Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1983-02-15 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD FEBRUARY 15 , 1983 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , February 15 , 1983 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , N . Y . , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , David Klein , Barbara Schultz , Bernard Stanton , Carolyn Grigorov , Edward Mazza , Virginia Langhans , Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) , Peter M . Lovi ( Town Planner ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) . ALSO PRESENT : James C . Rogan , William Frandsen , William P . Frandsen , Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 34 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERATION OF REAFFIRMATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR 6 LOTS GRANTED IN 1968 , A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 56 - 3 - 13 , OFF PARK LANE , ITHACA , N . Y . WILLIAM FRANDSEN , DEVELOPER / OWNER , Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted matter duly opened at 7 : 36 p . m . and accepted for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on February 7 , 1983 , and February 10 , 1983 , respectively . Chairman May read aloud the Notice of Public Hearing as noted above and asked Mr . Frandsen to speak to the matter . As an introduction , Mr . Fabbroni explained that at the time Eastern Heights was subdivided Mr . Frandsen was interested in subdividing his own acreage below Eastern Heights , at least he owned the land . As Eastern Heights fumbled around with different layouts , Mr . Frandsen , in turn , had three different alternatives for his land which were largely changed because they had to match with what Eastern Heights was doing - - as Eastern Heights changed , his was changed . There were certain understandings that went with his doing that - - the sewer that was brought up would come up the roads within the Frandsen subdivision and serve the Eastern Heights subdivision . The cost of changing the plans would have been offset by the utilities going in - - specifically Park Lane and what was to be King ' s Lane . Mr . Fabbroni stated that this went on in terms of approving Eastern Heights and finally Mr . Frandsen got final subdivision approval in 1968 , which was never recorded , for the six lots the Board is going to look at tonight . Eastern Heights then went on to be constructed ; sewer up Park Lane was constructed . The Eastern Heights developers decided that there was too much rock in the eastern portion and that it would be better to give this area to the Town for park development , therefore , the east -west sewer in this i Planning Board 2 February 15 , 1983 section was never built . Mr . Fabbroni stated that another part . of the history came in 1976 when we had all the flooding and he ( Fabbroni ) went to Mr . Frandsen and asked him for a drainage easement which follows Park Lane so that the Town could build a diversion ditch and divert some of the water causing havoc from Eastern Heights into another stream . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Mr . Frandsen. cooperated with the Town and granted the easement . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that , since we got 13 acres from Eastern Heights for parkland , when Mr . Frandsen came back to reopen this whole issue , he ( Fabbroni ) encouraged him to come to the Planning Board to obtain a reaffirmation of his approval on these six lots , and , for the remainder of the subdivision , a discussion with the Board of his preferred alternative that did not include the leftover areas , as he ( Fabbroni ) felt there were enough parks in the immediate area for now . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he suggested that Mr . Frandsen come back later with a plan for remaining lands for the Board to consider . At this point , Mr . Frandsen went back to his engineer , John MacNeil , and updated the identical six lots and came up with a new schematic for how they would .like to subdivide the remainder of the land . Mr . Fabbroni stated the the Public Hearing is on the six lots , however , Mr . Frandsen would like a reaction from the Board on the sketch plan . He pointed out that the plan for the six lots was updated in 1983 and reflects some change in the water lines to meet Health Department and Town standards . He noted that the • subdivision :road is to go as an extension of existing Park Lane and that he :really has the sewer on that particular alignment to work with , arid , really , water to work with . Mr . Frandsen then spoke to the Board . He stated that the reason he did not go with this project in 1968 was there was no water . Mr . Fabbroni explained that at this time the City had placed a moratorium on water hookups . Mr . Stanton asked if there were natural gas in the area . Mr . Frandsen responded that there was natural gas part way up and they are trying to decide whether to go with gas or electric , or both , in any event , the gas is not in . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the sewer line actually exists along the alignment of Park Lane . Mr . Stanton wondered if it were the plan that there will never be an access into this property from Slaterville Road , Mr . Fabbroni stated that access could be on the adjacent landowner ' s property . Discussion followed by the Board with Mr . Fabbroni and with Mr . Frandsen of the original maps and the new maps on an informal basis . • Chairman May wondered if there were an entrance from this property to Route 79 , how much would this end up as a short cut Planning Board 3 February 15 , 1983 . to Snyder Hill Road . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he would think the opposite would be the case and described the use of Pine Tree Road suggesting that some people from Eastern Heights might use it rather than Snyder Hill , however , if going down Route 79 he could not see why they would use it as an alternative to Pine Tree Road , Chairman May asked Mr . Frandsen what his timing might be , assuming that he would commence with the six lots , then what was his time schedule for the balance of the development . Mr . Frandsen stated that this depended on the economy . Mr . May noted the availability of the sewer line . Grades were discussed with Mr . Fabbroni . Mr . Fabbroni commented that the failure of Eastern Heights was that the roads do not follow the contours ; it disregarded the shape of the land and grades . The schematic was discussed as to a turn - around into Eastern Heights Park . It was noted that Mr . Fabbroni prefers this . Storm sewer was discussed with Mr . Fabbroni commenting that he almost prefers an open ditch . He stated that -there is no erosion in the present proposal until you get down to the very bottom of the subdivision where the land drops off ; this is where you will want to have a storm sewer . Mr . Fabbroni commented that Mr . Frandsen has been forced to compromise . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he is in contact with the State with reference to a drainage problem on Route 79 and we are . asking the State for help because of the help we gave them on three of their drainage problems . Mr . Fabbroni said that he would rather have driveway culverts over an open ditch which would be easier to maintain at this point in view of discussions with the State . Chairman! May asked Mr . Frandsen if he had given any consideration to changes since 1968 for a plan that will be more in keeping with current situations , adding that in looking at the plans , it did not look as though solar access had been considered . Chairman May stated that it may be doing Mr . Frandsen and the Town an injustice to keep the plan because it was done in 1968 . Chairman May stated that perhaps the plans could be reviewed with a look toward a little better layout from the standpoint of solar , etc . , although he realized Mr . Frandsen has spent many dollars on this project already . Mr . Stanton commented that he did not think Mr . May was talking about the six lots . Mr . May stated that he was not ; he was thinking about the schematic plan . Mr . Frandsen stated that he had spent over $ 20 , 000 trying to cooperate with the the Town and had a stack of plans that would choke a horse and that somewhere along the line he would like to stop pushing papers . He stated that he had been willing to do most anything but he would hesitate to make any more changes ; he • had to stop . i • Planning Board 4 February 15 , 1983 . Mrs . Grigorov stated that she could see Mr . Frandsen ' s strong desire not to change the six lots , but with the rest of the plan , perhaps some changes could be made . Mr . Frandsen pointed out that he is ending up with a piece of land that is land - locked and asked what he could do , what he should do with the entrances . Chairman May stated that it might be more beneficial to Mr . Frandsen and the Town to cut down costs of utilities , roads , etc . Mrs . Grigorov pointed out the great south - facing slope . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that it is important to realize that better than half of the parcel is mature woodland . Mr . LOVi stated that , as far as solar access goes , the orientation of a good many of the lots really is fine and what it really comes down to is siting the houses on the land . Mr . Lovi noted that he has east / west roads already and when it has come down to siting building , if Mr . Frandsen would consider solar , it might be an interesting alternative . Mr . May wondered if maybe there could be some clustering in the center . Mrs . Grigorov noted where the best trees are that are worth saving . Mr . Mazza inquired as to the average frontage on the streets . Mr . Frandsen said 100 ' frontage and 15 , 000 square feet or better . • Mrs . Grigorov commented that one of the mistakes in Eastern Heights was cutting down all the trees . Mr . Stanton asked Mr . Frandsen if he were the builder , with Mr . Frandsen responding that he would be the builder of the proposed development . Mr . Lovi commented that clustering is good , but this is a place where we must work with constraints already in place . Mr . Lovi pointed out that the cluster regulations require a buffer . Mr . May asked Mr . Frandsen if he will clear the land . Mr . Frandsen staged that that was not so ; the trees will remain as best he can ; he would make sure that trees have to be cut down before they are cut down and that he would try to save as many as possible . Mrs . Schultz asked how many lots are being considered with Mr . Frandsen noting that there will be a total of 68 lots , including the six being requested for affirmation . Chairman May asked if there were any comments at this point from the public . There was no public comment . p . m . Chairman May declared the public hearing duly closed at 8 : 13 . 1 Planning Board 5 February 15 , 1983 Chairman May asked that the Board turn to the SEQR review , the Board having before them a copy of the Environmental Assessment Form ( Short Form ) . All questions had been answered " no " and it had been reviewed by Mr . Lovi . The reviewer ' s recommendations were that this is an unlisted action for which a negative declaration was in order . MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : WHEREAS . 1e the developer has complied with the requirements of Local Law # 3 - 1980 providing for the environmental review of development in the Town of Ithaca , and 2a has completed the Short Environmental Assessment Form , answering all questions in the negative , and 3 . the Town Planner has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Form and determined that this project is an unlisted action as defined by SEQRA , and 4 . the Planning Board has carefully reviewed all maps , plans , and other relevant information and is acting as lead agency in the environmental review of this development ; • THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED THAT : 1 . the Planning Board determine and hereby does determine that the subdivision plan as presented by the developer is an unlisted. action as defined by SEQRA and Local Law # 3 - 1980 , and 2 * that there will be no significant adverse environmental effects as a result of this development , therefore no further environmental review is required , and 3e a negative determination of environmental significance shall be signed by the Chairman of the Planning Board . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Klein , Schultz , Stanton , Grigorov , Mazza , Langhans . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . David Klein , seconded by Mrs . Virginia Langhans : iWHEREAS : 1 Planning Board 6 February 15 , 1983 1 , the subdivider has prepared subdivision plat ( s ) in a form acceptable to the Town Engineer , and 2e an environmental assessment form has been prepared and reviewed by the Town Planner , and 3o this subdivision has been classified as an unlisted action and the Planning Board has determined that this project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment , and 4e the developer has already received final subdivision approval for this subdivision June 11 , 1968 , and 5s the subdivision layout was largely constrained at the time by the Eastern Heights Subdivision , which has since been developed , and 6o no parkland will be required to be added to the adjacent thirteen acre Eastern Heights Parks , and 7e there will be substantial conformance between the present subdivision plat ( s ) and the final plat ( s ) to be filed in the Office of the County Clerk , and 8e that such conformance shall be certified by the Town Engineer- prior to such filing , THERFORE: , IT IS RESOLVED : that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board reaffirm and hereby does reaffirm final subdivision approval for the six - lot subdivision as proposed and submitted by William Frandsen , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 56 - 3 - 13 , as presented in the maps in the Office of the Town Engineer provided that the final subdivision plat ( s ) to be filed in the Office of the County Clerk shall be in substantial conformance with these maps and that the Town Engineer shall certify the conformance of such final plat with the preliminary plat prior to its filing and before any offer for sale or other transfer shall be made . By way of discussion , Mrs . Langhans verified that the Motion deals only with the six lots previously approved . Mr . Fabbroni stated that that was correct . Mr . Klein wished to know if there were any changes from that time , to which Mr . Frandsen responded that there were none with the exception of the location of a PRV in the water system . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . . Aye - May , Klein , Schultz , Stanton , Grigorov , Mazza , Langhans . Nay - None . Y Planning Board 8 February 15 , 1983 • Mr . Mazza asked about traffic . Mr . Fabbroni stated that there is no good solution as to access onto Route 96B . Mr . Fabbroni stated that since Mr . Rogan first came to the Town Office three or four months ago , he has been struggling to find a good solution . There are two driveways now onto Danby Road and Mr . Rogan took the Town ' s suggestion and went to the State DOT and he wound up with one driveway and complete elimination of the worst driveway that is there . Mr . Fabbroni commented that this intersection at right angles is actually better than the Danby and Coddington Roads intersection , adding , the ideal is neither , but we are dealing with and trying to work with the situation . With the plan Mr . Rogan is proposing , there will be one widened driveway 15 feet wider than the existing driveway . When completed , the driveway that is presently there will be eliminated . Mr . Fabbroni stated that they tried to work with the situation where the grade could be the flattest , such that there will be adequate flat area for stopping at the highway before cars must enter onto the highway . Mr . Klein noted the absence of shoulders and Mr . Fabbroni noted that the road widens out in that area . Mr . Klein wondered if a car leaving the store would nose out into the highway in order to see . Mrs . Grigorov asked if there were not , at one time , some sort of recommendation that the entrance was to be onto Coddington Road . Mr . Fabbroni stated that that was based on the corner parcel which Ithaca College owns , but that is not part • of this project . Mr . Fabbroni commented that that land was donated and preserves the view of the " President ' s House " , adding that Joe Centini gave it to the College and it would not seem likely that the College would sell it - - all of which adds to the dilemma . Mr .. Fabbroni stated that they had considered all these things which led them back to a main entrance on Danby Road . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the problem on Danby Road is one more of transition . Cars must go from 40 mph to 30 mph within a few feet until 1 , 000 feet into the city on Aurora Street . Mr . Fabbroni commented that it may be more hazardous than the ideal , but this will be up to the individual driver and how cautious they are . Mr . Stanton asked Mr . Rogan if he were planning on student traffic into the business ; Mr . Rogan hoped that he would have student business . Mrs . Schultz commented that they would probably come the back way from Ithaca College . Mr . Rogan added that they may come down Hudson Street and come down Coddington Road . Mr . Mazza asked about the overhead electric line . Mr . Rogan talked about his agreement with NYSEG and ingress and egress . Mr . Rogan also talked about the NY Telephone Company pole , commenting that the overhead cable does not really bother him . Mr . Rogan indicated that the utility pole owned by NYSEG has to be moved , noting that it provides service to the two houses . Mr . • Klein wondered about access to the house that will remain . Mr . Rogan stated that his son will live in the house that is to remain on the property and he will be the one to manage the store . Planning Board 9 February 15 , 1983 • Mrs . Langhans asked if the store would be open on a 24 - hour basis , with Mr . Rogan responding that , as of right now , no . Mr . Mazza asked what was going to be sold , with Mr . Rogan responding that there will be a deli - - no pizza - - and a small seating area . Chairman May declared the public hearing duly closed at 8 : 42 p . m . and noted that there was no one present at this time to make public comment . Chairman May asked if the Short Form EAF were appropriate with the gas pumps . Mr . Lovi stated that it was , commenting that if Mr . Rogan were requesting a rezoning , it would not be . Mr . Stanton indicated that this project could add to the traffic problems and noted that the intersection with Coddington Road is not a good one . Mr . May asked Mr . Rogan if beer were going to be served . Mr . Rogan stated , absolutely no , however , beer will be sold in terms of off - premises sale . Mr . Rogan commented that he will tear down the houses in the next couple of weeks . He stated that he will have to reconsider if he does not get the approval for the pumps and stated that one dealership picked up 1 , 300 customers off the gas pumps ; 34 % bought something else in the store . The Board expressed concern with the " no " responses to questions 11 , 12 , and 13 on the Short EAF . Mr . Lovi suggested that the Board could direct him to go over a Long Form EAF with Mr . Rogan and enter such in the record . The Board directed Mr . Rogan to complete a Long Environmental. Assessment Form with the aid of Mr . Fabbroni . REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNTY PLANNING BOAR.D , CAROLYN GRIGOROV Mrs . Grigorov reported on the February 9 , 1983 , County Planning Board meeting . With respect to PASNY Power , Mrs . Grigorov reported that John Hamor , Public Affairs Officer , PASNY , New York , was a guest speaker , along with Dan Collins , General Manager , NYSEG , Ithaca Branch , Mr . Hamor cited the Niagara Redevelopment Act ( 1957 ) and pointed out that contracts between the Power Authority , State of New York , and the Municipal Electric Utilities Assocation of New York State and New York State Electric and Gas Corporation will expire in 1985 and 1990 respectively with the first reallocation of Niagara Hydroelectric Power occurring in 1985 . At the time the Act was established an economic transmission distance of 150 miles from Niagara Station was established as the economic service area and , although the oil embargo of 1973 resulted in • increased cost of oil , as well as coal and nuclear energy , hydropower has stayed practically the same . Later there were other municipal corporations from Long Island which requested a Planning Board 10 February 15 , 1983 share of the Niagara hydropower , and the transmission lines being already established to connect various regions together , it was considered reasonable to extend the hydropower all the way to Long Island - - in effect , setting the entire State as an economic service area for hydropower . If no action were taken locally , the hydropower allocations would be taken from utility companies and given to established municipal agencies ( preference customers ) to meet their needs ; local energy costs would go up . PASNY is proposing the Residential and Rural Energy Authority Plan ( RREA ) as a solution for 1985 contract changes - the one vote , one watt concept . Frank Liguori wondered if forming paper companies were legal and Mr . Hamor indicated that he thought so , however , the matter is still up in the air . The Niagara Redevelopment Act does not specify that a municipality should own their distribution system hardware . Rensselaer County has passed a resolution to go on referendum to form their own utility system ; others have formed paper agencies . If counties go on record by November 1983 , they could be on time for the allocation procedures , with minimal risk . A question and answer period was held , e . g . , if the paper agency , other than receiving power and allocating it through NYSEG , should get additional authority with Mr . Hamor answering that it is up to local wishes ; the paper agency is all that is necessary for now , and , if hydropower is generated locally , do the municipalities still get their allocated share of the Niagara Hydropower - - with Mr . Hamor answering , yes . Mrs . Grigorov reported that the Village of Groton has received approximately $ 480 , 000 of Community Development funds which will be used as low interest loans to local businesses to stimulate jobs . Mrs . Grigorov reported that Cortland and Tompkins Counties are progressing in a solid waste disposal site feasibility study , with a preliminary report expected by June . Mrs . Grigorov reported that the new law , " The State Fire Prevention and Building Code " , is scheduled for implementation by January 1 , 1984 , and the regulations in the Code are a compilation of all of the different codes which have been in force by State mandate , such as : The State Building Construction Code , the Fire Prevention Code , the Model Housing Code , the Energy Housing Code , Manufactured Housing Code , Plumbing Code , and others . Mr . Klein stated that Architects have come out against that new Code for several reasons , one being that it was put together too quickly and thus is not well thought out . Mr . Klein commented that the State gave too short a comment period , noting that they are taking comments this week , with the official document being out only a month . Mr . Stanton asked Mrs . Grigorov if the landfill will go , • with Mrs . Grigorov responding that she got that impression . Chairman May thanked Mrs . Grigorov for her report . Planning Board 11 February 15 , 1983 • Mr . May noted that activity on fire stations for West Hill and South Hill is moving along . Mr . Lovi stated that he has been in touch with a young lady who works with Professor Schmidt and who is an M . B . A . candidate at Cornell who is doing a feasibility study in equipping and siting a fire station . Mr . Lovi stated that she has submitted a project definition , a copy of which he has sent to Town Councilman David Jennings . Mr . Lovi has suggested that she consider a single station concept as an analytical tool , since a networking of stations becomes anyone ' s guess , adding that her efforts will allow the Boards to have an independently evolved analysis . Mr . Lovi stated that he had received a letter from the New York State Department of Transportation indicating that the Town and DOT should strive for early coordination of projects . Mr . Lovi reported that he had requested a subscription to the Cumberland News Service , a publication pertinent to Displaywriter uses , at a cost of $ 20 per year . Mr . Lovi informed Board members that there will be a SEQRA Workshop on February 26th at Cooperative Extension from 10 to 1 P . M . The Board expressed interest in attending . Mr . Lovi spoke of the Subdivision Regulations that the Board will be working on and the review thereof under SEQRA . He described a " scoping session " in terms of a D / EIS and a checklist of topics intended as a starting point for developing a detailed scope for a project - specific D / EIS . Mrs . Fuller distributed copies of all the material related to the SEQR review of the proposed subdivision regulations to each of the Board members . Chairman. May asked if the Board wanted the New York State Department of State Planners to offer another seminar and what topics they would like to see discussed . Mr . Stanton suggested that SEQRA would be a good topic . This matter will be discussed at a later meeting . CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE ROGAN PROPOSAL Mr . Rogan submitted an Environmental Assessment Form (Long Form ) , dated February 15 , 1983 and the Board commenced its review question by question , page by page . Referring to question # 19 , Mr . Mazza noted that from Coddington Road the building is set back 20 feet with the ordinance requiring 30 feet , consequently , it would appear that Mr . Rogan should request a variance for this also . This fact should also be noted in question # 19 in addition to the request for variance for gas pump island . Mr . Rogan stated that he would like this to be added . • The following changes were made to the Environmental Assessment Form ( Long Form ) : Planning Board 12 February 15 , 1983 • 1 . Question # 19 - - Add " Rear set back from 30 feet to 20 feet . " 2 . Question # 24 - - Change " 10 " to " 3 . " 3 . Question # 34 - - Check " Young tree species less than 30 feet tall . " yes , rather than " no " . 4 . Question # 50 - - Delete " none " and " move 1 " ; Add " Demolish two and relocate one off - site . " 5 . Question # 52 - - Change " None " to " No . " It was noted that Town Engineer Fabbroni had reviewed the EAF , described the proposal as an Unlisted Action and recommended , as reviewer , that " exact details of State DOT permit for driveway construction to Danby Road SR96 should be followed . There is no ideal access to this site without corner parcel involved . Circulation on site is very good for both convenience store and pump needs and peak loads . Landscape plan shown is a minimum . " Mr . Rogan stated that he would plant evergreens on the whole back side of the property . Mr . Rogan referred to the site plan and discussed the drainage plans - - catch basins , manholes , 15 " piping - - with the members , noting that these plans are into the State right now . Mr . Rogan described his discussions with DOT in Syracuse - - Fred Grout being • the Resident Engineer here in Ithaca . Mr . Fabbroni verified that he had checked with Mr . Grout who said that Syracuse had no problem except for fine detail such as a grate over the entrance driveway . • MOTION by Mr . Edward Mazza , seconded by Mr . Bernard Stanton . WHEREAS : 10 the developer has complied with the requirements of Local Law # 3 - 1980 providing for the environmental review of development in the Town of Ithaca , and 2e has completed the Long Environmental Assessment Form , and 3 . the Town. Engineer has reviewed the Environmental Assessment Form and determined that this project is an unlisted action as defined by SEQRA , and 4 . the Planning Board has carefully reviewed all maps , plans , and other relevant information and is acting as lead agency in the coordinated environmental review of this development , and 5 * this review has examined all environmental issues including the granting of a variance for a self - service gas pump island on the site and a variance for the rear yard setback ; THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED THAT : • 1 . the Planning Board determine and hereby does determine that the retail food store described in the site plan presented Planning Board 13 February 15 , 1983 • by the developer and granting of a variance necessary for a self - service gas pump island and a variance for the rear yard setback are unlisted actions as defined by SEQRA and Local Law # 3 - 1980 , and 2 * there will be no significant adverse environmental effects as a result of this development , therefore , no further environmental review is required , and 3e a negative determination of environmental significance shall be signed by the Chairman of the Planning Board . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Klein , Schultz , Stanton , Grigorov , Mazza , Langhans . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he would suggest two points for consideration by the Board : ( 1 ) the grade on the southwest portion should be cut down as much as the public sewer depth allows so sight distance would be improved as much as possible with the grading ; ( 2 ) a concrete pad should be put around the • pump island :because of the issue of incompatibility of gasoline with asphalt . Mr . Rogan stated that there will be lights on the pumps and at the Danby Road driveway intersection . MOTION by Mr . Edward Mazza , seconded by Mrs . Barbara Schultz : WHEREAS . 1 * the developer has prepared a site plan in a form acceptable to the Town Engineer , and 2a an environmental assessment form has been prepared and re - viewed by the Town Engineer , and 3e this development has been classified as an unlisted action and the :Planning Board has determined that this project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment , and 4o the wide driveway and the elimination of two private driveway ;" along Danby Road will substantially improve the existing traffic access , though no access is the ideal , and • 5e three existing homes will be removed or demolished and the remaining home will be connected to public sewer and brought Planning Board 14 February 15 , 1983 • into compliance with all building , electrical , and fire codes , and 6 * there will be substantial conformance between the present site plans and the final plans to be filed in the Office of the Town Engineer , and 7e the present plans are substantially in a form acceptable to the New York State Department of Transportation pending the completion of minor modifications in the plan details , and 8e that such conformance shall be certified by the Town Engineer prior to such filing ; THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED : 16 that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does grant site plan approval for a retail food store in an existing Business " A " District , Danby and Coddington Roads , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels Number 6 - 40 - 4 - 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , as presented in the plans on file in the Office of the Town Engineer provided that the final plans to be filed in the Office of the Town Engineer shall be in substantial conformance with the site plan and that the Town Engineer shall certify the conformance of such final plan with same • prior to its filing . 2e that lighting satisfactory to the Town Engineer shall be provided at both entrances . 3e that a pedestrian walkway shall be provided at the Coddingt. on Road entrance and along the driveway into the parking area . 49 that at the southwest entrance on the Danby Road the grade adjacent to the highway be cut down as much as practical to improve visibility in a manner acceptable to the Town Engineer . 5e that there be a concrete pad at the gasoline pump island in accordance with applicable State codes . 6e that the Planning Board , having determined that : a . there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location ; be the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood in which the use is to be located will not be adversely affected , ce the proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development of the Town , • recommend and hereby does recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that a variance be granted to allow the construction Planning Board 15 February 15 , 1983 and operation of a self - service gas pump island and a variance be granted for rear yard set - back , as indicated on the site plan as approved hereinabove . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Klein , Schultz , Stanton , Mazza , Langhans . Nay - Grigorov . The MOTION was declared to be carried . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , the Chair declared the February 15 , 1983 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10 : 16 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board .