HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1988-04-05 FILED
TOWN OF ITHACA
Date 99
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARDClerk
APRIL 5 , 1988
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday , April 5 , 1988 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca ,
New York , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , James Baker , Carolyn Grigorov ,
Virginia Langhans , Robert Miller , Robert Kenerson , David
Klein , William Lesser , John C . Barney ( Town Attorney ) ,
Robert R . Flumerfelt ( Town Engineer ) , Susan C . Beeners ( Town
Planner ) , George R . Frantz ( Assistant Town Planner ) , Andrew
S . Frost ( Town Building Inspector / Zoning Enforcement
Officer ) .
ALSO PRESENT : Laura Holmberg , Don Ellis , Jeff Rathke ( WVBR ) , Judy
f Small , Theda Zimrot , Thomas Johnson , Tony Chiesa , Harry
Roscioli , Roberta Chiesa , Elizabeth Roscioli , Lenny
Fromkes , Song Kyong , Paula Weiss , Bob Leathers , George
Vignaux , Michael Peyton , Eva Hooton , William Hooton ,
Helen Engst , Ed Hallberg , Bruce Rich , Steve Heslop , Jon
" Meigs , David A . McCune , Edward W . King , Esq . , J .
Hamrock ( WHCU ) , Gene Ball , . Iva Michener , Salvatore
Grippi , Rosalind Grippi , Shirley Ainslie , James
Ainslie , Ruth Johnson , Hugh Howarth , Jo Perry , Carl
Sgrecci , Judith Cone , Steve Heslop , John Weiss , Elsie &
Gery White , Gerald Hall , William Grover , Athena Grover ,
Celia Bowers , John Bowers , Fred Yahn ( Ithaca Journal ) ,
Doria Higgins , Slade Kennedy Jr . , Peter Novelli ,
Phiroze Mehta , Bill Petrillose .
Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 30 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 March 28 , 1988 , and March 31 , 1988 , respectively ,
together with the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice
upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion ,
op upon both the Clerk and the Building Commissioner of the City of
Ithaca , upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works , upon
the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the applicants
and / or agents , as appropriate , on March 30 , 1988 .
Chairman May read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled ,
as required by the New York State Department of State , Office of Fire
Prevention and Control .
NON - AGENDA ITEM
Andrew Frost distributed to each of the members of the Board a
;� copy of his March 1988 Report of Building / Zoning Activities .
Planning Board - 2 - April 5 , 1988
PLANNER ' S REPORT
Town Planner Susan Beeners introduced the new Assistant Town
Planner , George R . Frantz , to the members of the Board . Ms . Beeners
stated that Mr . Frantz commenced work on Monday , April 4 , 1988 , and
added that he has a Bachelor ' s Degree in Landscape Architecture from
Cornell University , and is just about to finish his Master ' s Degree in
City and Regional Planning . Ms . Beeners offered that Mr . Frantz had
worked for several years with the Lancaster County Planning
Commission , as well as for several other agencies , and some private
firms .
Chairman May , and members of the Planning Board , welcomed Mr .
Frantz as a new staff member .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR REAFFIRMATION OF FINAL
SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE " BLACK OAK LANE " CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION ,
19 NEW UNITS AND ONE EXISTING UNIT , GRANTED FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
ON MARCH 3 , 1987 , LOCATED ON 7 . 01 ACRES AT 921 MITCHELL STREET , TOWN
OF ITHACA TAX PARCELS NO . 6 - 60 - 1 - 3 AND - 4 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R - 15 ,
JOSEPH CIASCHI , OWNER ; WILLIAM DOWNING , ARCHITECT .
Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above -noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 42 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Chairman May invited Mr . Edward King , Attorney for the project ,
to address the Board .
Attorney King stated that the primary reason for the
reapplication was the concern with the time limitations on approval of
the subdivision map . Attorney King noted that the subdivision was
approved in March of 1987 , and the site plan that was used was an
architect ' s drawing , noting that it was not a survey . Attorney King
is seeking approval of an actual survey that can be filed with the
County Clerk . Attorney King stated that there are several changes in
the site plan - one change mentioned was that the proposed garages
that had been up in the entrance lane on the north side of the site
were removed , as required by the Planning Board in March of 1987 .
Attorney King noted that the separate Tax Parcel had been delineated ,
whereas it had not been separately delineated on the original plan ,
adding , the reason for that was that the Attorney General requires
that property being subjected to a Homeowners ' Association Agreement
cannot be occupied , commenting that the existing house had a couple of
tenants . Attorney King stated that in the official offering plan it
is actually the seven acres , minus the parcel that is discussed in the
plan . Attorney King commented that the offering plan itself is a 130
page booklet describing all phases of the construction . Attorney King
stated that it has met the requirements of the Attorney General ,
except a couple of pages have to be revised , because of Town approval .
• Attorney King stated that the phasing had been discussed in the
original plan , but it had not been decided how it would be phased ,
adding that the new site plan completed by the surveyor shows the
Planning Board - 3 - April 5 , 1988
. layout of the different phases of construction , and the land area
being transferred to the community . Attorney King said that five
phases had been approved by the Board , commenting that the applicant
came back before the Board in August of 1987 to apply for approval of
four units located in the southeast quadrant , which is labeled Phase
6 . Attorney King noted that Site. Plan II does not depict the roadway ,
but it is a private road .
Chairman May wondered what the status of the buildings was at the
present time . Attorney King responded that the exterior of one
building is substantially complete .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
anyone present wished to speak . No one spoke . Chairman May closed
the Public Hearing at 7 : 50 p . m . and brought the matter back to the
Board for discussion .
William Lesser wondered , if the Board were to approve the plans
as final subdivision plans , is there any implication that Phase 6 is
being approved ? Attorney Barney responded , no , the resolutions can be
made , specifically excluding that , adding that the normal requirements
of a subdivision plat , as noted in Section 37 of the Subdivision
Regulations , require showing alleys , roads , etc .
Robert Flumerfelt , Town Engineer , mentioned the storm water
• detention facility . Mr . Flumerfelt stated that he talked with Mr .
Gary Wood , the Engineer for the project , and added that there would be
further study on the matter .
Robert Kenerson wondered about landscaping . Ms . Beeners
responded that there has been some work done with respect to the
landscaping .
There appearing to be no further discussion , Chairman May asked
if anyone were prepared to make a motion .
MOTION by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board reaffirm and
hereby does reaffirm its March 3 , 1987 , conditioned final approval of
the " Black Oak Lane " clustered subdivision , comprised , of 19 clustered
units and one existing single - family dwelling , located on 7 . 01 acres
at 921 Mitchell Street , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No . 6 - 60 - 1 - 3 and
6 - 60 - 1 - 4 , with the understanding that the additional dwelling units
shown on a map reviewed by the Planning Board on April 5 , 1988 ,
entitled " Site Plan - 2 for Black Oak Lane " , dated August 28 , 1987 ,
revised December 10 , 1987 , by George C . Schlecht , P . E . , L . S . , in the
area described thereon as Phase VI of said " Black Oak Lane " clustered
subdivision , are not approved , and with such reaffirmation being upon
the further condition that the owner provide a final plat in a form
meeting the approval of the Town Engineer , the Town Planner , and the
• Chairman of the Planning Board , such final plat to contain all of the
items required under Article VI , Section 37 , of the Town of Ithaca
Subdivision Regulations , and that such finally approved plat be
Planning Board - 4 - April 5 , 1988
• recorded in the Office of the Tompkins County Clerk within 90 days of
such final approval .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Chairman May declared the matter of Consideration of a Request
for Reaffirmation of Final Subdivision Approval :for the " Black Oak
Lane " Clustered Subdivision duly closed at 8 : 03 p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN BOARD
WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED REZONING OF A 15 . 86 - ACRE PORTION OF TOWN
OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 24 - 4 - 14 . 2 , LOCATED AT 1290 TRUMANSBURG
ROAD , 48 . 86 ACRES TOTAL , FROM RESIDENCE DISTRICT R - 15 TO BUSINESS
DISTRICT " B " , FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A NEIGHBORHOOD
COMMERCIAL SERVICE CENTER , AND FURTHER , WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPOSED
REZONING OF A 12 -ACRE PORTION OF SAID TAX PARCEL FROM RESIDENCE
DISTRICT R- 15 TO MULTIPLE RESIDENCE DISTRICT . 00 HYON AND SONG JA
KYONG , OWNERS ; ROBERT S . LEATHERS ARCHITECT , P . C . , SITE PLANNER .
( ADJOURNED FROM MARCH 15 , 1988 . )
• Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 8 : 04 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Mrs . Kyong addressed the Board and stated that her husband , Dr .
Kyong , has a medical office in the existing house located at 1290
Trumansburg Road , noting that the house has been renovated . Mrs .
Kyong stated that they felt very strongly that there are not any
services in that area for the people on West Hill , Mrs . Kyong noted
that before the house was renovated it was rented to nurses , adding
that the nurses loved to stay in that area because the area was
beautiful and convenient to the Hospital .
Mr . Robert Leathers , Architect for the project , appeared before
the Board and appended large maps to the bulletin board .
Mr . Leathers noted that when he had first viewed the site to
figure out what could be done with the existing house , where Dr . Kyong
wanted to have a medical office , and at the same time looked at the
parcel of land for future use because the Kyongs planned to move
there , and build a house , which they still plan to do . Mr . Leathers
realized that that . indeed was a very nice residential area . Mr .
Leathers stated that when he started looking at the second parcel of
the whole property he wanted to be sure that something was going to be
built that everyone could be proud of . Mr . Leathers stated that , as
an Architect , he would not construct anything that he felt would not
• be appealing . Mr . Leathers noted that Mrs . Kyong started with that
when she approached an Architect . Mr . Leathers stated that the first
area viewed was the 15 acres adjacent to Trumansburg Road , which Mr .
Planning Board - 5 - April 5 , 1988
• Leathers felt was ideally situated to be used as a small neighborhood
services area , and also felt that the character of that should be
something that had a personal scale , adding that while it provides
service to the community it indeed maintains that rural beauty and
enhances that whole area by staying with a natural construction , i . e . ,
natural woods , working with cedar , and working with materials that
would be right as a good neighbor . Mr . Leathers offered that the
development would be an area of retail sales , but an area that , in
fact , will have that character and personality , adding that the land
has a natural rural beauty . Mr . Leathers stated that the 12 acres
behind the 15 acres is proposed to be multiple family housing . Mr .
Leathers noted that sometime when multi - family housing is mentioned
there is a tendency to think of ugly rental units . Mr . Leathers
stated that in this case it is not true . In fact , the units would
look almost more like single family housing than apartment buildings .
Mr . Leathers stated that the proposal is for sixty units , which would
be ten buildings with six units each , constructed with natural
materials , and with entrances directly from grade . Pointing to map ,
Mr . Leathers said that 1 . 9 acres would be a park with tennis courts ,
parking areas , picnic areas and maybe a small playground , which the
Kyongs plan to deed over to the Town of Ithaca . Mr . Leathers noted
that , in fact , it would be an enhancement of the overall character .
Mr . Leathers stated that it is , in fact , true that the multiple family
zoning might have approved over 200 units . Mr . Leathers stated that
the developer is not proposing more because they want to retainxthe
• character , and leave all that open space , commenting that the single
family housing it is presently zoned for would allow at least 92
living units on that same space . Mr . Leathers commented that with 60
living units there is actually less than would be permitted at the
present time , under the existing zoning . Mr . Leathers noted that the
reason for a - lesser amount is to maximize the open space that links
all the park - like setting together .
Don Ellis , Architect , with the Robert Leathers firm , addressed
the Board with some detailed outlines of the project .
Mr . Ellis noted that it has been established in Planning
documents all the way back to 1959 that there is a need for retail on
West Hill , Mr . Ellis stated that the 1959 plan shows a location on
Bundy Road , and given the fact that there is a traffic light at the
Hospital entrance , and the sight lines at Bundy Road , he felt that
this was a very logical location for the commercial development . Mr .
Ellis noted that there is very little need for an argument to
establish that there is need in the area , in general , for high quality
multi - family housing . Mr . Ellis felt that said proposal is the right
kind of project in a good location , as it is a location where the
commercial is nicely buffered from the surrounding areas , noting that
the cemetery is to the north , the proposed multi - family to the west , a
NYSEG substation to the south , and across the road all the development
is either office or institutional . Mr . Ellis noted that , in terms of
the residential , the proposal borders against other residential , and
• against the cemetery on the north . Indicating on the map , Mr . Ellis
pointed out the 125 feet of developed landscape that separates the
proposed multi - family from the proposed commercial , adding that there
Planning Board - 6 - April 5 , 1988
• is a proposed park on the south edge . Mr . Ellis pointed out some
representative photographs appended to the bulletin board , commenting
that this was the type of commercial development proposed . Mr . Ellis
noted that the appended photographs were very residential in
character , form , and very rural appearing . Mr . Ellis stated that this
is the same kind of arrangement of buildings that one would find in
the farms up and down the road . Again , indicating on the map , Mr .
Ellis pointed out the existing barn which might become a Health
Center , and adjacent to that is about 5 , 000 square feet of retail
space . Mr . Ellis stated that in the surrounding area there would be
rather extensive landscaping , noting that the reason for this is that
the developer has chosen to develop at a low density . Mr . Ellis noted
that the buildings are spaced quite far apart , and there is a
tremendous amount of land that is not being used . Mr . Ellis stated
that the intention of the developer is to use a landscaping scheme
where immediately next to the building a lot of care is used . Mr .
Ellis stated that some trees will be planted . Mr . Ellis noted that
there is an extensive buffer to the north that is sensitive to the
alignment of the stream , commenting that the developer would like to
enhance the stream feature . Mr . Ellis noted that there are two
groupings of the multi - family units , noting that the first grouping
focuses on the pond , and the second grouping is oriented 'to look down
toward the lake . Mr . Ellis also noted that the multi - family units
would have a single family house character .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
there were anybody out there who wished to say anything on this
matter .
Elizabeth Roscioli of 152 Bundy Road spoke from the floor and
stated that she thought it a little bizarre to even consider rezoning ,
building , and adding , before the City fathers do something or other
about what is going to be done with the Octopus , if anything .
Secondly , Ms . Roscioli wondered what kinds of businesses were
proposed , commenting , what if the business is defunct - what happens
to the remains that are left ? Ms . Roscioli also expressed her concern
with increased traffic in the area . Mr . Leathers .responded that the
proposal as outlined , in terms of neighborhood services , the traffic
would not be increased , but decreased through the Octopus . Mr .
Leathers stated that the rationale being , the people using these
neighborhood services are going . to be from the neighborhood that is
adjacent to the Hospital . Mr . Leathers does not see people
frequenting the West Hill shopping center from East Hill , Mr .
Leathers noted that the complex would include retail shops , such as
possibly a health club , small deli , drive - thru bank , dry cleaners ,
beauty shoppe - those kinds of services . Mr . Leathers stated that
there would certainly not be a Hilton Hotel . Continuing , Mr . Leathers
noted that the buildings are drawn at 4 , 000 and 5 , 000 square feet ,
commenting that some of the businesses might use that much space , but
it is much more likely that that size would serve a couple of
merchants . Mr . Leathers stated that , in addition , some of the people
• that have to go downtown for services now can shop in their
neighborhood , thereby not having to make one trip down and another
trip back , commenting that the average person on West Hill makes
Planning Board - 7 - April 5 , 1988
between 4 . 00 and 8 : 01 trips per da downtown to in fact ,
P P Y , go shopping ,
etc . Mr . Leathers noted that the above information was based on
planning information from planning references that had been put
together for suburban areas .
John Bowers of 1406 Trumansburg Road spoke from the floor and
noted information that he felt was relevant to the traffic concern .
Mr . Bowers stated that at the last Planning Board meeting of March 15 ,
1988 , Mr . Leathers ' firm , Mr . Ellis in particular , offered as evidence
that the traffic situation would not be worsened , in fact , would even
be improved . Mr . Bowers stated that Mr . Ellis had counted around 70
cars up at Community Corners . Mr . Bowers stated this statistic would
be great , except that Mr . Ellis happened to choose Tuesday afternoon
at around two or three o ' clock in the afternoon , which is , as any
shopkeeper knows , just about the deadest period of the week . Mr .
Bowers stated that he decided , with his two sons , to go up to
Community Corners and count the number of cars turning into and out of
the commercial areas on Saturday between 12 : 05 p . m . and 1 : 05 p . m . Mr .
Bowers stated that they counted over 500 cars turning in and out of
those areas . Mr . Bowers stated that he felt the area in question was
roughly comparable to the area at Community Corners , and the kinds of
shops proposed are very similar . Mr . Bowers pointed out that one of
the most heavily used areas at Community Corners was precisely the
kind of bank drive - in that is proposed , adding that there were cars
continually coming into and out of the bank drive - in . Mr . Bowers
stated that he cannot believe that someone can say seriously , even if
• it was just local traffic which is clearly not the case , that this is
not going to affect traffic patterns - that traffic has to go into and
out of this commercially developed area onto the Trumansburg Road and
other roads around there . Mr . Bowers stated that this is the kind of
rate we are going to have at peak hours , commenting that the figures
that were given out were completely and utterly misleading . Mr .
Bowers stated that he had no doubt that Mr . Leathers ' plans for said
development are beautiful , as he had seen some of the work that Mr .
Leathers had done , specifically the playgrounds , also noting that he
has no contention that Mrs . Kyong ' s plans are something that looks
beautiful , but felt this would be fine if this area were zoned for
multiple residence and for commercial . Mr . Bowers felt that the only
problem with said plan is that everybody who lives in this area
opposes it . Mr . Bowers offered that it was mentioned earlier that
plans as far back as 1959 noted this site as a good place for
commercial development . Mr . Bowers noted that the question is - who
determined that this is a good place for commercial development ? Mr .
Bowers continued that if it has anything to do at all with the
residents in the area , then the answer is quite clear - - we do not
want commercial development , even nice elegant commercial development
in that area - - we do not want the increased traffic that apartments
in that area would add to the whole area - - we want it kept what it is
zoned now , mainly single family residence and Agricultural . Mr .
Bowers noted that more than 200 signatures have been collected from
people living in the area and people who regularly go up and down the
Trumansburg Road , which Mrs . Bowers , in a relatively short space of
time , managed to collect . Mr . Bowers commented that , given another
Planning Board - 8 - April 5 , 1988
two weeks , 98 % of the people in the whole area would come out against
this proposed development .
Celia Bowers of 1406 Trumansburg Road spoke from the floor and
read aloud for the record a petition to the Planning Board , Town of
Ithaca , as follows .
" We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed
rezoning of a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the
hospital entrance on Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for
the development of a shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed
rezoning of 12 acres on the same site from R15 to multiple residence
( to accomodate 60 apartment units ) , We believe that opening up West
Hill to commercial development would destroy the residential and
medical character of the neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no
zoning changes should be made in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus
plan is finalized . "
At this point , Chairman May directed that the petition received
from the surrounding neighbors be entered into the record . [ Attached
hereto as Exhibit 1 . 1
Mrs . Bowers pointed out that she nearly lost at least 50 % of the
signers of this signature because they said it was not strong enough
- - they did not want commercial development even if the Octopus plans
P... were finalized . Also , Mrs . Bowers noted that in her travels securing
signatures for the petition she found two people who were asked to
sign the petition who did not , and indicated that she would like the
Board to recognize that because she felt the neighborhood does not
want this . Mrs . Bowers stated that her own kids play on a Leathers '
playground and was sure that Mrs . Kyong is an honorable lady , but
noted that , frankly , Mrs . Kyong is not eternal - she is going to die .
Mrs . Bowers wondered what happens to the development when Mrs . Kyong
dies and her heirs sell it , and it is zoned commercial . Mrs . Bowers
noted that there is no way this Board , with the best will in the
world , can undo that commercial zoning . Mrs . Bowers commented that
the future owner may say - - I want to maximize profits on this land - -
I am buying commercial property and I am going to put in another 12
buildings . At this point , Town Attorney Barney interjected and stated
that the Zoning Ordinance does not permit that , the applicant has to
come before the Board for a site plan approval . Mrs . Bowers
responded , sure , but if it is zoned commercial , commenting that the
City of Ithaca just lost a lawsuit because they wanted to stop
development that the land was zoned for . Attorney Barney stated that
that was a different ordinance and a different set of circumstances .
Mrs . Bowers wondered , if permission was given for five buildings that
no more would ever be built . Attorney Barney stated that if any more
were going to be built the applicant would have to come before the
Planning Board and a revised site plan would have to be approved .
Mrs . Bowers stated that commercial zoning is there , and therefore , the
applicant can say - look , we have this commercial site , and we need to
use it to the full because we cannot make money , noting that the Board
would listen to them . Mrs . Bowers stated that two or three people
Planning Board - 9 - April 5 , 1988
have indicated that they would like to see a variance perhaps at some
time , off the Trumansburg Road for a Mom and Pop store .
Mr . Ellis , Architect , stated that traffic generation formulas
were used to figure out how much traffic will result from a particular
kind of business . Mr . Ellis noted that the numbers are
representative , and standard numbers were used . Mr . Ellis felt that
there was a misunderstanding that the developer is proposing a
development that would decrease traffic . Mr . Ellis stated that the
developer is proposing a density of use , and a density of population
that is lower than what would happen if this land continued under the
current R- 15 zoning , and added that said development is less dense
than what could be done without any request of the Planning Board ,
Zoning Board , or the Town Board , Mr . Ellis noted that there could be
at least 46 single family homes , plus accessory apartments would be
permitted . Mr . Ellis felt that the traffic generated with the
existing zoning is higher than what is being proposed . Mr . Ellis
noted that 60 apartment units would have fewer vehicles than 60 single
family houses . Mr . Ellis noted that , if the zoning is not changed ,
then a certain level of traffic density and population density will
develop . Mr . Ellis offered that the level of traffic density for the
proposed development will be lower . Mr . Ellis stated that , also
significant , in fact , is since some of this is commercial facilities ,
the density of traffic , particularly crossing the Inlet , would be
lower under the presented proposal than what would happen under the
existing zoning , three years , five years , and ten years down the road .
Mrs . Kyong stated that many people are working day and night for
the community , and for Ithaca . Mrs . Kyong felt that these people need
a place for a break . Mrs . Kyong commented that she would not do
anything to take away the beauty of the area . Also , Mrs . Kyong stated
that the hospital workers need a place to live .
George Vignaux of 1470 Trumansburg Road spoke from the floor and
stated that he did not sign the petition when it was presented to him ,
because he wanted to attend the meeting to hear the facts , and make
his own decision . Mr . Vignaux stated that he was opposed to
development on West Hill because it is zoned residential , noting that
the Hospital is a variance , and the Doctors ' office medical facilities
are variances to the character of the neighborhood , which is
residential . Mr . Vignaux stated that he saw a domino effect where the
argument is that because there is a Hospital there is a need for
commercial , adding that because the commercial is there it would be
nice to have residential , if we have this commercial residential
package . Mr . Vignaux noted that Bruce Babcock has 160 acres of land
the next block up that he would love to have as a Pyramid Mall type
shopping center , and if you have already given permission for the
Hospital why not give permission for this . Mr . Vignaux stated that if
you give permission for this and rezone it as commercial why not go
commercial on the 160 - if you do the 160 , why not put some high
density factories up there , commenting that a zoning decision should
not be inviolate , but very close to inviolate . Mr . Vignaux stated
that the Board should , very seriously , consider any of the
consequences of changing what has been established , and has caused
Planning Board - 10 - April 5 , 1988
people to make their decision to live in that neighborhood , based on
the established zoning that is there , and should remain .
Judith Cone of 211 Perry City Road in the Town of Ulysses spoke
from the floor and stated that she felt very strongly that development
on Route 96 also affects the Town of Ulysses . Ms . Cone noted that she
is right near Route 96 , and in the last eight years traffic has
increased on Perry City Road . Ms . Cone stated that there is a lot of
push in Ulysses for developments , adding that there are constant
requests for rezoning for housing development , shopping malls , trailer
parks , etc . , noting that Ulysses , so far , has been pretty strong about
not allowing them . Ms . Cone stated that she is opposed to development
on the west side of the lake because she does not feel there is a
need , commenting that once the Town of Ithaca starts zoning variances
to put in commercial and apartments , etc . , it will mushroom , and Route
96 will be Elmira Road , Ms . Cone felt that it would never be like
Lansing because Route 96 is residential - it is one - family residential
there are people living out there - it is not like Route 13 that
does not have any houses .
Theda Zimrot of 110 Campbell Avenue stated that , at this
particular point , she is very concerned about seeing any kind of
change in the zoning law , as most of us have deliberately chosen to
live in this kind of rural area . Ms . Zimrot noted that she came here
from New York City , and finds the area a very beautiful rural area
that allows some of the advantages of the two colleges located here .
Ms . Zimrot stated that she would hate to think that the City of Ithaca
becomes boxed in by a variety of Elmira Roads . Ms . Zimrot felt that ,
to some extent , there is a possibility of bad faith in changing the
area , at this point , for those of us that are living there . Ms .
Zimrot stated that she works in the Hospital area , and knows how
difficult it is to exit , noting that there has been a traffic light
erected because of all the accidents that have been occurring there .
Ms . Zimrot also voiced a concern about the ambulances that have to get
to and from the Hospital , and also the added traffic . Ms . Zimrot
stated that she finds herself in a little bit of conflict because she
also does have respect and integrity for the people who are proposing
the project , but would not like to see the proposal in this particular
rural area .
David McCune of 821 Cliff Street stated that he 'did not sign the
petition , and rather than trying to deal with this as an emotional
resident , contacted Mrs . Kyong . Mr . McCune stated that Mrs . Kyong
very graciously provided the whole plan that had been provided by Mr .
Leathers ' firm . Mr . McCune noted that the area is primarily
residential , and currently is all residential , with the exception of
the Hospital . Mr . McCune noted that the Hospital is a variance , but
is clearly not in keeping with the residential character of the
neighborhood . Mr . McCune expressed a concern to Mrs . Kyong that there
is obviously potential within this community for a number of people to
develop West Hill , and felt that the Planning Board had to decide if
that is to happen , and how that is to happen . Mr . McCune stated that ,
in his opinion , the proposed development is a very tasteful and very
thought out plan . Mr . McCune noted that , when he discussed the
Planning Board - 11 - April 5 , 1988
project with Mrs . Kyong she assured him that the concepts for the
project were very much in keeping with the concerns of the residents .
Mr . McCune stated that his concerns in regard to traffic were , if
there is going to be an increased traffic density in said area for
people going to and from shops , that he would just as soon see othe
people coming from Trumansburg toward Ithaca not continue down
Trumansburg Road , and cross the Octopus , but merely stay on the
outskirts of town and go back in that capacity , adding that this would
continue in both directions and probably , ultimately , have some effect
in terms of decreasing the road usage down below . Mr . McCune stated
that he is a businessman on Cliff Street , and has difficulty exiting
his business , noting that if he did not have to go down through the
Octopus for lunch , and could stay on West Hill it would be convenient .
Mr . McCune offered that in talking with individuals from the Cayuga
Heights area , and the Community Corners area , he felt that the area
was a similar type of concept , although disagrees with the rate that
Community Corners has developed . Mr . McCune stated that if the
restrictions are to be placed on the proposed project as to its size
and character , he felt the proposal was a good idea . Mr . McCune
stated that the residents around the Community Corners were very
adamant in not wanting the shopping center removed from their
neighborhood , because they do a good deal of their shopping there , and
find it convenient . Mr . McCune stated that he discussed the
convenience aspect with Mrs . Kyong , and noted that he is not opposed
to the project in any way , shape or form . Mr . McCune mentioned that
there are details to be worked out , but was assured by Mrs . Kyong , and
Mr . Leathers ' firm , that they are open to the nitty - gritty types of
details and concerns . Mr . McCune stated that he believes there are a
number of individuals in favor of this type of development .
Bruce Rich of 253 DuBois Road spoke from the floor and wondered
who owned the property on the west side , with Mr . Ellis answering , the
48 acres is part of the Kyong parcel , and there are no plans for
development at the present time , because the water district does not
come up that far . Mr . Leathers stated that , yes indeed , sometime in
the future houses will be built there in conformance with the zoning
and residential character , adding that the fact is , there is no
intention , absolutely no intention now , or in the future , of putting
any multiple family or putting anything except what it is zoned - -
family residential .
Rosalind Grippi of 423 East Seneca Street spoke from the floor
and stated that she had spoken at the March 15 , 1988 Planning Board
meeting opposing said project . Mr . and Mrs . Grippi own land on West
Hill , which is adjacent to the proposed project . Mrs . Grippi inquired
as to how the parcel could be developed with more units than at the
present time . Mr . Leathers stated that what he suggested was that , in
fact , with a multiple family zoning it would be conceivable that
someone could draw a plan and propose as many as 200 units on 12
acres , if it were rezoned to multiple family . Mrs . Grippi wondered if
it were true that there would be one exit and one entrance , using the
traffic light , for the commercial development and also the multiple
housing , with Mr . Leathers responding , yes , we are proposing one
entrance at that location , because we felt it was better to contain
Planning Board - 12 - April 5 , 1988
the traffic where there is good control , rather than to distribute the
turnoffs along the road . Mrs . Grippi stated that she felt that would
be a lot of traffic for one exit and entrance . :Mrs . Grippi stated
that the Kyong development , as proposed , would have an extensive
impact , as judged from the West Hill residents , on the quality of life
of others living in the vicinity who moved to West Hill because of its
special character , and who depend on present zoning to protect that
character . Mrs . Grippi noted that individuals , buying on West Hill ,
or people already living there , anticipated growth , but controlled
growth , under the protection of present zoning . Mrs . Grippi offered
that in addition to the immediate neighborhoods the Kyong proposal
impacts on all those who use Route 96 , noting that anyone concerned
with access to the Hospital , and that means nearly everyone in
Tompkins County , that the Hospital is expected to serve , Mrs . Grippi
commented that the Kyong property is located at the hub of thinking
about Route 96 - - that is next to the Hospital . Mrs . Grippi felt this
was not a modest zone change , we are talking about two zone changes ,
noting that there was a variation granted for that property , she
thought , only two years ago . Continuing , Mrs . Grippi stated that the
residents are concerned about that one light , commenting on the fact
that using one entrance and exit is a positive recommendation for the
change in zoning . Mrs . Grippi stated that the Kyong property also
extends to Hopkins Road , and includes a little on :Hayts Road , adding
that she could imagine that sometime the density , or just the activity
generated by the change in zoning , will necessitate an exit off to
Hopkins Road , and the use of Hayts Road which would then come down and
join Route 96 , separating the two areas of the cemetery . Mrs . Grippi
stated that she was informed that the Kyong project is well located in
respect to Route 96 because of the possibility that Route 96 or other
roads may , in fact , be mapped to descend behind the Hospital to Route
89 . Mrs . Grippi commented that she could not quite understand why
that might be to the advantage of this project , but on the other hand
pointed out that Route 96 may not be placed in that way , and if it is
not placed to descend to Route 89 , and / or , if it is , it is possible
that Route 96 may carry the traffic away from the property and make
the commercial area fairly inaccessible , or may leave a commercial
development in the wrong location . Mrs . Grippi stated that , in other
words , she does not believe that future thinking should be encumbered
about the design , shape , and path of Route 96 in the vicinity near the
Hospital by also prematurely mapping a commercial area and multiple
residential district in the vicinity . Mrs . Grippi felt that Route 96
must be solved first , before there are any changes in zoning . Mrs .
Grippi noted that she remains incredulous that the proposed developers
answered no to the question in the Environmental Impact Study that
asked " will proposed action result in the generation of traffic
significantly above the present levels . " Mrs . Grippi stated that in
addition to solving the Route 96 design , a Comprehensive Plan for West
Hill should be in place before zoning changes are granted .
Continuing , Mrs . Grippi stated that she is in agreement with the
Tompkins County Representative who stated that " generally speaking
throughout the County , planning activity has been fragmented " . Mrs .
Grippi stated that the Ithaca Journal also pointed out that traffic
problems have a way of transcending municipal boundaries , with Mrs .
Grippi commenting that this is especially true for West Hill , where
Planning Board - 13 - April 5 , 1988
• one main artery , primarily one main artery ( Route 96 ) , serves the City
and Town , as well as municipalities beyond for important access to
jobs in the City and the Hospital on West Hill . Mrs . Grippi stated
that she felt there should be a Comprehensive Plan for the Planning
Board to function . Mrs . Grippi wondered if the Planning Board could
make any determination without a Comprehensive Plan , adding that she
understood there was no such thing as a Comprehensive Plan , or none
that was done beyond 1959 . Mrs . Grippi referred to the Zoning
Ordinance , Section 78 , which states : Planning Board Recommendations .
In making recommendation to the Town Board and the Board of Appeals ,
the Planning Board shall determine that :
1 . " There is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location . "
Mrs . Grippi remarked that whether there is a need for a
commercial district could be argued back and forth , but on the
other hand , whether there is a need for the proposed use in the
proposed location requires that there be a Comprehensive Plan for
the development of West Hill , Mrs . Grippi noted that in making
recommendation to the Town Board and the Board of Appeals the
Planning Board shall determine that too .
2 . " The existing and probable future character of the neighborhood
in which the use is to be located will not be adversely
affected . "
Mrs . Grippi stated that the existing character of the
• neighborhood is judged by those who live there , noting that most
people who live there felt it would be adversely affected . Mrs .
Grippi noted that , as to whether the probable future character of
the neighborhood in which the use is to be located will not be
adversely affected would depend , again , on the future thinking
about the development of West Hill which would require a
Comprehensive Plan .
3 . " The proposed change is in accordance with a comprehensive plan
of development of the Town . "
Mrs . Grippi stated that she heard there is no such Comprehensive
Plan .
At this point , Chairman May stated that there is a Comprehensive
Plan within the Town , and the courts have ruled that a comprehensive
plan need not be a single document .
Chairman May noted , at this time , that one more person could
address the Board before the Public Hearing was closed .
Doria Higgins of 2 Hillcrest Drive spoke from the floor and
stated that the Public Hearing should not be closed if there are other
people who want to be heard , commenting that that is unfortunate . Ms .
Higgins , in response to Mrs . Kyong ' s statement , stated that the
motivation for this plan was to serve the people who work in the
Hospital , which Ms . Higgins felt was a very commendable motivation ,
. but as someone who has worked at the Hospital , and on the Hospital
grounds since 1964 , retiring about three years ago , she never felt a
need to go across the street to do marketing . Ms . Higgins stated that
Planning Board - 14 - April 5 , 1988
• most Hospital employees have one -half hour for lunch and do not go out
to market and do their childrens ' diapers , noting that the employees
go near home to do those things , adding that , there is no need for
that reason to have a commercial development across from the Hospital .
Ms . Higgins also studied what the courts require in terms of a
Comprehensive Plan , and it is unfortunate that one is not available in
writing that the public can review , adding that , in her opinion , 1959
is a long time ago . Ms . Higgins also pointed out that there is an
enormous amount of development going on all over the place , i . e . , 175
acres above West Haven Road that are going to be developed , and
several other large scale developments . Ms . Higgins stated that she
felt it was most unfortunate that this is going ahead without a real
plan .
At this point , Chairman May stated that he was going to close the
Public Hearing , as the Board was hearing repeat comments .
Jonathan Meigs of 235 Culver Road spoke from the floor and
protested the closing of the Public Hearing . Chairman May responded
that Mr . Meigs could speak before the Board .
Mr . Meigs stated that he felt it really unfortunate to cut off
public comment . Mr . Meigs commented that he felt the Town does not
need wrap -around development , adding , that speaks to Comprehensive
Planning and long -range planning . Mr . Meigs noted that he does not
• live in the immediate area , but lives in an area of the Town ,
obviously , that has had certain development pressures , and development
related pressures . Mr . Meigs stated that he agrees with most of the
previous speakers that the area is basically a residential area , and
felt it should remain so .
Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 9 : 10 p . m . , with
Attorney John Barney ' s concurrence , and brought the matter back to the
Board for further comments and discussion .
Susan Beeners suggested that the Board should consider exactly
what the character of the neighborhood is in regard to the Kyong
project , also what some of the surrounding land uses are , and what the
zoning is that is adjacent to the Kyong site . Ms . Beeners stated that
she would be willing to answer any questions .
Board Member Virginia Langhans stated that the Mayer School is in
the area , and is not residential .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , appended a large Land Use map to the
bulletin board , along with an enlargement of West Hill . Ms . Beeners
pointed out that the lower map shows land use and land cover ,
inventoried by color , as of 1986 , with updating . Ms . Beeners ,
indicating on map , stated that the Kyong site is the northern half of
" this " brown area , noting , at the time the inventory was done it was
being identified as inactive Agricultural land . Ms . Beeners noted
• that the purple area , [ indicating on map ] that appears somewhat to the
northeast of the site represents the Tompkins County Professional
Building which is zoned Business " A " , and remarked that " this " map
Planning Board - 15 - April 5 , 1988
• thus shows what the distribution of commercial is , as well as a whole
variety of other land uses in both the Town and the City . Ms . Beeners
pointed out East Hill Plaza and Ides Bowling Center , Ms . Beeners
stated that the dark pink areas are public use or tax exempt lands .
Ms . Beeners also pointed out the Hospital , the Special Land Use
District that was created for the Biggs Center area , the Mayer School
and Broome Developmental Center in the old Odd Fellows Complex , and
the Lakeside Nursing Home . Ms . Beeners offered that she was trying to
show , in two scales , what has occurred as far as zoning is concerned ,
and felt it was the responsibility of the Town to fulfill needs and to
work along in a dynamic comprehensive plan . Ms . Beeners noted that
there is a large R- 15 area , and noted that most of that area is
capable of being served by public water and sewer at the present time .
Ms . Beeners noted that adjacent to the R - 15 area on the other side of
the road there are several Special Land Use Districts that were
created around existing buildings that had been there for quite a long
time and had gone from one institutional use , and were then converted
either into an institutional use or semi - institutional use . Ms .
Beeners pointed out that to the south of the Kyong site is the NYSEG
substation , which at this time is only occupying about one -quarter of
its land , but that facility could be expanded . Ms . Beeners stated
that she did not consider that NYSEG facility terribly amenable to
having medium density R- 15 residential adjacent to it . Ms . Beeners
noted that the yellow areas indicated where there is presently single
or two - family residential development at this time , and that the
• orange -yellow shows the multiple residence zones , one being seven
units in the Odd Fellows Carriage House , and the other being the
Candlewyck Apartments which has a density of about 13 units per acre .
Ms . Beeners offered that , in her opinion , the Kyong proposal makes
sense from a land use standpoint because it would be located adjacent
to another business area , and adjacent to a number of non - single or
two - family uses which do exist , and have existed for quite a long
time . Ms . Beeners noted that , as far as choosing this location ,
besides having an association of other institutional or business uses ,
there is the matter of what circulation is going to be like in the
future , and of course , everyone is waiting to see what will happen
with Route 96 . Ms . Beeners stated that , irrespective of whether Route
96 is relocated and designed to have an interchange roughly opposite
the Kyong property , or if the city adopts Plan A , the hospital
entrance at the traffic light is a major intersection , adding that
there is the need to develop better circulation between the City and
the Town , noting that if Route 96 were not relocated , the Town might
require developers to provide a better access perhaps , a road located
below the Hospital in some type of alignment to access Route 89 , or
some type of a connection southward . Ms . Beeners commented that while
there are several pending road decisions this location appears to be
the best and most central location for what is a very modestly scaled
shopping area . Ms . Beeners mentioned the fact that combining East
Hill Plaza with the Ide ' s Bowling center there is about 200 , 000 feet
of commercial space on about thirty acres , and noted that the Kyong
proposal is presently being proposed for 20 , 720 square feet of new
commercial space , with possibly some additional expansion , but nothing
approaching the East Hill Plaza which is Business " C " . Ms . Beeners
stated that she envisions the consolidation of the non R- 15 uses in a
Planning Board - 16 - April 5 , 1988
• nodal pattern , and perhaps including a portion of the old Odd Fellows
farm parcel , which is owned by Cornell . Ms . Beeners stated that there
is a road system that may develop using the right- of - way between the
Mayer School and the Carriage House that could loop around and
actually go through the proposed Kyong site plan as a potential road
extension . Ms . Beeners noted that these types of efficient
concentration of land uses are needed in this location , as the
infra - structure is considerably reduced , and the traffic impact can be
controlled because the traffic can be organized on several connecting
roads . Ms . Beeners stated that concentration of these land uses at
this location would help retain the residential character of
established and probable R- 15 neighborhoods . Ms . Beeners noted that
said proposal is compatible with a comprehensive plan of development ,
and commented that , accepting a proposal in this central location
there would be less pressure on the remaining Trumansburg Road
corridor for commercial or high density development . Ms . Beeners
remarked that in the 1950 ' s there was a plan for locating a shopping
center on the Perry farm , and there was a need established at that
time for commercial on West Hill . Ms . Beeners mentioned that there
have been some inquiries by Babcock for commercial development on his
property . Ms . Beeners stated that she understood that the City was
still recognized by the Town as being the traditional business center
for Ithaca , and noted that there is a lot of development commencing in
Lansing that would serve the needs of the greater region for quite a
while .
• Board Member Robert Ken erson inquired about the Fire Station
location . Indicating on map , Ms . Beeners pointed out , that the Fire
Station would be " here " on the south edge of the former Odd Fellows
Farm .
At this point , Chairman May asked for any other questions or
comments from the Board .
Mr . George Vignaux of 1470 Trumansburg Road spoke from the floor
and wanted to ask one question . Chairman May responded that the
Public Hearing had been closed . Mr . Vignaux stated that he would like
to enter , for the record , a protest at this time .
Board Member William Lesser pointed out , for the record , what
appeared to be typographical errors which are as follows :
1 . Letter to Susan Beeners from Robert S . Leathers , P . C . , dated
March 31 , 1988 . NARRATIVE - should be a 12 acre
Multi - family area .
2 . Environmental Assessment Form for commercial development .
Site Description - Application is 15 . 86 acres .
Approximate Acreage - - Meadow or Brushland
( Non -Agricultural ) - Presently 14 . 00 acres .
Forested - - 1 . 86 acres . Mr . Lesser stated that the Kyong ' s
office and barn is presently on the site and felt that it
should be reflected that there were some buildings presently
on said site .
Planning Board - 17 - April 5 , 1988
Board Member Virginia Langhans wondered if the Board was in
40 agreement with the proposed one entranceway for the development .
Chairman May responded that it has always been the Planning Board ' s
preference to have a minimum of two entrances . Chairman May asked Mr .
Leathers about a service entrance by the cemetery , with Mr . Leathers
answering that a service entrance in that location had been explored .
Mr . Leathers noted that the developer wanted to control the traffic
more , and felt that there would be better control with one entrance ,
adding that a service entrance could certainly be provided . Chairman
May stated that he felt the Board would be more comfortable to see a
service emergency entrance provided , but noted that the traffic light
is a controlled entrance and has a lot of benefits . Town Planner
Susan Beeners wondered if an alternative might be a boulevard at the
entrance , which would be similar to the one at the Hospital . Robert
Flumerfelt , Town Engineer , concurred that a low- key secondary access
or a divided main access would be in order . Chairman May stated that
he would like to see both a secondary access and a divided main
access , adding that a divided entrance would match the Hospital and a
service entrance would serve as an alternative access .
William Lesser commented that he could appreciate the value for
some commercial development on West Hill , and felt that Ms . Beeners '
statements were well taken that this area would seem to be a better
location than many others . However , Mr . Lesser was concerned with the
request to rezone 15 - 16 acres when only a small portion is intended to
be used at this time . Mr . Lesser felt that , if indeed , the Board does
rezone that area , although the Planning Board does have the right to
review any site plan changes , etc . , it would be very difficult for the
Board to maintain much control over the situation , remarking , in that
respect the recent decision in the City was some indication - - if it
is zoned B , and there is something that is appropriate in Zone B then
Mr . Lesser personally felt he would have a difficult time denying that
right . Mr . Lesser stated that he would look on the commercial
development section far far more favorably if at this point in time
the request were for an area that was more in accordance with the
amount of development that was proposed , with the possibility of
recommending additional rezoning at some future time , should the need
arise . Mr . Lesser noted that the proposal is done in a fairly small
strip down the center , and does not see any reason why that area in
itself could not be considered for rezoning at this time .
Town Attorney Barney stated that the case in the City involved an
area that was zoned for duplexes , among other things , and duplexes
were permitted in that area , adding that the lots met the size . Mr .
Barney noted that it would be similar to someone coming before the
Planning Board in an R - 15 zone , and showing one 30 , 000 square foot lot
and requesting to subdivide it into two 15 , 000 square foot lots . Mr .
Barney stated that the City did it in the guise of saying - we do not
like the density , but noted that their Ordinance had already provided ,
and specifically allowed for that type of development to occur in that
type of area . Mr . Barney stated that when the Town goes from a
• residential zone to a Business zone , A , B , C , D , E , or to a Multiple
Residence zone , the process requires a general site plan and a
rezoning based upon that general site plan , not on some other site
Planning Board - 18 - April 5 , 1988
plan , and then a return to the Planning Board for clarification and
completion of final details . Mr . Barney referred to Article IX , Site
Plan Approval , which specifically states that whenever a district is
created pursuant to the provisions of said Article , the owner shall be
bound by the site plan as approved and adopted by the Town Board , Mr .
Barney offered that once the site plan is adopted there is no question
but what the Town can take the position the rezoning was pursuant to a
general site plan and that is what the applicant is bound to . Mr .
Barney commented that that is not to say that some Board in the future
will not say that a modification should be permitted , but the
applicant has to come before the Town and seek permission for
modification , adding that it is not something that is there as a
right . Mr . Barney stated that he wanted to make clear that there is a
distinct difference between what happened in that one case in the City
and the way the Town of Ithaca Ordinance is constructed , insofar as
commercial and multiple residence zones .
Board Member Klein noted , as stated by others at tonight ' s
meeting , no one would question the integrity of those proposing the
development nor the qualifications of the designers of said project .
Mr . Klein stated that everyone recognizes Mr . Leathers as an excellent
designer . Mr . Klein stated that , in a kind of perverse way , the very
successful potential design of said development may also lead to a
substantial number of problems because it is potentially so
attractive , and so well done . Mr . Klein felt that it had potential to
go beyond what is proposed as a neighborhood development , commenting
that people would come from Trumansburg , and maybe across the hills .
Mr . Klein felt that the success of the project may have a ripple
effect of putting some pressure on for some additional development on
the site . Mr . Klein stated that he had a problem with trying to call
the project a neighborhood shopping area , although considering Route
96 , and the Town Planner ' s presentation , it probably is the best spot
along Route 96 , but the fundamental question is whether the Board
accepts the best place , or nothing at all , adding , in his opinion ,
that is what the neighborhood is saying . Mr . Klein also noted that he
was worried about what impression is given future Planning Boards in
terms of recognizing what really is the first commercial zone , noting
that there are typical areas at the Hospital and the Professional
Building , and stating that exceptions have had to be made for creative
reuse for some of the other facilities in the area . Mr . Klein stated
that he liked the character of Route 96 , as it is , by the Hospital ,
and felt that the development , as presented , may very well fit in
there . Mr . Klein stated that , at this point in time , he is not
personally comfortable with changing the zone from residential zoning
to commercial Business " B " zoning . Also , Mr . Klein noted that a small
cafe or restaurant was mentioned , commenting that , according to the
Zoning Ordinance , a small cafe or restaurant is not even allowed in a
Business " B " , remarking that it would have to be a Business " C " . Mr .
Klein also felt that at this point in time there were still too many
unknowns , adding , people have referred to the 1959 Comprehensive Plan
which indicated some commercial in this area . Mr . Klein offered that
• the Zoning Ordinance , which has been amended many times , and most
recently amended in 1968 , is the version the Board is working with ,
still has not included any zones on subject strip for commercial ,
Planning Board - 19 - April 5 , 1988
• noting that there are some on Route 96B , and others in the Town , but
apparently Route 96 was not recognized adequately to put a business
zone on that part of Route 96 . Mr . Klein stated that when the
proposal was first presented he did not have very good feelings about
it , although the project itself may , as a piece , be very well done .
Mr . Klein stated that he cannot buy the concept of the proposal at
this time , adding , if the people on West Hill want a neighborhood
shopping center then the neighbors should come in and state that they
want more conveniences on West Hill , noting that he had voiced an
objection in other areas that the Board had looked at . Mr . Klein felt
that at this point in time he does not see the demonstrated need for
rezoning said property .
Ms . Beeners noted that the Tompkins County Professional Building
across the street from the Kyong parcel is zoned Business " A " .
Chairman May offered that there is quite a community right at the
Hospital and the Biggs Complex , which certainly has both demonstrated
and expressed interest in subject project .
At this time , Chairman May directed that the petition received
from the surrounding neighbors in favor of the proposal be entered
into the record . [ Attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . 1
Board Member Klein noted that the great majority of the people
that signed the above noted petition in favor of the proposal work at
the Hospital , with Chairman May stating that there is no question
about that . Chairman May stated that , in his opinion , there is quite
a substantial community that exists within the Hospital , the Biggs
Complex , etc . , adding that that is part of the community in the area .
Board Member Carolyn Grigorov stated that she had viewed the
area , and felt that the neighbors were pretty far up the road . Mrs .
Grigorov noted that there is one house next to the cemetery , and
across the road there is an antique store . At this point , Mrs . Bowers
interjected and stated " that is a home owner business and that is a
home , not a store " . Mrs . Grigorov also noted that there was a
vegetable stand farther up the road . Chairman May also stated that he
had viewed the site and noted that with the traffic light , that
particular location makes a lot of sense .
Chairman May stated that the Town Board would be acting as Lead
Agency , and the Planning Board would only be making a recommendation
in the matter , but wanted to be sure the rezoning application was
complete , prior to going before the Town Board .
Jonathan Meigs of 235 Culver Road spoke from the floor and
wondered when the matter would be likely to go before the Town Board .
Attorney Barney responded that it might be as early as April 11 , 1988 ,
but more likely it would be the May 1988 meeting of the Town Board .
Board Member Virginia Langhans stated that she thought the Town
• Planner , Susan Beeners did a very good , fair , and thorough Job in
Planning Board - 20 - April 5 , 1988
• putting the matter together . Chairman May concurred with Mrs .
Langhans .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , stated that the rezoning application
would be complete before being forwarded to the Town Board , noting
that the Town Board would be indicated as Lead Agency in the matter ,
and signatures of the applicant would also be included on the original
EAF .
Board Member William Lesser wondered about the maximum vehicular
trips . Ms . Beeners responded that the 156 to 159 total was based on
what was agreed as typical trips generated during a peak hour . At
this point , Mr . Ellis distributed copies of the Kyong Traffic Analysis
to the Board . [ Attached hereto as Exhibit 3 . ]
Board Member Robert Miller , referring to the proposed draft
resolution , wondered about 3d , which states , " At such time as long
range impacts to traffic circulation are identified and attributable
to the proposed development , or in the event that a relocated Route 96
is not constructed by New York State , the Town of Ithaca may require
the developer to contribute to the cost of any roads that might be
required to improve circulation between the Town and the City of
Ithaca . " Mr . Miller stated that it sounded to him like the beginning
of impact fees . Attorney Barney stated that Ms . Beeners had
constructed the statement very nicely , commenting that the way the
• statement is phrased it may be required , and adding that a legal
determination may be made at that point in time as to what the
authority is to require , under what circumstances , and under what
basis it could be required . Mr . Miller wondered if this were future
impact , with Mr . Barney answering , something like that .
Board Member William Lesser , referring to the proposed draft
resolution , wondered about 3e , which states , " Provision of public
transportation to the proposed Business and Multiple Residence
developments " . Mr . Lesser wondered if there was going to be bus
transportation to the project . Ms . Beeners responded that as long as
there is some public transit it is recommended that the bus that
currently goes to the Hospital , as well as Gadabout , also include
stops that would be convenient to the business and multiple areas .
Town Attorney Barney suggested , public transportation , if available .
Town Engineer , Robert Flumerfelt , stated that traffic seems to be
a major consideration in this proposal , and reported that he had
completed a summary . Mr . Flumerfelt remarked that at the present time
Cliff Street is approximately at 75 % capacity , noting that the
Neiderkorn report states the ultimate capacity is estimated to be
about 1 , 875 vehicles per hour . Mr . Flumerfelt noted that , presently ,
the maximum peak hour traffic is about 1 , 425 vehicles per hour , which
is a difference from the ultimate of about 450 vehicles per hour . Mr .
Flumerfelt noted that in the figures being presented only 27 acres
have been assumed in the proposed development . Continuing , Mr .
• Flumerfelt stated that if the portion of the Kyong property proposed
for business and multiple residence use were developed under the
existing zoning classification , ( all single - family residential ) , the
Planning Board - 21 - April 5 , 1988
• estimated increase in peak hour traffic is 109 vehicles per hour ,
commenting that , assuming that about 95 % of that traffic will use
Route 96 and Cliff Street , the increase would consume about 23 % of the
remaining capacity of Cliff Street , Mr . Flumerfelt stated that if the
zoning reclassification were approved to convert 12 acres to multiple
residence and 15 acres to business / commercial use , the estimated
increase in peak hour traffic would be 156 vehicles per hour . Mr .
Flumerfelt offered , assuming that 95 % of the residential and 300 of
the commercial traffic generated would affect traffic on Cliff Street ,
that the traffic increase would consume about 16 % of the remaining
capacity of Cliff Street . Mr . Flumerfelt commented that , with no
development on the Kyong property , and assuming the continuing rate of
increase of Cliff Street traffic due to other development in the
region that has occurred in the last two years , Cliff Street would
reach capacity ( service level E ) in about seven years , therefore , the
development of the Kyong property under the present residential zoning
would shorten said time period to five and one - half years , adding
that , with the request in the change of zoning , the time period until
capacity is reached would be shortened to about six years . Mr .
Flumerfelt stated that the above only concerns the Kyong parcel .
Carolyn Grigorov wondered if one of the serious concerns of the
people in the area was that this development would be the entering
wedge for much more commercial development . Ms . Beeners answered that
the proposed Kyong development , along with possible on - site expansion ,
would serve current and presently foreseen needs . Ms . Beeners
• mentioned that , perhaps part of the Odd Fellows farm parcel to the
south would eventually be multiple , or maybe Cornell would want to do
something as far as the school use or offices , as it has some of the
same locational advantages as far as being on a State road , adding
that there are some locational disadvantages for R- 15 housing right
along the frontage of that property . Chairman May offered that that
may end up being an institutional use , not necessarily commercial .
Attorney Barney wondered if there were a problem with , perhaps ,
limiting the commercial rezoning to the portion north of the proposed
road . Ms . Beeners wondered what would be done with the remaining land
between the NYSEG substation . Chairman May stated that the remaining
land certainly should not be R- 15 , noting the way it is sandwiched in
between . Chairman May stated that NYSEG has four or five acres , and
at the present time is utilizing a very small amount , and that NYSEG
might well want to expand the substation .
William Lesser stated that he remains concerned about rezoning
such a large area with such a small portion to be used .
Town Attorney Barney noted that if the small strip of land is
left R- 15 , and the road is constucted , it could be divided into
conventional R - 15 lots , adding , if it is zoned commercial it would
stay open as long as said plat is in effect . Mr . Lesser noted that
from his point of view there is a considerable amount of more
• attractive land in that area , commenting that , if it is rezoned
commercial , and there is a credible case for expanding , it seems much
more likely to be developed because commercial land is far more scarce
Planning Board - 22 - April 5 , 1988
• on West Hill at this time . Mr . Lesser felt that the land should be
left R- 15 . Chairman May stated that he had a greater concern that the
area would become residential than someday becoming commercial .
David Klein felt that Mr . Lesser ' s point was very well taken .
Mr . Klein noted that the project is proposed on a very small scale but
that the rezoning is for a far larger tract of land . Mr . Klein stated
that a Planning Board in the future could acquire the minutes to
tonight ' s meeting and see that 15 acres of subject parcel is zoned
commercial , and very well the only chunk of land on that strip that is
zoned commercial , and that site would be more intensely developed .
Mr . Klein stated that if the Board wanted to rezone the parcel as to
what is proposed the door does not have to be closed in terms of
rezoning further phases . Mr . Klein felt the Board was going overboard
to pick up all 15 acres when such a small area is being used . Mr .
Lesser said he was concerned with the land between the office and the
road , back to the area that is shown as the multi - family . Mr .
Leathers stated that the use of the area to the south as an R- 15 would
not necessarily be appropriate to have a house located there .
However , Mr . Leathers stated that if the Planning Board were to
propose that only that area were going to be rezoned , then it would be
something the developer would consider , and something that Mrs . Kyong
has considered before , noting that the plan is to develop on that
portion . Continuing , Mr . Leathers stated that if the portion to the
south were left open , it would seem fine . Chairman May stated that
the Board would not do anything that would preclude the developer from
leaving it open .
At this point , Chairman May asked Town Planner Susan Beeners for
her comments on the issue .
Ms . Beeners stated that from her viewpoint , it would make sense
if there is going to be any planning ahead , as some people seem to be
asking for , that the Board try to designate some extra business land
so that there could be commercial development in a centralized
location on West Hill , so the Planning Board would not receive
requests later on for what might be rezoning in the wrong location .
Ms . Beeners commented that what is being proposed at this time , as far
as square footage is concerned , is capable of serving around 1 , 000
dwelling units . Ms . Beeners noted that the service area on West Hill ,
roughly north of Coy Glen and Poole Road , is estimated to have around
800 units . Ms . Beeners noted that when said proposal was reviewed , in
defining the area around existing buildings , including the house and
office , which is about five acres or so , the lot coverage in that
affected area where these buildings are located would have about 10 %
building coverage on the site . - Ms . Beeners stated that she had
estimated there might be some room for some expansion in the three and
one - half acres to the south of the road , plus maybe there could be an
additional building located north of the parking lot that is in the
open area , and still keep at least 100 - 200 feet from the northern
property line . Ms . Beeners stated that , basically , it was estimated
• that there could be an additional 15 , 000 to 20 , 000 square feet ,
maintaining the same 10 % lot coverage within the area , and thus
providing for some time in the future when there might be that
Planning Board - 23 - April 5 , 1988
• doubling of what the existing population is . Ms . Beeners felt that
the entire area proposed should be zoned commercial . Ms . Beeners
noted that she felt sensitive to what is being discussed , and stated ,
but if the Kyongs are willing to have a smaller area rezoned to
business it would be fine .
William Lesser commented that he understood , from what Ms .
Beeners noted , that the Planning Board is being asked to support the
idea of a neighborhood shopping center , but that the idea of a
neighborhood shopping center in the future could become substantially
larger . Ms . Beeners noted , in the long range there may be an increase
from the 800 units that are currently in that market area , and
wondered if some advance planning should be provided for some
expansion that could keep up with that , and also noted that it would
alleviate pressure for any other rezonings within that area . Ms .
Beeners remarked that if the full 15 . 86 acres were not rezoned during
that period of time there might be other uses that that land would be
put to , and it would be impossible to add to that zone . Chairman May
noted that the Board concurred to leave the strip of land in with the
commercial zoning .
There appearing to be no further questions or comments , Chairman
May asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker .
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town
Board with respect to the proposed rezoning of a 15 . 86 - acre
portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 24 - 4 - 14 . 2 , located at
1290 Trumansburg Road , 48 . 86 acres total , from Residence District
R - 15 to Business District " B " , for the proposed development of a
neighborhood commercial service center , and further , with respect
to the proposed rezoning of a 12 - acre portion of said Tax Parcel
from Residence District R- 15 to Multiple Residence District .
2 . This is a Type I action for which the Town of Ithaca Town Board
has been legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for
environmental review . The Tompkins County Planning Department ,
Tompkins County Health Department , New York State Department of
Transportation , and Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water
Commission are potentially involved agencies which have been
informed of this action .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on March 15 , 1988 , and
April 5 , 1988 , has reviewed the general site plan , Long
Environmental Assessment Form , and other submissions for the
proposal .
4 . The Town Planner has recommended that a negative determination of
• environmental significance be made for the proposed rezoning ,
subject to certain mitigating measures included in the proposal .
Planning Board - 24 - April 5 , 1988
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend to
the Town Board that a negative determination of environmental
significance be made for the proposed development .
2 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend
approval of the general site plan as presented , having found
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 .
3 . That the Planning Board recommend and hereby does recommend that
the Town Board establish the rezoning as proposed , subject to the
following conditions and requirements for final site plan
approval .
a . Acceptance of the proposed roads , public utilities , public
open space by the Town Board .
b . Acceptance of the relocation of access to the Trumansburg
Road Water Tank site by the Town Board and the Tompkins
Community Hospital .
c . At such time as there might be application for development
of later phases in the Business " B " and Multiple Residence
Districts , or for development of the remaining Residence
District R - 15 lands of the subject parcel , the developer may
be required to contribute to the capital cost of water
storage or other improvements that might be necessary to
support such development .
d . At such time as long - range impacts to traffic circulation
are identified and attributable to the proposed development ,
or in the event that a relocated Route 96 is not constructed
by New York State , the Town of Ithaca may require the
developer to contribute to the cost of any roads that might
be required to improve circulation between. the Town and the
City of Ithaca .
e . Provision of public transportation , if available , to the
proposed Business and Multiple Residence developments .
• There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Planning Board - 25 - April 5 , 1988
• Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Kenerson , Miller .
Nay - Klein , Lesser ,
The MOTION was declared to be carried .
Chairman May declared the matter of Consideration of a
Recommendation to the Town Board with respect to the proposed Kyong
Rezonings duly closed at 10 : 15 p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR PHASE
II of the " DEER RUN " CLUSTERED SUBDIVISION , SAID PHASE II PROPOSED TO
INCLUDE 51 DWELLING UNITS IN 13 CLUSTERS , LOCATED BACKLOT OF THE
INTERSECTION OF TROY AND EAST KING ROADS , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL
N0 . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 32 , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R - 15 , AND FURTHER , CONSIDERATION
OF A REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF SECTION 321r PARAGRAPH 61r OF THE TOWN OF
ITHACA SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS , TO PERMIT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 34 FEET
ON CERTAIN BUILDINGS PROPOSED FOR SAID PHASE II . EDWIN A . HALLBERG ,
DEVELOPER .
Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 10 : 16 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Mr . Hallberg addressed the Board and gave a brief overview of the
project . Mr . Hallberg stated that , per Town Planner Susan Beeners '
request , there is an easement that runs down to the land that was
• donated to the Town as a park site , adding that Ms . Beeners questioned
the topography of the land , so the easement was re •- routed to make it
easier to walk down .
At this time , Mr . Hallberg stated that he was requesting a waiver
of the height regulation , adding that the downhill units need a waiver
for the 34 feet , and commenting that the uphill units need a waiver
for 32 feet . Mr . Hallberg stated that the only units in question , as
to height , were the middle units in the buildings , as the end units
are all at 20 - 22 feet .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
there were anyone from the public who had any comments or questions .
Slade Kennedy of 227 East King Road spoke from the floor and
stated that he believed each of the lots on East King Road has 100
feet of road frontage , with Mr . Hallberg answering , yes . Mr . Kennedy
questioned the new road width as being 100 feet wide . Mr . Hallberg
stated that the road itself is actually 60 feet wide , and noted that
the entire 100 feet would be dedicated to the Town .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
anyone present wished to speak . No one spoke . Chairman May closed
the Public Hearing at 10 : 20 p . m . and brought the matter back to the
Board for discussion .
• Chairman May wondered if the ground slope in Phase 11 was running
about the same as it was in the upper part of Stage 1A . Mr . Hallberg
Planning Board - 26 - April 5 , 1988
• responded that it was about 70 . Indicating on map , Mr . Hallberg
pointed out that " this " line is where the heavier foliage is , adding
that beyond that line the project cannot be seen from down " here " .
Mr . Lesser stated that as he viewed the plans it appeared that
there were three additional clusters remaining in Phase III , and
wondered if the rest would be single family . Mr . Hallberg responded
that townhouses have been approved in Phases III , IV and V , adding
that he had discussed the possibility , today , with Town Planner Susan
Beeners , of turning the townhouses into single family homes . Mr .
Lesser wondered if Mr . Hallberg was anticipating a request for waiver
of height restriction for structures 28 , 29 , and 36 . Mr . Hallberg ,
[ indicating on map ] stated that " this " particular site is very steep ,
" this " site is probably going to require 34 feet .
At this time , Mr . Lesser stated that the October 6 , 1987
discussion with Mr . Hallberg indicated that three - quarters of the
buildings would be over the 30 - foot limit because of the grade . Mr .
Lesser commented that , in his opinion , that number appeared to be
closer to 100 % . Mr . Hallberg , in response to Mr . Lesser ' s comment ,
stated that that was one of the reasons for considering changing to
bring it back within , adding , when it was taken back to Peter Novelli ,
the project ' s engineer , the basis was that that was a best guess , on
the spot , at the moment , and that it would require further study that
was acceptable to the Town , commenting that anything requiring a
driveway in excess of 7 % would be under consideration . Mr . Lesser
• wondered where the 34 feet that is being requested , was measured from .
Mr . Hallberg answered that that was from actual base to the top .
Mr . Klein wondered what the proposed road grade was , through the
next developments . Mr . Peter Novelli answered that the maximum grade
is approximately 8 % for Phase II , which is a very short segment near
the intersection of Saranac Way and Whitetail Drive . Mr . Klein noted
that , under the original approval , there were some single - family lots ,
with Mr . Hallberg responding , yes , they were [ pointing to map ] " here " ,
and noting that the average square footage of each lot was around
25 , 000 square feet . Mr . Hallberg stated that it would be in the
covenants and restrictions that in front of each townhouse the
homeowner provide a lamppost .
Ms . Beeners wondered about the drainage . Mr . Novelli responded
that the retention pond is part of IA , and is proposed to be built
this spring .
There appearing to be no further discussion , Chairman May asked
if anyone were prepared to make a motion .
MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mr . Robert Miller :
WHEREAS :
• 1 . This action is the Consideration of a Request for Waiver of
Section 32 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Subdivision
Regulations , to permit a maximum height of 34 feet on certain
Planning Board - 27 - April 5 , 1988
buildings proposed for Phase II of the " Deer Run " Clustered
Subdivision .
2 . This is being reviewed as a Type I action , for which the Planning
Board has been legislatively designated to act as Lead Agency for
environmental review .
3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance for the granting of certain waivers
with respect to the proposed heights of buildings in Phase II .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED ,
That the Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in the
environmental review of this action , make and hereby does make a
negative determination of environmental significance for the granting
of waivers of the thirty - foot height requirement of Article V , Section
32 , Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations to
permit the following :
a . a maximum building height of 34 feet for downhill clusters
numbered 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 30 , and 31 .
be a maximum building height of 32 feet for uphill clusters numbered
9 , 11 , 15 , 33 , and 34 .
• c , a maximum building height of 33 feet for uphill clusters numbered
32 and 35 .
At this point , Mr . Lesser stated that , since he made it
abundantly clear that he was not a strong supporter of such waivers ,
but he thought in this case Mr . Hallberg had indicated a willingness
to change his plans to accommodate the needs of the Board ' s
requirements , under those circumstances he would support the
adjustment .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Dr . William Lesser , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval
for Phase II of the " Deer Run " Clustered Subdivision , 51 dwelling
units in 13 clusters , located backlot of the intersection of Troy
and East King Roads , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 44 - 1 - 4 . 32 ,
• and further , Consideration of a Request for Waiver of Section 32 ,
Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations , to
Planning Board - 28 - April 5 , 1988
• permit a maximum height of 34 feet on certain buildings proposed
for said Phase II .
2 . This is a Type I action for which the Planning Board , acting as
Lead Agency in environmental review , has made a negative
determination of environmental ' significance for the proposed
subdivision , subject to certain conditions , on March 17 , 1987 ,
and for which the Planning Board , on April _`i , 1988 , has made a
negative determination of environmental significance for the
granting of certain waivers with respect to building height .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on April 5 , 1988 , has
reviewed the following material :
" Deer Run Subdivision - Final Plat for Stage Two " , Hallberg
Associates , Developer , dated March 1. 5 , 1988 .
" Deer Run Subdivision - Landscaping Plan ( Conceptual ) ,
dated February 22 , 1988 .
Long Environmental Assessment Form , dated March 2 , 1988 .
Request for Waiver , from Edwin A . Hallberg , dated March
15 , 1988 .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
1 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final
• Subdivision Approval to Phase II of the " Deer Run " Subdivision ,
with the following conditions :
a . Approval of the final engineering drawings by the Town
Engineer .
b . Submission of a letter of credit in an amount sufficient to
assure the satisfactory completion of site improvements for
Phase II , prior to the issuance of any building permits for
Phase II , the amount of such letter to be approved by the
Town Engineer and the form of the letter to be approved by
the Town Attorney .
c . Submission of an " as - built " plan showing as - built utilities ,
drainage structures , and roadways for Phase II and earlier
phases prior to the final approval of future project phases .
d . Acceptance of the deed to the park site by the Town Board ,
and execution of the " 10 - foot easement for path to
recreation area " , and suitable improvement , by the
developer , of a suitably surfaced path within that easement
prior to completion of Phase II , or the posting of a letter
of credit , as above , sufficient to accomplish such
improvement , to secure such completion .
• 2 . That the Planning Board accept and hereby does accept the
recommendation of the Town Planner that an additional trail
easement may be required backlot of Phases III and IV from the
Planning Board - 29 - April 5 , 1988
boundary of the ButterField project to Whitetail Drive , and will
consider the requirement of such a trail as part of any final
subdivision consideration for future project phases .
3 . That , with respect to the request for waiver to permit a maximum
building height of 34 feet on certain buildings , the Planning
Board .find and hereby does find the following ;;
a . That the strict application of the thirty - foot maximum
height requirement of Article V , Section 32 , Paragraph 6 , of
the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations would cause
practical difficulties in the development of the housing in
Phase II .
b . That the Planning Board has determined that neither a
significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control
nor of the policy enunciated or implied by the Town Board in
adopting the Subdivision Regulations pertaining to clustered
development would be made in the granting of certain waivers
as described hereinafter in this Resolution .
4 . That the Planning Board grant and hereby does grant waivers of
the thirty - foot height requirement of Article V , Section 32 ,
Paragraph 6 , of the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations to
permit the following :
• a . a maximum building height of 34 feet for downhill clusters
numbered 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 30 , and 31 .
be a maximum building height of 32 feet for uphill clusters
numbered 9 , 11 , 15 , 33 , and 34 ,
ce a maximum building height of 33 feet for uphill clusters
numbered 32 and 35 .
d . For this purpose , " height " is measured from the lowest point
at exterior grade to the highest point of the roof .
5 . That the Planning Board further require and hereby does further
require that no building in any subsequent phases of the " Deer
Run " Clustered Subdivision exceed 30 feet on the uphill side , and
further , that all buildings in subsequent future phases shall
conform to the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations with
respect to height .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lessek , Miller .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
• Chairman May declared the matter of the Consideration of Final
Subdivision Approval for Phase II of the " Deer Run " Clustered
Planning Board - 30 - April 5 , 1988
Subdivision , and Consideration of a request for Waiver to permit a
maximum height of 34 feet on certain buildings in Phase II duly closed
at 10 : 51 p . m .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE
PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF A 30 ± ACRE PARCEL FROM TOWN OF ITHACA TAX
PARCEL NO . 6 - 51 - 1 - 3 , 101 . 05 ACRES TOTAL , LOCATED AT 611 CODDINGTON
ROAD , NEAR TROY ROAD , RESIDENCE DISTRICT R - 30 , RUTH E . JOHNSON ,
OWNER ; PETER GRIGOROV , APPLICANT .
At this point , Board Member Carolyn Grigorov removed herself from
her seat at the Board table during the entire discussion on the
proposed subdivision .
Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 10 : 54 p . m . and read aloud from the Notice of
Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above .
Mr . Grigorov approached the Board and stated that the 30 ± acres
should be corrected to read 21 ± acres .
Mr . Grigorov offered that he and his wife are purchasing his
grandmother ' s house , and the 20 ± acres surrounding the house .
Chairman May noted that this was an in - family subdivision .
iMs . Beeners , Town Planner , wondered if there were any immediate
plans for any type of development , or any increase in occupancy , with
Mr . Grigorov , responding , no .
Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked if
anyone present wished to speak to this issue .
Phiroze Mehta of 102 Troy Road spoke from the floor and stated
that he was very confused , as to what is being considered . Chairman
May responded that this matter was a subdivision of the land . Mr .
Mehta wondered about an increase in taxes when one subdivides .
Attorney Barney answered that , yes , it usually does increase . Mr .
Mehta wondered why one would want to increase one ' s taxes by
• subdividing land , without having any intention of doing anything with
it . Chairman May commented that there would be one 21 - acre lot and
one 80 - acre lot . Chairman May stated that all subdivisions of land
within the Town of Ithaca come before the Planning Board .
There appearing to be no one else from the public who wished to
speak to this matter , Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 10 : 55
p . m . and brought the matter back to the Board for discussion .
There appearing to be no further discussion or comments from the
Board , Chairman May asked if anyone were prepared to offer a motion .
. MOTION by Mr . Robert Kenerson , seconded by Mr . David Klein :
WHEREAS :
Planning Board - 31 - April 5 , 1988
1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 51 - 1 - 3 ,
101 . 05 acres total , located at 611 Coddington Road , into two
parcels of 80 ± and 21 ± acres each .
2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board has been
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency for environmental
review .
3 . The Town Planner has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance for this action .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as Lead Agency in
the environmental review of this Unlisted action , make and hereby does
make a negative determination of environmental significance .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller .
Nay - None .
[ No Vote - Grigorov . ]
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
• MOTION by Mrs . Virginia Langhans , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
WHEREAS :
1 . This action is the Consideration of Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 51 - 1 - 3 ,
101 . 05 acres total , located at 611 Coddington Road , into two
parcels of 80 ± and 21 ± acres each .
2 . This is an Unlisted action for which the Planning Board , acting
as Lead Agency for environmental review , has made a negative
determination of environmental significance .
3 . The Planning Board , at Public Hearing on April 5 , 1988 , has
reviewed a sketch plat for the proposed subdivision .
3 . The Town Planner has recommended that , because of the nature of
the proposed two - parcel subdivision , certain requirements with
respect to plat format at this time be waived , and that the
subdivision be approved subject to the submission of a final plat
prepared by a licensed surveyor for approval by the Town
Engineer .
THEREFORE , IT IS RESOLVED :
• 1 . That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board waive and hereby does
waive certain requirements for Preliminary and Final Subdivision
Approval , having determined from the materials presented that
Planning Board - 32 - April 5 , 1988
such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of
the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or
implied by the Town Board ,
2 . That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does
grant Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval to the
subdivision as herein proposed , with the following condition :
The provision of a final subdivision map prepared by a
licensed surveyor or engineer , suitable for filing by the
Tompkins County Clerk , for approval by the Town Engineer .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Langhans , Klein , Kenerson , Lesser , Miller .
Nay - None ,
[ No Vote - Grigorov . ]
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
At this time , Chairman May indicated that a memo should be sent
to the Town Board that Board Member Carolyn Grigorov did not
participate in this matter .
Chairman May declared the matter of the Consideration of
Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of a 30 ± acre parcel
• duly closed at 11 : 00 p . m .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JANUARY 19 , 1988
MOTION by Mr . Robert Ken erson , seconded by Dr . William Lesser :
RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Meeting of January 19 , 1988 , be and hereby are approved with the
following correction :
1 . That , the second paragraph on Page 10 be deleted and replaced by
the following paragraphs :
" Attorney Barney , in response to the concern about students ,
noted that this was an R - 15 zone and , technically , there could be
a two - family house on each of the lots . The Zoning Ordinance , as
it is presently written , states that a family is defined as a
traditional blood related group and that there may be up to three
unrelated persons residing in an entire building . Attorney
Barney offered that , if there were two - family houses here , there
conceivably could be three unrelated persons residing there , or ,
a conventional family in one unit , two unrelated persons in the
other unit , or two conventional families and each of them could
have one more unrelated person in each unit . Attorney Barney
added that that is what the Zoning Ordinance provides at the
• present time . Attorney Barney noted that the structure could not
be used for three students on one side and three students on the
other side . Attorney Barney also mentioned that there has been
Planning Board - 33 - April 5 , 1988
some litigation , and there are some questions as to whether a
Zoning Ordinance can define a family as related by blood or not ,
commenting that the Town of Ithaca is taking the position that
the Zoning Ordinance is valid . Attorney Barney stated that there
is no requirement for owner - occupancy , but , under Town of Ithaca
zoning , a developer can only rent to a conventional family and up
to two unrelated persons in the other unit , or to a total of
three unrelated persons in the entire building .
Attorney Barney noted that if a developer ignores the above ,
the penalties are usually an injunction proceeding brought by the
Town of Ithaca to restrain it , followed by contempt proceedings
if the judge decides that the Zoning Ordinance has been properly
enforced . Attorney Barney also noted that there are criminal
penalties for violating the Zoning Ordinance , which range from
$ 750 . 00 for the first violation up to $ 1 , 500 . 00 for the 3rd or
4th violation , and a potential incarceration for 15 days , ranging
up to 45 days , and each week of continued violation constitutes a
_ separate violation .
Mr . Iacovelli volunteered that he , and his Attorney , Edward
' Mazza , indeed , understood what those requirements were , and that
he had every intention of abiding by them . "
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
• Aye - May , Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Miller , Kenerson , Klein , Lesser .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
DISCUSSION
Chaiman May stated that he thought that everyone on the Board
understood there were two problems in Phase I and II of Eastwood
Commons . Chairman May noted that one problem was the requirement of a
bike path , adding that Mr . Schickel put in a bike path through the
driveway of Building # 19 , commenting , this was in violation of the
Homeowners ' agreement . Chairman May stated that , unfortunately , the
issue that concerns him the most , at the moment , was the fact that Mr .
Comstock of Building # 19 informed Mr . Schickel of the violation , and
asked him to wait while he called his attorney , but Mr . Schickel
proceeded to go ahead with the bike path . Secondly , Chairman May
commented on the access to the Orcutt property through the site of
Building # 20 , noting that , from the old Enos Pyle tract there was a
right - of -way shown to the Orcutt property . Chairman May stated that
Minnie Orcutt was there when Mr . Schickel was building the access to
Building # 20 , and she had asked him not to proceed any further until
she had an opportunity to find out more about the issue , but Mr .
Schickel proceeded anyway .
• Chairman May commented that , in his opinion , Mr . Schickel ignored
the requests of Mr . Comstock and Mrs . Orcutt . Chairman May noted that
Planning Board - 34 - April 5 , 1988
what concerned him was that Mr . Schickel totally walked away from the
issue by saying , now it is the Homeowners ' Association responsibility .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , stated that Mr . Schickel said he had
received the sign -offs from the Engineering and Planning Departments
regarding the path , without the Engineering and Planning Departments
realizing that he had no legal right to put the path there .
Chairman May stated that , at this point , his suggestion was that
the Planning Board not grant any further building permits for Phase
III until such time as Mr . Schickel figures out how to resolve the
matter of the pathway .
Attorney Barney stated that the original resolution was adopted
in 1981 , with the original Phase I , commenting that that resolution
noted that Mr . Schickel would provide a bike path to Woodcrest Road ,
Continuing , Attorney Barney stated that in 1987 , the Planning Board ,
with the implicit advice of all the staff members , including the Town
Atorney , changed that to read that Mr . Schickel would provide a bike
path from his road to the Town ' s existing Maple Avenue bike path ,
adding , at the time that was done there was no place that Mr . Schickel
could put that bikeway , because he had already sold Lot # 19 and Lot
# 20 in 1981 . Attorney Barney stated that a resolution was adopted
stating that Mr . Schickel would provide a bike path , and in fact , he
has done it . Attorney Barney commented that , as it happened , Mr .
Schickel did it over property that he had no legal right , probably , to
do it , but one could argue that the Residents ' Association , in taking
title to this land , took title , subject to all the requirements that
were imposed by the Planning Board in conjunction with approval of the
whole subdivision , and indeed , one of the requirements was that the
bike path would be placed to Woodcrest Road . Attorney Barney stated
that the wrinkle that is a little bit of a problem is that when the
Residents ' Association took title which talked about going to
Woodcrest Road , adding that , actually , when the bike path was laid out
in accordance with the resolution of the Planning Board it was laid
out over a different location . Attorney Barney stated that he did not
like what Mr . Schickel did , and the way it was done , but , technically ,
he has complied with the resolution . Attorney Barney remarked that he
had not researched the Orcutt access . Attorney Barney stated that the
matter is not within Mr . Schickel ' s power to resolve , but resides with
the Residents ' Association , and the Orcutts , to come to some sort of
an agreement .
Attorney Barney noted that the Planning Board can compel Mr .
Schickel , as a condition to future approvals , to put the bike path in
across land that he does own , which runs south . Chairman May
responded that the Board disagrees a little bit , from the standpoint
that there still has to be an access provided for the Orcutt property .
Attorney Barney stated that . he did not think the Planning Board
has the power to withhold building permits , noting , the Planning Board
• has the power to withhold approval of subdivision plans and proposed
subdivisions . Attorney Barney noted that the only person that would
have power to withhold building permits would be the Zoning
Planning Board - 35 - April 5 , 1988
Enforcement Officer , if he felt , based upon what the conditions were ,
and what conditions were imposed , that conditions were not met .
David Klein noted that Mrs . Orcutt had stated that she would
allow the path on her land if she had access through the driveway .
At this time , Attorney Barney stated that he would look at the
Orcutt situation and communicate with Andrew Frost , BI / ZEO .
Susan Beeners , Town Planner , stated that the Iacovelli matter is
scheduled to go before the Zoning Board of Appeals on April 13 , 1988 .
Ms . Beeners said that the Town Board is required , as stated in the
Subdivision Regulations , to approve road locations prior to
Preliminary Subdivision Approval , whereas it was done at the Planning
Board , prior to any Final Subdivision Approval , Ms . Beeners stated
that there is still an uncomfortable feeling about the actual location
of the road , and the whole circumstances of the project . Ms . Beeners
noted that -the Site Plan Subdivision Plat may be referred back to the
Planning Board before the Town Board made too much of a real decision
on it , or before the ZBA would look at it .
Ms . Beeners reported that the Eastern Artifical Insemination
Co - Op wants to move its bulls from Judd Falls Road to Sheffield and
Hayts Road , Ms . Beeners stated that this is regarded as a permitted
Agricultural Use , adding , there would be about 40 stalls involved .
• ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the April 5 , 1988 , meeting of
the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 11 : 35 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Mary Bryant , Recording Secretary ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board .
•
PETITION TO THE PLANNING BOARD, p
TOWN OF ITHACA
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 , 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B" , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R 15 to multiple residence ( to accomodate 60 apartment
units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial development
would destroy the residential and medical character of the neighborhood.
We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made in this area
until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
0210 ��4C f,
34
s�
S �' s 71
�
ovA
I%kL 10F
20
13 ;13 ;
144
16 . I
EXHIBIT 1
y
PETITION TO THE PLANNING 8 ® ARD , 107AL c
TGWN 6F ITHACA
we the undersigneia ;area residents are opposed to the proposed ri:jLoning of
a 15 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . w4 from R l5 to e)usmess District " B " for the development of a
; hopping mal ) we also co[.pos; e the proposed rezoning of 1L acres on the
:, arfle s1tt Ir i` (il t< j to nili � tlrile re =, ldenCe ( tp riCC ;jr (Ive F; i apartment
units ) . we ).relieve that opening up west Hill to commercial ilevrlc; priierit.
would de5D t . the resider� tlal and medir ;al character of the nrligrlborrlood
We also strongly urge that no zoning changes =; Would he made In this :area
until the Rte 96 / octopus pi ,:In is, final izrad .
will NAME — ADDRESS R – —
lS0, ep3, ( cr CQ Gt�o
3 . i COAL61 326 forAMR- o
OF
7 , fee
- I C
gwIlea 624' 2L, Ara_ A2L11
1ONYM M,AA I will
1 2 I
13 .
14.
EXHIBIT 1
PETITION TO THE PLANNING BOARD ,
TOWN OF ITHACA
• we the under' slgned ;area residents are i:; pposed to the proposes rezonirig Of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land ) rnrr) ediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 9 ( tPJ froom R15 to Busbies ; Dl : trlct " B 4t , for the d e v eliiprner) t
shopping mall We also oppose trip proposed reZe ninq of 12 acres on tr, e
Sarrle Site frorn Rl. > to multlplp reciderict i" o ar. r , rrioriate C, (.1 , ,_) rt. rrirnt
units ). We believe treat or; enin (. ;_; r) w reD Hill to corrtrnercial oe ��� � icJrJrrierit
would de .-Dtris) y tr) e reS:Jderu and meijii, al Cr) ara (_ ter Of the neit-_jrit.-porr, 00d
We also Arongl �d urge triat rto z �) nir) g rhangF �; hn ;.ilii h; e rOadF? 1n tr) 1 '_ ;ire.,
until the Rt ? . w) / octopu ; l ;) ri is ffinal ized
NAME ADDRESS
J2nen 122a /L
43 On ZZ
4. l AA L/%. r
r� . C:2 9�
l
6 /317
l
": jjgAaffia
10 .
li
.r
12 1
Aj,
0 14 . I
EXHIBIT 1
PETITION TO THE PLANNING BOARD,
TOWN OF ITHACA
We tree undersigned area reidents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 'a6N from R l to Busme s Uistrirt " ° " for t ; �� development of a
snopping mall We also oppose trip proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
_- arose sl t e f ri'. rn R l to rriui i i ( ile residence (. i. o ace ; rnc� daie F� 0 ap ie t rnent
units ) . We Celieve that opening up West Hill to commercial develcI.-Mient
wpu ) d riestrc,y the residerti .a1 and medical character of the nr' vjrlt; Qrr, u ,ad
We also strongly urge ir� at no Zoning changes , riould be rnade in this area
until the Rte ') 6 / iextopuls flan is finalized .
NAME ADDRESS
ad 6 (e, c
'a . Z &ox XL
I ' ll IeA
- !¢L° !�
5, Pat�CA
? . C�- Nt:) ro ams < < ► ' 1
C9 " � / DW p A60
.� ell
.� �
or
• 14. ' 2,
•, EXHIBIT 1
I V 1 1 11. 1 Lmr"l1 41111 YV N `JriI \ v .
TOWN OF ITHACA
• We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R 15 to Business District " B" , for the development of a
shopping mall , We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to P, 30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) , We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized ,
NAME ADDRESS
�W' 4
or
Q4L.o,o,,, ; I K�
i �
G �
4.
� . 'i�"-"000000- az:
� a
r
8. c ,�� ( y 5 57) "e�v I �
l
2.
o.
1tAf A
i r ,
13 to
t
i
14. 10A D /M E _ ojK (0Cgl O�
0000
• Z 7 ,
Eoollo XHIBIT_ 1 1 — . . . , r.. . . . ... .. .... .. .._ T __ „ Y& SD � 7
I I i rUN I U I rpt NLANNIIvu DUAKUO
TOWN OF ITHACA
• We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte , 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ). We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area, until the Rte. 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
NAME ADDRESS
2 . iQal
3 Pe4.e-,� al, 0 �say4
Tw,
a.
6 1444 ljflon4 I - a a (' w,
81
01,
JP
air ✓
13 , rd Ile
LAA
•
1 t (� U-
EXHIBIT !
r 11 iVIV I V I I IL r' LP% 141411 %4Q W) d ^ ML)
TOWN OF I THACA
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R 15 to Business District " B" , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R 15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized.
NAME ADDRESS
y,
� . Yom.
3 / � /x
6'
7
!41 y � � rF ��� A/
A2 /M
3 0 ngK�Cj L ^
6 . /1A VaLA k
0
g � 1 b ( 3 WAy Rd #8/24
J
1 � let) dVIA 9wd7/"
.
'
154 ZA4&0;7
16 ,
EXHIBIT 1
y;r( `t�`�`•1 � � � , � ! , ,1 fad r L i i I ivir i i i iL r Lt11r1rifr �/ u � rsr� u ,
�. TOWN OF ITHACA
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
• a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R 15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ). We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood, We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte. 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
NAME ADDR SS
1 . 1 144 S v M
2 , 0 f'✓ / a CA _ -
� .
0 4,"�AA Sa 66v A-, t� o S , PQ44 V0 � v1
4.
l�
6
8 . 'eZ
9. /� _ �- .
_�
Mor
10. �� x&IV-"4j r c 4C
-1-1 . VAe30
19 . •�.� 1 -- ?0 . 3&4• G Xa 9 - _L��ltara , Al r /Am
14, mA4
1 � Sty
1 t o lQcj n c rf
EXHIBIT 1
Pvo _ f � '&49 " i L i a i i Vi i i V i i iL r LP'► 1111111V VVMr\ 0 ,
t t �^ i TOWN OF ITHACA
. We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
,same site from R 15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ). We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood , We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized.
NAME ADDRESS
Cu' 1, 1
4. 107
S
61
8.
bJJA401 aci
t4A1
oe
l
14 Ale. lc-4%w v5a. v' n xxx a i
� 7� w
16 . E 2 # — �fj � 04: w4jj
EXHIBIT 1
rL I i 1 IUIN i U i MC WLHi41)404Q L) ) ,OES LJ
TOWN OF ITHACA
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R 15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall , We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R 15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development wouid destroy the residential and . medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
NAME ADDRESS
3t. '7 r� ►ransh V\rT / f w ��l a ca
2AL�'Vt ibJQ4A � 1 4 'A L4 10 0
NY l � Y ,I
Ogg
7 , wzelV0A Vj
�.
6A4
8 .qn It "0
10 .
J
t � t �/ A , �
14 ('2
vv a c- e-L c� T 1.6�. CM40- (v
R �-
EXHIBIT
C> .
r L I I I AVIV i V 1 FIL" 1 i . r11VIVIIYV UVt� t`iU ,
TOWN OF ITHACA
• We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B" , for the development of a
shopping mall , We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hili to commercial
development would destroy the residential -and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte. 96 / octopus plan is finalized.
NAME
c
P A? s�
o� l� c
6 L 4' 119 d A /< we o�,5 L�l'� �-/064
of
8 .
atZ�o
} 9. CLC, . "
1 1 C-Aw S
I
2 1
14. X Y1 ID8s /r�V6�V Let
1 C51
Ce
EXHIBIT 1
r I I VIv I V f FIL rL ?N lYIVIIVV OVf1ML) i
TOWN OF ITHACA
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
QF-1%
S S
Lin
i. v
6 . t ► Oa Ks , lWood kn 1 "Lwoo
FST l 'log
12 \ '
i
M-'
I 'mac A
I Z7
�a I
man .,
1 d L
2
' 5,Q
o4 Ole
EXHIBIT 1
i ivir i I rL. nIIIIIIvV r\ LJ
TOWN OF ITHACA
• We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on .
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B " , for the development of a
shopping mall . Vie also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood , We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte. 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
NAME ADDRESS
• �- to
1 /Pj�(11 i
•
6 .
A9
41
8 .1 w
r
11 . �
12 .
1q �
15 .
EXHIBIT 1
Vvr► i \ u
TOWN OF ITHACA
i F r
1 '
We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the proposed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District " B for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West Hill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is finalized .
- - NAME ADDRESS
i Cr
4. � J
c►.,v�, c S L i
7 I
8 .
9 I
13 :
14:
�. 15 I �
16 .
EXHIBIT 1
i
i u) I n rLrink ININ114
TOWN OF ITHACA
a
PL
i We the undersigned area residents are opposed to the propOsed rezoning of
a 15 . 86 acre parcel of land immediately opposite the hospital entrance on
Rte . 96N from R15 to Business District _ Q " , for the development of a
shopping mall . We also oppose the proposed rezoning of 12 acres on the
same site from R15 to R30 ( multiple residence , to accomodate 60
apartment units ) . We believe that opening up West dill to commercial
development would destroy the residential and medical character of the
neighborhood . We also strongly urge that no zoning changes. should be made
in this area until the Rte . 96 / octopus plan is fin � lized .
NAME ADDRESS _
x &000441tadr 150e 0/0
�j
= a , � P-3/1 )
8 .
9. � TO
1 I-io 1 ' 4
LF
W , j
Aki
Lit-
t , ' }La. 12 AP,_
2 .
LlA" dL P _
16 . D
EXHIBIT 1 /
t
• PETITION
We , the undersigned , being either residents of or employees
on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca , welcome the retail and
housing development proposed by Mrs . Kyong on Trumansburg Road
opposite the hospital .
Name Address
9V T-fPt%mc
0(0 i ba,1% a-/ 1LAO
/ oI 1 - bur k�,1.
t3 9 j
:3/3I�88
.313
311- 8� yie7zlz; / 30 / ric(ina000 u1y mol
/a go �
:414� Ised Sot
JA
i
s. y
/8g. r � . S/a,a ,ah " ; . %30 % . rr bI " - 1e czea., n .
.
X-1
I
IIi
• 1 .
EXHIBIT 2
^'1w 7}�.'^rCt ;RIV ,l
r�l:y � rJ . Ir '4�t\' 1Nt�yy� >�i nrT � A ''L`x� , lYt.rr f }yr . It � Z Y..tt � i '.•�i a x 1 ':: l+�i . t'J j r f �Ilt asvi 'L �,
:Z . � µi ,ti ., t�l , 11, . :v r i da�arj` r ..\.. � a . . . .. .5 �'� .. .. . ',�;1 S�" ..o f. � ,.•4' r �,` 4 / . _ .. 4tn ` . -.,1 ? . v .. .. . .. , .
• PETITION
We , the undersigned , being either residents of or employees
on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca , welcome the retail and
housing development proposed by Mrs . Kyong on Trumansburg Road
opposite the hospital .
Name Address
IM Al
3i 00 a40000
311z" xer :7
4e 1
4-4- la-0e ( t
3� 31 � � � j��•n � � 020 l Da4-eS 2a^
.• _ -
..
• lax
• i
•
EXHIBIT 2
. 1 ! . '..i. tiI+...7- ' — . �
c, ru ,1- � _'r ` . jsJ '.'. vT i— ) t-.. x r —'�-I•. t q�- . r q :"1' v '1 U^
Y .•v^IT^' . - . . .
. .
a
• PETITION
We , the undersigned , being either residents of or employees
on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca , welcome the retail and
housing development proposed by Mrs . Kyong on Trumansburg Road
opposite the hospital .
Name Address
01
Ilk A-ist Jc��4a
�
mac//
Y �ms, r) zc
� U
•
EXHIBIT 2
- r
a
• PETITION
We , the undersigned , being either residents of or employees
on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca , welcome the retail and
housing development proposed by Mrs . Kyong on Trumansburg Road
opposite the hospital .
Name Address
G�
C
•
t
•
EXHIBIT 2
r
• KYONG TRAFFIC ANALYSIS KYOTRAF6 . MPW AP ril 5 1988
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
( DEALS WITH 12 & 15 ACRE PARCELS ONLY )
COMBINED RESIDENTIAL & COMMERCIAL
TIME RESIDENTIAL CARS / HR BUSINESS EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING
OF DAY CARS CARS / HR CARS / HR CARS / HR CARS / HR
EXISTING PROPOSED PER HOUR AT AT AT AT
ZONING ZONING AT GATE GATE BRIDGE GATE BRIDGE
500 10 10 0 10 10 10 9
600 36 34 1 37 35 35 33
700 90 16 30 120 95 46 24
800 90 25 45 135 99 70 37
900 80 30 60 140 94 90 47
1000 40 30 60 100 56 90 47
1100 50 30 65 115 67 95 48
1200 60 30 100 160 87 130 59
1300 80 34 80 160 100 114 56
1400 85 38 85 170 106 123 62
1500 90 42 95 185 114 137 68
1600 109 45 100 209 134 145 73
1700 90 42 114 204 120 156 74
1800 70 36 100 170 97 136 64
1900 50 30 95 145 76 125 57
2000 30 14 70 100 50 84 34
2100 20 19 30 50 28 49 27
2200 10 10 10 20 13 20 12
DAILY TOTALS .
ARCH ' S 1090 514 1140 2230 3032 2485 830
APA ' S * 1095 1040 212 1307 1104 1252 472
COLUMN : A B C D E F G
ASSUMPTIONS :
1 . Single family dwellings have 1 . 8 cars per unit , multi family
has 1 . 6 cars per unit .
2 . Seventy percent of development ' s commercial traffic does not
cross the Inlet bridge . Shoppers are from West Hill .
3 . Ninty - five percent of development ' s residential traffic
crosses the Inlet bridge .
4 . One hundred ninty cars leave the development between 5 : 00 and
9 : 00 AM on weekdays .
5 . APA assumes 8 . 05 trip / dwelling unit / day , architect and county
planning use 7 . 5 .
6 . The following formulas are used above :
0j COLUMN A . from tables .
COLUMN B , from tables .
COLUMN C , from tables .
COLUMN D , col A + col C
EXHIBIT 3
COLUMN E . 95col A + . 30col C
COLUMN F , col B + col C .
COLUMN G , . 95col B + . 30col C .
* Data from . Performance Zoning by Lane Kendig ,
published by American Planning Association
•
EXHIBIT 3