . He pointed out that the Co -Op is regulated by the County Health Department and the Department of Environmental Conservation . • Mr . Bean continued and stated that the facility was constructed in 1944 by Cornell University . He said that the bull stalls are 9 ' x 11 ' , the bulls are 8 ' , and so they need more adequate housing for their bulls . They presently have a sire barn , semen collection area , semen processing area and a storage area and a lab . He stated that any con - struction they do has to be approved by Cornell University ; they must + Planning Board - 13 May 3 , 1977 approve any changes in construction . The proposed addition would be to the rear of the present facilities with an estimated cost of between • $ 500 , 000 . 00 and $ 750 , 000 . 00 . He stated that they have not formalized all of the plans on this project as yet ; they have not formalized them because they were not sure of their situation on zoning . Mr . Aron asked if it will be a separate building . Mr . Bean replied that it will be separate - - separate by several hundred feet . Mrs . Hoffmann asked how high the building would be . Mr . Bean replied that it would be one story , approximately eleven to twelve feet . Mr . Aron asked if it will be constructed with steel corrugated sides . Mr . Bean stated that in the past Cornell has only approved concrete block and added that they want to insulate , but they are not firm on that yet . It will be either block or a painted steel . He stated that there will be two proposed buildings - - storage for hay and another one . Mr . Aron asked if there would be any change in traffic or entrances or exits . Mr . Bean replied that there would be no changes ; they will be essentially doing the same thing . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he wanted to see a notation of drainage and accesses to the buildings within the property ; he did not want flow off into Cascadilla Creek . Mr . Aron stated that he did not see any objection to the proposal . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Liese Bronfenbrenner : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals of said Town that said Board of Appeals grant a variance to Eastern Artificial Insemination Cooperative , Inc . , located at 219 Judd Falls Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 63 - 1 - 3 . 4 , in order to allow for the needed expansion of applicant ' s facilities , being the expansion of a legal non - conforming use denied under Section 54 and Section 18 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , and further THAT a variance be granted for the laboratory , being a part of said Cooperative . By way of discussion , Mrs . Hoffmann asked where the proposed apartment development might be in relation to this facility . Mr . Fabbroni stated that it was some 600 to 800 feet away . Mrs . Hoffmann asked about any proposals for plantings . Mr . Bean stated that there would be no problem in putting in trees . Mrs . Hoffmann commented that there might also be a glare . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , Aron , May , Baker , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , the Chair declared the Meeting duly adjourned at 10 : 50 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Na.ncv M . Fuller _ Secretarv . 40 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MAY 3 , 1977 A G E N D A 7 : 30 P . M . Routine Business Report of Building Inspector Report of Planning Engineer Report of County Planning Board Representative Report of Planning Board Chairman 7 : 45 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Final Cluster Approval of Phase III , Longhouse Development Cooperative , Inc . , Elm Street Extension , Tax Parcel No . 6 - 28 - 1 - 28 . 4 . 8 : 15 P . M . Consideration of Sign Approval for East Hill Depot Restaurant , 8 : 20 P . M . Consideration of Sign Approval for Beaujolais Cafe , Elmira Road . 8 : 30 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of proposed rezoning of 8 . 05 acres from Business " C " and Residentia l � 30 to Mixed Use ( Commercial -Multi - Family ) District , and , proposed Qf rezoning of 18 . 60 acres from Residential - 30 to Business " C " , and , proposed addition of Mixed Use ( Commercial - Multi - Family ) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 , Evan Monkemeyer , King Road East , 9 : 15 P . M . Informal consideration of Eastern Artificial Insemination Cooperative , Inc . , Site Plan for expansion . 9 : 30 P . M . Adjournment , Nancy M . Fuller Secretary NOTE : IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD CANNOT ATTEND , PLEASE NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY AT 273 - 1721 . . AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING TOWN CLERK ' S OFFICE a ITHACA , N . Y . I � Edward L . Bergen , , being duly sworn , say , that I am the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , that the following notice hasbeen duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and that the notice has been duly published in the local newspaper : ( Ithaca Journal ) : on May 3rd , 1977 , Notice of Public Hearings/ of Town of Ithaca Planning Board in Town Mall , East SenecaN . Y . , ato 7 : 45 P . M . - Longhouse Development Cooperative , Inc . , Elm Street Extension , and Ptnal Cluster Approval of Phase ! I ! ( Tax Parcel No . 6 28 1��. ) to 8 : 30 P . M . - Monkemeyer : Proposed rezoning of 8 . 05 acres - from Business " C " an e i - ict , and , Proposed rezoning of 18 . 60 acres from Residential - 30 to6 u , Proposed adelition of Mixed Use ( eorunercial: , Multi - Family ) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . Town Tax Parcel No . 6 436 3: 302 Ob7ca�tion of sign board used for posting : Front Entrance of Town Hall . Date of Posting ; April 26 , 1977 . Date of Publication : April 28 , 1977 . Edwa Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca State of New York County of Tompkins SS . Town of Ithaca Sworn o before me this 28th day of April , 19 77 . NOTARY GERTRUDE IL BERGEN � Y clic, State of New Yoft No, 5SZ279725 QiWified in Tompk__in�<rr Countx J7 26 ITHACA JOURNAL Thursday, April 28, 1977 Legal Notice TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TUESDAY, MAY 3, 1977 By direction of the Chairman of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HERE- BY GIVEN that Public Hearings will, be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, May 31 1977, in Town Hall, •126 East Seneca Street (second floor) , Ithaca,N.Y., at the following times and on the follow. ing matters: 7:45 p.m.—Longbouse Developpment Cooperative, Inc., Elm Street Exten. sion, Final Cluster Approval of Phase III (Tax Parcel No. 6-18-1-28.4). 8:30 p.m.—Monkemeyer: Proposed . rezoning at 8.05 acres from Business "C" and Residential-30 to Mixed Use (Commercial-Multi-Family) District, and, Proposed rezoning of 18.80 acres from Residential-30 to Business "C", and, Proposed addition of Mixed Use (Commercial-Multi-Family) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-{3-1- 3.2. Said Planning Board .will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objec- tions thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Edward L. B: .:ERGEN Town Clerk i Dated : April 28, 1977 Town of Ithaca Publish : April 28, 1977 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS • TUESDAY , MAY 3 , 1977 By direction of the Chairman 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 , May 3 , 1977 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , at the following times and on the following matters : 7 : 45 P . M . Longhouse Development Cooperative , Inc . , Elm Street Extension , Final Cluster Approval of Phase III ( Tax Parcel No . 6 - 28 - 1 - 28 . 4 ) . 8 : 30 P . M . Monkemeyer : Proposed rezoning of 8 . 05 acres from Business " C " and Residential - 30 to Mixed Use ( Commercial - . Multi - Family ) District , and , Proposed rezoning of 18 . 60 acres from Residential - 30 to Business " C " , and , Proposed addition of Mixed Use ( Commercial -Multi -Family ) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 . 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 . Edward L . Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca Dated : April 26 , 1977 SPublish : April 28 , 1977 AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS : COUNTY OF TOMPKINS ) . Nancy M . Fuller , being duly sworn , deposes and says , that deponent is not a party to the actions , is over 21 years of age and resides at 316 Turner Place , Ithaca , New York , That on the 28th day of April , 1977 , deponent served the within Notice upon : Ithaca College Fred Stolz Ithaca , New York 14850 113 King Road East Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Evan Monkemeyer 123 King Road East Edward Whitlock Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 115 King Road East Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Jack M . Herman & S . Gilbert 277 Esplanade Drive Sharon Staz Rochester , N . Y . 14610 117 King Road East Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Sam & Ruth Peter 1083 Danby Road Ithaca Heights Inc . , Ed . Abbott Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 707 First National Bank Bldg , Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Moses Peter , William Bush 702 Hancock Street Charles Wilson Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 909 West State Street Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Edward Barnett 107 King Road East D & H Refurbishers Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 1080 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Robert Pedecs 111 King Road East Ethel Yonkin , , et al Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 1060 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Robert Farley 1050 Danby Road G . Gostanian Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 1058 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Arthur Parkin 1048 Danby Road Elizabeth Murnighan Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 1044 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Eugene Eberhardt 1040 Danby Road Forrest Sanders Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 1034 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Andrew Cone 1032 Danby Road Dell Grover Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 415 Hillview Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Rexford Ballard 1010 Danby Road Douglas Payne Ithaca , N . X . 14850 1006 Danby Road Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 Althea Kelly 1002 Danby Road David B . Gersh , Esc . Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 308 North Tioga Street Ithaca , N . Y . 14850 By depositing same enclosed in a postpaid addressed wrapper , in a post officie under the exclusive care and custody of the United States Post Office Department within the State of New York . (I( Nota" Public, St%* of New Na 5,&627V25 M . FuTler ifi�a in g'ompkins erm Expires Y�arch 30, 14 f f .' Sworn to before me t�s 28th day of April , 1977 . 4000 /Notary Public M TOWN OF ITHACA PLA14NING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TUESDAY , MAY 3 , 1977 By direction of the Chairman 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 , May 3 , 1977 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , at the following times and on the following matters : 7 : 45 P . M . Longhouse Development Cooperative , Inc . , Elm Street Extension , Final Cluster Approval of Phase III ( Tax Parcel No . 6 - 28 - 1 - 28 . 4 ) . 8 : 30 P . M . Monkemeyer : Proposed rezoning of 8 . 05 acres from Business " C " and Residential - 30 to Mixed Use ( Commercial - Multi - Family ) District , and , Proposed rezoning of 18 . 60 acres from Residential - 30 to Business " C " , and , Proposed addition of Mixed Use ( Commercial -Multi -Family ) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance . Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 . 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 . Edward L . Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca Dated : April 26 , 1977 Publish : April 28 , 1977 SIGN APPLICATION AND PERMIT FEE: $5.00 - APPLICATION PLUS $1.00 PER SQ. FT. AREA OF EACH SIGN. APPLICATION DATE: // PERMITI _ DATE ----------------------------- -00- 0-NING DISTRICT _- TAX MAP PARCEL �� - ------------------------- ------------------- APPLICAI3eau jolais Cafe TELPHONE 277-012-? NT ADDRESS 602 Elmira Rd. Ithaca, N. Y. 14850 PROPERTY OWNER Robert O 'I�ialley ADDRESS 602 Elmira Rd . Ithaca, N. Y. 14850 TELPHONE 273-43i2 LOCATION OF SIGN(S) 602 Elmira Rd . SCALE DRAWING OR-ATTACHED OR BLUEPRINT. - - - - - - - - - 1 fled �9� _ /e st. f t i r _ �S• o /cam r 60 y !o SIGNATURE DATE G ,// 'c�'c�c-klr ..SIGN .. - E PERMIT . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ` PLANNING- BD. -DAT ACTION- - ( )APPROVED BY ( )DENIED UNDER SEC._ TOWN BD. ACTION DATE PEAL ACTION 2ND. PLANNING BD. ACTION DATE DATE OF APPEAL 2ND. TOWN BD. ACTION DATE DATE OF HEARING $25.00 DEPOSIT FOR ADVERTISEMENT OF HEARING. SIGN APPLICATION AND PERMIT � /�L�.aQ 3 �, O o FEE : *$ 5 . 00 - APPLICATION PLUS $ 1 . 00 PER SQ . FT , AREA OF EACH SIGN . 4 //f/'/ , " APPLICATION DATE : t1 � � 1 PERMIT - # DATE , . ,PING DISTRICT TAX MAP PARCEL APPLICANT + �' AA VSV�73 � TELPHONE 213 1 7 ADDRESS PROPERTY OWNER= ADDRESS 42. ' �1 �� � �� ^� ; V � ` TELPHONE'.AA`3 ^ LOCATION OF SIGNS ) A A AAI\ \ A A h h A A A A A A A A A /\ A I\ A • A A h A I\ A I\ I\ %♦ A A I\ h AAI♦ I\ A h I\ A A A /\ A I\ /\ A SCALE DRAWING - OR - ATTACHED . OR BLUEPRINT . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a, v\A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -0. Y\A J 1_ i � I DATE ' 1 SIGNATURE PERMIT - • . . - - PLANNING BD . ACT ION - - - - - - - - - DATE .'J �3 - - ( ) APPROVED BY ( ) DENIED UNDER SEC . TOWN BD , ACTION DATE AP ACTION 2ND , PLANNING BD , ACTION DATE OF APPEAL DATE OF NEARING 2ND , TOWN BD , ACTION DATE $ 25 . 00 DEPOSIT FOR ADVERTISEMENT F HEARING . , PROPOSED PROTECTIVE COVENANTS FOR MOUNTAIN PARKWAY BUSINESS CENTER PRE MYIBLE . Mountain Parkway Business Center will be a park of not less than 30 acres for offices , art studios and other facilities for professional and business use including convenience services for the neighborhood . It will be located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Danby Road ( State Rt . 96B ) and King Road East , in the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York . The Park will be surrounded by prestige residential areas to diminish the necessity for extensive auto travel by executives , employees , customers and neighbors . The Park will be a landscaped campus for businesses seeking attractive , beautiful , agreeable locations which are already provided with roads , water , sewer , and other utilities . The Park will - include vast grass areas , groves of trees , brooks and a large pond , bicycle paths , an art gallery and related facilities for artists , and other features designed to attract desirable business and residential users . The Park will not be a producer of traffic problems because it will not utilize the frontage on existing highways for additional curb - cuts and all parking will be without charge and. within the Park itself to avoid parking on public highways . Traffic within this Park will be limited because executives , employers , and customers will be encouraa, ed to live within , or within walking or bicycling distance , of • the park itself . - 2 - The operation of the Park will be designed to insure permanence in quality of construction and maintenance and the prevention of adverse influences . This will be achieved by continuity in developer/ owner control . The land has been in one family for 35 years and the current developer is a native Ithacan . In order to accomplish the foregoing objectives , Evan N . Monkemeyer , being the owner of the above described premises , hereby establishes the covenants , . conditi.ons , reservations . and restrictions upon which and subject to which all lots and portions .of such lots shall be improved , leased or sold and conveyed by him as owner thereof . 1 . Prior approval of plans . No building shall be erected , placed or altered on any lot until the construction plans and specifications and a plot plan showing the location of the structure and wlandscaping of the plot have been approved by the Architectural Review Committee as to quality of workmanship and materials , harmony of external design with existing structures , andasto location with respect to topography and finish grade elevation . 2 . Height of building . No building may be constructed on land leased or sold , having a height of more than two stories above a basement , if any , or above the ground level . This restriction may be waived and a building with basement and not more than three stories permitted with prior written approval of such increased height by said Architectural Review Committee . 3 . Size of, building . No building shall be erected which covers more than 250 of the area of land leased or sold . 4 . Location of building . No building shall be located nearer than 20 feet to any right of way or nearer than 15 feet to any boundary of land leased or sold . No building shall be located nearer than 30 feet from Danby Road and King Road East . 5 . Nuisance . No noxious or offensive activity shall be carried on upon any lot , nor shall anything be done thereon which may be or may become an annoyance or nuisance to adjoining owners , their employees , tenants or customers . 6 . Garbage and refuse disposal . No land leased or sold shall be used or maintained as a dumping ground for rubbish . Trash , garbage or other waste shall not be kept except in sanitary containers inside the building or under cover . All incinerators or other equipment for the storage or disposal of such material shall be kept in a clean and sanitary condition . 7 . Signs permitted . No sign or other advertising electrical display may be erected or permitted on any land leased or sold or buildings thereon except that a sign may be constructed and maintained carrying name , business and directions of such size , design and colors and at such locations as may be approved by the Architectural Review Committee . 8 . Off - street parking . Each building erected on any land leased or sold shall be located so as to provide ample space on the remainder of the land leased or sold for off - street parking for the convenience of executives , employees and customers , and such parking space must be maintained and used for parking purposes exclusively except as permitted by the Architectural Review Committee . Unless otherwise permitted by such committee , the minimum standards shall be the total of the following : a . One parking space for each 300 square feet of gross floor space in office use . b . One parking space for each 1 , 000 square feet of gross floor space in storage use . C * One parking space for each 150 square feet of gross floor space in commercial retail or service use . d . One parking space for each 600 square feet of gross floor space in light industrial use . ® - 4 - 9 . Traffic Circulation . Each owner or tenant of land leased or sold shall also provide adequate space for the circulation of traffic in the parking areas , which shall not be a part of the off - street parking space required in the above paragraph . 10 . Multiple Occupancy . The owner or tenant of a building . located on any land leased or sold shall have the right to build for multiple occupancy of tenants , provided the lessees of such space shall meet and comply with all of the restrictions , conditions and provisions hereof , and provided approval of the Architectural Review Committee is obtained . . 11 . Access Roads . A single curb - cut on Danby Road and on King Road East shall be permitted . No additional access roads through land leased or sold to Danby Road or to King Road shall be permitted . Interior access roads between Danby Road and King Road and opening to such roads will provide the sole access to land leased or sold . 12 . Architectural Review Committee . The Architectural Review Committee shall be composed of three members , Mas follows : ( a ) «onkemeyer , Inc . acting by and through . one of its officers designated for that purpose , or in place of such officer , Evan N . Monkemeyer , ( b ) a registered architect selected by the person named in ( a ) above , and ( c ) a neighbor , tenant or owner of land leased or sold , selected by the persons named in ( a ) and ( b ) above . These three shall serve for a period of five years , or until their successors are duly chosen and qualify as herein above set forth . The members of said committee shall serve without compensation for services performed pursuant hereto . The committee shall function by majority vote , and may make their own rules and regulations regarding procedure , notice of meetings and other matters not covered hereby . In the event some question or problem, should arise , the solution of which is not provided for or authorized hereby , same shall be decided by the then Chairperson of the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca , acting as an arbitrator , and the decision of said Chairperson , if not inconsistent with any of the above restrictions , covenants or provisions , shall be final , conclusive and binding on all parties concerned . - 5 - 13 . Variances . The Architectural Review Committee may , in the exercise of fair and impartial discretion , and solely in order to relieve hardship cases , . amend the provisions of Section 4 hereof , with respect to any land sold or leased . 14 . Enforcement . Enforcement shall be by proceedings at law or in equity against any person or persons violating or attempting to violate any covenants , whether to restrain violation and/ or to recover damages , and such proceedings may be maintained by any owner or other person having a special interest therein . 15 . Severability . Invalidation of any one of these covenants by judgment or court order shall in no wise affect any of the other provisions , which shall remain in full force and effect . 16 . Duration . These covenants are to run with the land and shall be binding on all owners and tenants or persons claiming under them_ of the land leased or sold until January 1 , 2002 , and shall terminate and be of no further effect on January 1 , 2002 . However , at any time prior to that date , the then owners of a majority of the area in square feet within mountain Parkway Business Center may , by written declaration signed and acknowledged by them and duly recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office , extend such provisions for a period of ten additional years , and this right to extend for additional ten year periods by the then owners shall exist as long as the owners of a majority of the area in square feet within such Park affirmatively vote to so extend them . 17 . Amendment . Any and all of the provisions herein may be amended or rescinded at any time by written declaration of the ten owners of a majority of the area in square feet within *Mountain Parkway Business Center , signed and and acknowledged by them and recorded in the Tompkins County Clerk ' s Office . 18 . Conflict . In the event any of the foregoing provisions conflict with any rule , statute or regulation of the Town of Ithaca now in effect , or if any amendments to these provisions conflict with any rule , statute or regulation of the Town of Ithaca in effect at the time of such amendment , the more restrictive provision shall control . NEXT MEETING : WEDNESDAY , MAY 119 1977 9 7 : 30 PM' TOMPKINS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING z. .... _ ...._. 'T.r ..n.n�r � ' ➢CV V..-^ 'i. .. c C'^T n _ _ _ ` . . _ _ . ro.._ Frank R. Liguori PE Commissioner of Planning � APR 2 - 1977 S U M M A R Y TOWN OF. ITHACA COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MEETING i APRIL 13 , 1977 7 : 30 PM The meeting was called to order by Chairwoman Barbara Caldwell . An attendance record is attached . The summary of the March 9th meeting was accepted . Privilege of the Floor E Leonard Miscall reported that bills have been introduced into both Houses o7f the State Legislature in connection with the forma tion of a Finger Lakes Area Water Resources Commission . He is hopeful that the Legislature will authorize formation of the Commission during this session . Commission members will be nominated locally but will be appointed by the Governor from a nomination .list . The Commission will be composed of 7 members . Tompkins County will be paired with Schuyler County to share a emember., ;Under the proposal favored by Mr . Miscall , the Department of: Environmental Conservation will be the lead agency . There are other bills in the Legislature which call for.. the Department, of Transportation to become the lead agency . , Leonard stated several reasons why he feels the proposed Law is a worthy one . ! i Ray Hemming said a Task Group has been working with the City Planning and Development Board and has prepared a draft outline of revisions to the city zoning regulations . There is a moratorium in the city on the conversion of homes to group and multi® family ` living . That moratorium expires in June and there is hope that the new regulations will be adopted before that time . A sample survey of the city indicates that 60% of the dwellings are single0 family and 20% are duplex homes , with a total of 80% being family homes . Only 18% of the dwellings are multi ® family . This points out that Ithaca is essentially a city of homes and that there . is a need to protect neighborhoods from the encroachment of multi® family f : and group housing . The proposed zoning revisions will also rede- fine a " family " to its strict definition , implying direct relation- i ship . A " grandfather " provision will allow existing conditions to continue if they are presently legal . Jim Yarnell suggested that many of the young people living in group or mu i - family homes are not students and it is improper to broadly classify all of the young people as students . Tom Brown of the Town of Enfield expressed interest in the conm cep of a Inger Lakes Water Resources Commission and would like more information . 128 East Buffalo Street , Ithaca , New York , 14850 - Telephone 607. 273 . 2080 Extension 28 , 29 e S Shirlev Raffens er er , Town of Ithaca , expressed interest in the s a istics on the housing survey in the City of Ithaca and wondered if the city tightens up on their zoning in relation to group and multifamily living , if this will cause the problem to spill over into the Town of Ithacao Carl Cox , Village of Trumansburg , said the Planning Board has comp a ed the village planning study and is now conferring with the Village Board urging its acceptanceo He said that he underestimated the amount of time and effort required to develop and obtain acceptance of a community plan ° Ron Anderson , Village of Cayuga Heights , said the village is looking into the advantages of adopting flood plain regulations . _ so flood insurance will be available in the village . He also reported that the village is not rushing into the SEQR local regulations , but is continuing to look into the matter . The village recently met with the prospective new owners of the TV cable systema Tony Schultz , Town of Caroline , expressed continued concern over the provisions of the law authorizing the formation of County Youth Bureaus . He said even the proposed amendments do not improve the law and he is opposed to the establishment of more bureaus . to manage peoples lives and activities . In relation to the SEAR law9 . he asked , t° If the law is so good , why is the opposi ® tion to .it -so strong? 11 He felt the Department of Environmental Conservation ha.s, become a gigantic bureau that is over- regulating the lives and activities of the citizens and communities . He gave several examples which reinforced his point of view . Ben Richards , Village of Lansing , said the village is looking - into e�impementation of the SEQR regulationso •Paul Komar , area manager of NYSEG , said the utility has decided -to . c.arry ou the fly ash disposal on property presently owned by NYSEG in the vicinity of the generating planta The site will serve Cayuga Station and will also serve Milliken Station when the present disposal site is consumed . Committee Reports Jim Yarnell said the Committee on Planning Board Structure will make a full report at the next meeting . Beverly Li_v_es�aV reporting on the Ad Hoc Youth and Recreation Commi tem sai s veral State departments are urging the formation of County Youth Bureaus and are rewriting rules and regulations to recognize and give an important role to the County Youth Bureau . She ,said the Ad Hoc Committee hopes to make further recommendations in relation to a County Youth Bureau in June . 2 - v • G SEQR Forum LIRLori reported that the SEQR Forum sponsored jointly by the P1 ninv ,Board and the Environmental Management Council was held on Mar.ch `30 _ and was attended by 40 to 50 people , mostly municipal officials . Alan Coburn of NYS DEC presented an overview . The County Planning Department prepared and distributed suggested local regulations , working forms for recording the events and administration of a SEQR Law , and presented a review of the entire procedures . Liguori said there was a great deal of concern expressed by municipalities over the complexity of the SEQR Law . The ,mounty has drafted regulations and will hold a public meeting on these regulations at the April 25th meeting of the Board of Representatives at 9 : 45 a . m . Subsequently , a public hearing will be held before consideration of adoption of the regulations . He said that a municipality may adopt the regulations by resolution , by ordinance or by local law , but in every instance there must be a public hearing preceeding the adoption . Improvements to Rt . 96 . Liguori said some 20 alternative improvements for Rt . 96 have now been presented to the public and there is a good deal of frustration . He likened the situation to attempting to juggle 20 balls at one time . He said it is perhaps time to sit back and re- examine the objectives of the proposed improvements and to look • at the alternatives vs the objectives . He suggested that the objectives seem to be as follows , although he pointed out that there has never really been a consensus as to what the objectives ought to be , Improved safety Improved traffic flow , both local and regional , now and for the future . ® Provide a second gateway ( bridge ) to the west end . ® Improve access to the Hospital and the west end , including emergency vehicles . Reduce the conflict with vehicle traffic and railroad crossings . ® Reduce traffic and thus improve safety through the Octopus and onto Cliff Street . Terminate the improved highway near the Hospital with good access to the Hospital . ® Improve or maintain good accessibility between the west end and major employment centers , including the central business district , 3 s Accomplish the above with the least impact possible upon : Residential areas • Commercial areas ® Cass Park Natural environment Changes in traffic patterns ( detrimental ) There was . . discussion of the objectives and a general consensus that the objectives were appropriate . It was pointed out that the 12 alternatives which have been presented to the public at the urban end can be classified into 3 broad categories . 1 . The Cliff Street solutions which have in common the continued use of Cliff Street as a prime arterial for Hospital and Rt . 96 traffic . These alternatives generally call for a new bridge parallel and close to the present bridge to serve traffic destined for Cliff Street and Rt . 89 , interchanging at the base of the hill . The alternatives also generally call for extensive use of public busing as a means of reducing traffic . These alternatives do not propose an overpass over the railroad , but deal with the railroad conflict problem by stating that emergency vehicles can be allowed passage through a blocked intersection through CB communications . 2 . The Buffalo Street Corridor . These alternatives have in common entrance and exit in the Buffalo -Court Street corridor and opening up of anew gateway across the waterways in that vicinity . It was pointed out that the Buffalo - Court Street corridor is comp- atible with the major east-west traffic corridor on Green , State , 5eneca , '- Buffalo , and Court Streets . This broad traffic corridor as fixed by the existing street patterns and by the location of major employment centers . These alternatives keep open the option of an overpass over the railroad and they significantly reduce traffic through the Octopus and Cliff Street . Furthermore , they tend to enhance the flow of traffic through the city and the com® mercial districts in the city . 3 . The Estes- Third Street Corridor . These alternatives all have in common a opening of a new ga eway . somewheres between Estes and Third Street . They are based upon an assumption that most of the traffic destined to enter the gateway to the west end are already on Meadow Street or Rt . 13 . An analysis of the east®west traffic patterns would indicate that this is not the . case as most of the east-west traffic of necessity flows through the Green Street® Court Street corridor because of the location of major employment centers and existing street patterns . This means that in order to reach a new gateway in the Estes-Third Street corridor , much of the east-west bound traffic must be diverted for one to several blocks on Meadow Street or Rt . 13 in a north or south direc® tion before continuing with the east or west travel . It was suggested that these turning movements will create traffic congestion on Meadow Street . Therefore , the alternatives within this category may not fully meet objectives . Considerable discussion followed . Discussions will continue at the next meeting , May 11 , 1977 . The meeting was adjourned . 4