Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2004-04-20FILE DATE SSo TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, APRIL 20, 2004 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in special session on Tuesday, April 20, 2004, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning (7:16 p.m.); Dan Walker, Director of Engineering; Susan Ritter, Assistant Director -of Planning; Michael Smith, Environmental Planner. EXCUSED: Rod Howe, Board Member OTHERS: Robert Smith, 1572 Slaterville Road; Gerald Hall, 1307 Trumansburg. Road; Patricia Hall, 1307 Trumansburg Road; Don Gordon, 232 Richard Place; Steve Beyers, 1328 Slaterville Road.; Catherine O'Hora, 7112 North Division St, Auburn; John Bowers, 1406 Trumansburg Road; Celia Bowers, 1406 Trumansburg Road; Doria Higgins, 2 Hillcrest Drive; Susan J. Suwinski, 451 Sheffield Road; Paul Mazzarella; Ithaca Neighborhood Housing,' 115 West Clinton Street; Sydney Merritt, 127 Woolf Lane; Joyce Merritt, 127 Woolf Lane; Ann Byrne, 137 Hopkins Road; Steven Daughhetee, 245 Hayts Road; Katrina Thaler, Thaler and Thaler, 309 North Tioga Street; John Rancich, Post Office Box 547; Ota U Ic, 227 South Albany Street; Don R. Crittenden, 173 Bundy Road; Bill Goodman, 231 Rachel Carson Way; Rosalind Grippi, 9 Orchard Hill Road; John Shroder, 618 Stewart Avenue; Peter Trowbridge, 1345 Mecklenburg Road; Grace Chang, HOLT Architects, 217 North Aurora Street; David Herrick, T. G. Miller, North -Aurora Street; Chris Pappamichael, Aris Investment; Ryan Sherry 87 Griffin Road; George Frantz, 604 Cliff. Street; John Guttenberger, Cornell University Office of Public Relations; Roger DuPuis II, The Ithaca Journal Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7 :05 p.m., and accepted for the record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on Aprill.2, 2004 and April 14, 2004; together with the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of Danby, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as appropriate, on April 14, 20040 Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire. Prevention and Control. AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD (attachment #1) Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:06 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox — If there is a member of the audience who wishes to address the Planning Board this evening on an issue, an item, a topic or a concern that is not on this evening's agenda, I ask you to please step to the microphone and we ask that you give us your name and address and we would be very interested to hear what you have to say. Mr. Shroder? Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 John Shroder — May I speak to an item on the agenda because I have to leave? Chairperson Wilcox — No, you.may not. Mr. Shroder —Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. However, I will try to get you in first when we open the public hearing, if you are still here. Mr. Shroder - It's for Sky Garden Chairperson Wilcox - If we get to it, it is going to be late, there is no public hearing scheduled for tonight, but I will give the public a chance to speak. Go ahead. Mr. Shroder — This is a statement from the Eco Village at Ithaca Incorporated Board of Directors with regard to the proposed Sky Garden. I am the president, which is the not - for - profit that owns most of the lands at Eco Village, but most of the lands are separately owned. This is a statement approved by the EVI Board. (see attached statement, statement # 1) Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — I see, you have to go to work. Are you going to leave that with us? If you could, just for the record. Ma'am if you wish to address the Board. Rosalind Grippi, 9 Orchard Hill Road — On West Hill. I spoke at the public hearing of the generic environmental impact statement on October 3, 20030 My husband and I, then, were surprised, that the Hayts School and Chapel were not considered in the revamped zoning plans, which would now include the office park and neighborhood convenience zones. This was six months before the re- zoning of the Kyong property, now under discussion. At that time, we protested that GEIS paid no attention in the case of the West Hill area to the cultural or historic resources that are bound there. We stated that we were surprised that some members of .the Town committees were unaware, not only of the historic significance of the schoolhouse and chapel, distinguee by the role they played in the abolitionist movement, but were unaware even of the existence of the buildings, therefore, it only follows that the GEIS did not tackle the problem of how these historic buildings and cultural resources would fit in with the new zoning of the area. When we did get a response, a month later, and it was a the cultural resource. section of GEIS, highlighted historic resources that have been listed on the State or Notional Registers and, therefore, did not include these buildings and they also replied with a comment that there is a Historic Preservation Planning Workshop at .Cornell that the Town had been working with, again, it did not include the schoolhouse or chapel. I believe that the, Town Planners and representatives should take responsibly for furthering the cultural resources of West Hill, which has presently being exploited for other purposes. Town government should not assume a passive role by relying on National or New York registry for the enumeration of its cultural resources and historic buildings, but they should initiate these approaches, designating areas of West Hill as a historic district and bring them to the attention of the. National or New York registry. In 1988, we submitted a request to the New York State Office of Parks and Recreation, Historic Places and it appears that the chapel and schoolhouse are eligible.for New York and National registry, but it is more that those two buildings that make up West Hill's historic district. A historic district would include the Kyong property, which was a home of Mr. Hayts, who built 2 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 the Abolition Church in protest against the Presbyterian church that supported New York Legislation to. return fleeing slaves to the owners. There is also the old cemetery. There is the Oddfellows/ Rebecca Home, already on the registry, not only for it's architectural qualities (and the architectural qualities pertain to all the buildings thus far mentioned), but also for innovative treatment and innovative facilities and the sick. Possibly, also, Indian Creek Fruit Farm might by eligible. I also have been told that there are artifacts of sequestered slaves that have been uncovered in the house nearby.. Also, the Dewitt Historical Society has put a book on homes on west hill and there are many other publications with material to . be found. At the October meeting, I submitted copies of pages from newspapers and books on the school and. chapel and this included comments . on the proposed New York Heritage Trail, where the author Carol Kammen, made a case for Ithaca to be included in the Heritage, silting the work of Mr. Hayts and the Hayts Chapel. It would be sad . indeed to think that history might be buried by single - eyed vision on progress and commercial development. I hope the government of the Town will take all this into consideration. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox- Have you made your views known to the Town Board? Ms. Grippi — Well, I did at the last meeting. Isn't this the Town Board? Chairperson Wilcox — This is the Planning Board. I just wanted to make sure that you have made them known to the Town Board, i.e. your elected officials. Ms. Grippi — Yes. The GEIS was the Town Board, right? Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. Ms. Grippi — This has been expanded here Chairperson Wilcox — I am very glad you came and read that, but I just wanted to make sure that you also let the Town Board know. Ms. Grippi — I think West Hill deserves being considered a historic district or parts of it and these things should be highlighted before they disappear. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — Could we, have a copy of that? Ms. Grippi — This is a sloppy old copy that I just did. I'll be happy to retype it Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you ma'am. Would anybody else like to address the Planning Board this evening on an item that is not on this evening's agenda. Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:15 p.m. AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination: Cornell University Library Storage Annex Addition, Palm Rd. Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:15 p.m. 3 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox - Representing Cornell University is? Good evening Mr. Smith. Can I ask you to pull the microphone over? Have you even been here before? I will ask you to provide an overview of the project and then I will ask you about any environmental issues that you are aware of. Robert Smith, 1572 Slaterville Road — I've brought some help with me. Do people normally stand? Chairperson Wilcox — They stand, but if you stand, you have to carry that microphone around with you. If you want to sit then, we will pick you up on that microphone. We both record and we amplify so that people can hear you. Mr. Smith — I am a project manager for Cornell University. The project that we have in front of us is the annex library storage facility addition: Let me just use this map behind me to point out where exactly that facility is located. It is located between Route 366 and Cascadilla Creek between Game Farm Road and Tower Road. It's off of Palm Road. There is two additions to the existing facility that we are going to figure in. There is a small addition, which is a.. loading dock area, adjacent to Palm Road. It's about 4,000 square feet in area. The larger area consist of three modules, each of about 10,000 square feet, making up a total 'of 30,000 square feet of area. It measures about 200 feet long, 146 wide and is 41 feet high, that compares to the 39 feet high at the existing facility. In addition to these, we also have some... The reason that we are adding to the facility at this time is that the existing libraries of Cornell University are filled to capacity and we need to find additional space for books and the additions that we are proposing will provide'space for about 5 million volumes. The storage space will also be used to provide storage space for library materials during the renovations to the libraries on campus. We have several site designs that we have looked at: The building additions have been designed so that they come no closer to Cascadilla Creek and the unique natural area, than the existing facility. The building revisions have been pushed forward to the setback limit on Palm Road. I might point out that there is a setback that isn't actually shown on this drawing, but from Cascadilla Creek there is a setback of about 75 feet and we are about at 150 feet from Cascadilla Creek so we area long way from that setback limit. As I have pointed out before, we actually have some mechanical equipment that might produce some greater than ambient sound. What we have done with that equipment is we have actually put it in a courtyard which faces away from the creek. We are trying to minimize sound that would be disturbing to anyone that is walking along the natural way. We've taken into consideration, storm water retention in our design. We actually have a series of swales draining ponds, which are best shown on the drawing over. to the other side here. So we are actually controlling the drainage around the building and not allowing it to go down a steep slope, but actually meet with the stream, just about at a level location adjacent to the roadway here. We've also tried to minimize the view of the building from the creek and the walkway adjacent to the creek. We've done that by actually cutting into the hillside, such that, while we have a 41 foot high building, the lower 15 feet of that building is actually going to be hidden by the hillside. M Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann — Excuse me. Could you repeat that. I don't understand what you mean. It would be hidden by the hillside in what way? Mr. Smith — We have a 41 foot high building here and we have the hill that comes up from the creek and actually we cut very deeply into the hillside on the reverse side, so that we could ,. place our building depressed, I guess, from the natural height of the land is the best way to put it. Board Member Hoffmann — Thank you. Mr. Smith — You can see from the photograph that there are a number of mature trees along the embankment leading up to the building and we have actually located the building in such a way and done all our site work in such a way that we do not disturb the natural wooded area on the embankment as well. In addition to the natural trees on the site, we are adding both deciduous and coniferous trees to aid in reducing the appearance of the building from the Cascadilla Creek foot path. Some of the. considerations of the design of the building were to keep the design of the building as low -key as possible. The additions are designed to be a neutral background with minimal impact on the site. The exterior walls of the building are to match the existing finishes, it is a pre- cast concrete building with a textured finish. I think that is all I have to say about the, building. Are there any questions? Board Member Hoffmann — Could we see the photos that you had of the exteriors of the building? Mr. Smith — Yes. Board Member Hoffmann —That is the existing building Mr. Smith — That is the existing building and we will be matching the existing panels with new panels on the additions. You can see here that we have basically a rough textured concrete. Board Member Thayer — So, the reason that you have a low profile on the building is that you are taking out so much material? You are taking our 5,000 cubic yards of material right? Mr. Smith — Yes we are. We have to have a building that is level with the existing building at the floor level and, in order to do that, we need to cut into the hillside and bring the building down. Board Member Thayer — Do you have any plans as to where that material is going? Mr. Smith = If it is clean fill, we will probably keep in on Cornell property in Precinct 7, moving it as short a distance as possible. There is some talk of possibly putting it behind the carpenter's shop there. For other materials, that are non - native material, we plan on disposing those in a legal manner in the landfill site. Board Member Conneman — Is this part of Cornell's Master Plan for the site or is this just an addition? 5 Planning Board Minutes April.20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Smith — I don't know if I am qualified to speak about the Cornell Master Plan, but — Are you talking about the Master Plan for this Precinct? Board Member Conneman —For the Precinct,. yes. Mr. Smith — The planning people at Cornell are aware of this building. I am not sure how to. address this question entirely. Board Member Mitrano — Does Cornell have a registered Master Plan? Chairperson Wilcox — We haven't seen one. Registered or unregistered, we haven't seen one. Ms. Ritter — There was a general environmental impact statement done for this particular area. So it has been identified and certain issues have been identified for being appropriate for this area. Board Member Hoffmann — And certain regulations about setback and such have been set for the whole — Mr. Kanter = For the whole Precinct 7. Board Member Hoffmann.— It's called Precinct 7, 1 keep forgetting the numbers. Mr. Smith — This building and the entire development is in full compliance with that bylaw that it was written into for Precinct 7. Board Member Hoffmann — I think it was called a generic environmental impact statement that we did. Ms. Ritter — That's right and then this area is zoned special land use district, so a lot of the requirements that came out of the EIF were brought into that SLUD language. Chairperson Wilcox If I'm not mistaken, the primary purpose of this area is to move non- essential activities off of the main campus to a location, such as this. For example, book. storage. Board Member Mitrano — Do patrons receive the books there or do they go to one of the existing libraries? Mr. Smith — Normally, they would go to one of the existing libraries and then a van would deliver the books from this storage facility to the other libraries, but there is a small reading room associated with this facility. Chairperson Wilcox — You mentioned -I'm sorry, did I interrupt someone? Lei Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Mitrano — Does each individual library and its director and /or whatever total applies make the decisions about which books go out into the annex and which ones stay on the central campus? Mr. Smith — We have John Hoffman here, he would probably answer that question better than I, „ but- Board Member Mitrano — I'm just curious by the way, it's not an environmental review. Mr. Smith — There is a process within the libraries for selecting books that are going to come out to this facility. I know they look at the usage of the materials and the less materials are uses, the more likely they are to end up in this facility. This is for low -used books. Board Member Mitrano — And then internally, how do you shelf them? One of the benefits of being on this Board is, that I get to learn about things I don't otherwise get to learn about, so you'll just have to bear with me. Mr. Smith - The books are all shelved according to size, as opposed to a call number. They are given codes and located in boxes. There is very, very dense storage there. Board Member Mitrano — Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — You mentioned noise, ambient noise in the facility, where would that come from? Mr. Smith — We have some chillers that are located out side of the building. We do have to control the atmosphere inside the building to very close tolerances. It will be 50 degrees and 30 percent humidity on the inside of the building. In order to achieve that, we have to have some sizable chillers on the outside of the building. We've tried to locate those in such a way that they will minimize their impact on the surrounding community. Board Member Thayer — You mean Lake Source doesn't get over there? Mr. Smith — No, it does not. Chairperson Wilcox — Am I correct that the addition is no closer to Recreation Way than the existing storage facility. Board Member Mitrano — Where are the chillers? On the roof or on the side. Mr. Smith- There is actually a courtyard between the proposed loading .dock area and the storage area here and the other side of it is the existing building here. So any sound that is produced by the three chillers here will be projected out towards Palm Road. Board.Member Mitrano — I see. How much larger is the projected building than the existing one. Mr. Smith - I believe the existing building in total area is about.30,000 square feet with a 5,000 square foot loading dock. 7 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann —Tracy, in the generic environmental impact statement there were also set limits on noise levels and such, that a certain level of noise was not to be carried over beyond the boundaries of this parcel. I am assuming that you are falling within those limits too. Mr. Smith — We will comply by all regulations. Board Member Hoffmann — I have some questions. I noticed that there were some papers here when we came in tonight. The grading and erosion control, utility plan, CS 200 has had an upgrade. What does that consist of? I just haven't had time to look at it. Mr. Smith — I believe that we changed some of the grading in the immediate area around the building. The update was actually to create enough flow from this swale right here, going into, it's a creek. that comes down and joins into the main creek here. Basically, that was the only change that was made to that particular drawing. Board Member Hoffmann — And the change consists of making less drainage go into the ditch or what? Into the creek? Mr. Smith — The drainage? It just slows down the drainage as it is going into the creek, but it doesn't actually stop any drainage. Mr. Walker — Actually, the change is a result of our review, we have found that there was an error on the drawing and the retention pond adjacent to Palm Road was actually higher than the road so that it wouldn't hold any water. We pointed that out to the design engineers that did the storm water and the site work and they have acknowledged that that was incorrect so, basically, the little ponding area that is shown in the upper right hand corner, with the pipe coming in and the pipe going out into that creek has been lowered several feet to work and it's he way it should be. Board Member Hoffmann — But it hasn't changed in size or anything? Mr. Walker — No, they just lowered to it make water flow down hill. Board Member Hoffmann — To make it work better. I remembered and I saw in the text there, . there were two existing retention ponds. Where is the second one? I just couldn't see it. Mr. Smith — Well, I don't know if these count as retention ponds, but there are two swales, two area showing retention ponds on the site. The first one being here and it has a pipe that leads from it into the second one here. At the bottom of the hill, we actually have a retention pond that is adjacent to the stream as well. So, it's the retention pond, basically for the entire district. Ms. Ritter — You can see that on your aerial photograph. It's about where the word "recreation" is. . Board Member Hoffmann — Which I just got tonight. Ms. Ritter — Pardon? t'] Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann — Which we just got tonight. The text, as I remember, talks about two retention ponds that would handle the drainage from this expansion, is that right? Mr. Smith — These are the two retaining ponds that I think I have been pointing out here. Board Member Hoffmann — Now there were also some other papers here tonight. Ms. Ritter — I can explain them. The information about the side road. The construction vehicle road on the side, that. one with the revised narrative, they.just corrected the road initially came into the back of the property, this They just moved the location, so the narrative corrected Board Member Hoffmann — Thank you. That's all I needed to know because. it is a little disconcerting when there are new papers with new information that you haven't seen before come in. If somebody else has questions, go ahead. Chairperson Wilcox - Dan, do you want to offer any more comments with .regard to the drainage? Mr. Walker — They have provided a drainage report, storm water management - report and erosion control for this particular project, which fits into the frame work that was done, the hydrologic report, that was done during the generic environmental impact statement and looked at the whole Precinct 7 area and retention areas were sized based on the future build out of the area. the pond that is referred to as FRDS pond, there is no standing water in it. If you looked at you aerial photo, right about the Recreation Way, there is a discharge structure, but it is actually, that wooded area is basically a large wet land that does fill up two or three feet deep during high runoff events. So the wetland filters the runoff as it comes off the site, if you change it for a period of a day to two, depending on the size of the storm, then it allows it to discharge gradually into Cascadilla Creek, that was constructed when the original library addition was put up and the FRDS area was cleaned up because it had been a disposal area for things left over from University renovations. So, the drainage report was quite complete, it fits in with the original framework and is consistent. They have added the two small ponds .adjacent to this building to control immediate runoff from the building. Chairperson Wilcox — The memo that we got from Susan and Mike say " there are still some unresolved issues associated with the drainage swale. I believe you previous comments address that. Mr. Walker — This revised drawing are those comments that we made because as we looked at the grading for the site, we realized that, for that pond to work, it would be spilling water on to Palm Road. We've contacted the engineers and they revised it and that's why we have the revised and these are the documents that we are waiting for to complete our review and with these, we are satisfied with the review. Chairperson Wilcox- Previously unresolved issues have been resolved. Ms. Ritter —There is a condition on the resolution that will need to be complied with. G!1 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Mitrano —I've noticed that the aerial photographs that we use are all dated 2002. Where did these come from? Ms. Ritter — New York State DEC provided them to local government. We got them actually from Tompkins County and they did a fly over in 2002. 1 think they do every two or three years. Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. I was wondering where that disposal site that you mention in your description is located. There is no indication, that I found, on the drawings. Mr. Smith — You are wondering where the existing .FRDS is on the drawing? Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I guess that is another question. Is that the same site that you were talking abound in your text that came with this project, that you think that the digging for this project will be outside of the disposal site. Mr. Smith. That is right. Board Member Hoffmann — You mentioned that if you find some old things that had been disposed of, where they would go if you had dug them up. Mr. Smith = Yes. If we did.up something that is non - native material; then we would probably be hauling that off to a certified legal disposal area. Board Member Hoffmann — But, is the is the site that you are talking about, this.FRDS site... Mr. Smith — That would be located somewhere in.this area here. I think what happened is that in the past, this was a steep hillside that Was leading down to the stream and what happened was that, on the plane above the cliff materials were unloaded off of vehicles and then they used a bull dozer, basically, to push it over the sides of the cliff. What I think that we find on the top of the cliff is that there i.s some materials that have been left behind that have never been pushed over. Board Member Hoffmann— You've mentioned that there are some, I don't have the exact words, but there are some records that Cornell University has about this site. Are they quite detailed? Mr. Smith — I think that there have been studies done, but I don't think that anybody really understands exactly the limits of the former refuse area. It is a little bit vague and it has been covered over, of course. So we can't see that. As we are digging into the site to put our building there, we are sure to uncover some part of the disposal area and we are going to find some materials that need to be disposed of. Board Member Mitrano — Now, these areas that stretch out from the main campus are they part of the original land grant or are they area that Cornell acquired subsequently? Chairperson Wilcox — Boy, you're full of questions tonight, aren't you? Mr. Smith — I'm afraid, I really am not qualified to answer that question. 10 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Conneman — My understanding is that the land grant was actually in the western United States and we sold that and bought properties here. Board Member Mitrano — Maybe I am mistaken. Board Member Conneman — I am sure that Cornell acquired a lot of property; all this was always part of a farm. The orchards were part of the farm. Board Member Mitrano — So, these were developments over time, rather than in 1865 there was some large swap of land, Jonathan? Chairperson Wilcox — We weren't around then. Board Member Thayer - I like the design of the building, I'll move the SEQR. . Board Member Hoffmann — Well, I'm not ready with my questions yet. Board Member Talty — I have a. question with regard to architecture. Is there any type of additional architecture or things that go into the planning to compensate for the weight of the books? Mr. Smith — Well, there is a very strong slab in this building. You would normally build a floor slab in a library for about 150 pounds per square foot. This slab will hold 1,000 pounds per square foot, so it's ten or twelve inches thick of re- enforced concrete and that's basically- Board Member Talty It's just my quick calculation. and I don't pretend to be .any type of expert in the weight of books, but if each book is a pound and you are saying that there is going to be a million six, that is .800,000 tons, does that mean anything because I knew of another Upstate university that their library began to sink and they had to go and add on to their library to stabilize it. Mr. Smith — We do have one module that is identical in height of the shelves on the interior and has a floor slab built in it that is similar at this time and there has been no movement in that facility, at this time. So, we are not anticipating that there is going to be any movement. Mr. Walker — I think, just on the soils that are in the area, the bearing capacity of the soils are probably in excess of three to four thousand pounds per square foot, based on this glacial till. Some of the other institutions in the country have been developed on .areas, like Southwest Park, for example, that were old swamp and land fill. So, I think the bearing capacity is adequate here. Chairperson Wilcox — Let's also not forget that there is an existing storage facility there now. You all set Kevin? Board Member Talty — .Yeah. Chairperson Wilcox = Eva, back to you. 11 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann - Yes, thank you. This side that was used for waste disposal for the whole University from 1938 to 1973 must contain all kinds of stuff, some of it probably not so good. Do you know of any tests that have been done to test what is in this disposal site? Where there are some dangerous things that shouldn't get into the creek. For instance, like PCB's or mercury or stuff like that? Mr. Smith — You are asking a question that I am not really qualified to answer here, of course, but I wasn't here when they were putting all these materials into this disposal area. There are no daily records as to what was put into the sites. It's anybodies guess as to what's in there, but when we dig it up, or dig up any part of it, we are going to be very careful about looking at what we are removing from the site. Board Member. Hoffmann — Does that mean you are going to be testing it then, as you dig it up, if you find it? Mr. Smith - We will be looking very carefully at what we are moving and we have our environmental compliance office, they will be witnessing and reviewing exactly what is dug up and taken out of the site Board Member Hoffmann — Do you have some plans to assure that none of this waste material that you might find, if you find it, will go into the creek adjacent to the site and into Cascadilla Creek? Mr. Smith — Of course we will be very careful and we have plans for controlling, any runoff from the area that we dig up, including these ponds that we have been looking at here will isolate the runoff that comes off of the excavation site. We will control the runoff from the excavation and from any materials that are dug up. Board Member Hoffmann — If you isolate the runoff, how will that work? Mr. Smith — We're really into a topic here that I am not that familiar with myself. Mr. Walker I might have a little insight on this. Back in 1992, 1 think it was or 1991 the FRDS site was cleaned up and sealed basically and when they constructed the first expansion of the. library, they actually placed additional fill onto the site where this new addition is planned to go, we monitored it, Cornell monitored it very closely because they had monitoring well. I am not sure if they still are monitoring it or not, but they basically disposed of visible material on the top, the things that had been buried there and then they capped it with clean fill and then when they built the addition to the library, there was excess material and they deposited it to the east of the building, where this new addition will be going. I don't have exact numbers, my memory isn't that good, but I believe there was. four to five feet of material placed on that slope as it was graded during that construction process. So, I think what they are saying is that when they dig the deepest foundations, they may be extending below the original ground surfaces that existed ten years ago, but I don't anticipate that they will find tremendous amounts of waste materials there. As I recall, the primary land fill area or dump area that they used was directly to the south of the existing building and it was more over the bank and this library annex that existed there for quite a while and actually had a white goods spoil pile that they built up trash that was compacted 12 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 after they had enough metal to make it worth while to recycle it. We have inspectors that go out also and Cornell will have to monitor it to meet the SPEDES permit requirements for storm water management. I'm sure we will prevent anything from running off adversely. Board Member Hoffmann — My concern is not so much materials that are not safe, that don't contain any noxious materials, but I am concerned about things that could have leeched out from them. In this period of time when this fill was used, there weren't such strict regulations and nobody really knew what sort of damage could be done by the chemicals that may have been released from these things. I am just concerned that none of it should reach Cascadilla Creek and reach our lake, where we get the drinking water. Mr. Walker — I agree. We do have reports that were done on this project as they did the reclamation work and I believe we can get a report and information on that to confirm what they found. I think that they found that with sealing it, they have prevented a lot of leech aid from leaving the site. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you Dan. Board Member Mitrano — John's just left and he might be the best person to answer this question, but. are there legal requirements that you are aware of Dan; just in the work that you do, that would do the task that Eva is asking. about is monitor as they move along as to whether disturbing the site is creating some potential leeching as part of the project. Mr.. Walker Yes, as part of the storm water discharge in construction area regulations, we have to monitor that very closely and I know Cornell's compliance office is monitoring that very closely also. Chairperson Wilcox — And it's part of the New York State SPEDES permit as well. Steve Buyers, 1328 Slaterville Road — I'm with the Environmental Compliance Office, like Dan said. Dan did a very good job of explaining, I think everything he said, as I understand,. is true of the area. The area was actually used up until 1973 and I think. most people know that we have another disposal site for chemicals north of the airport, so, for at least part of the time before 1973, 1 think that one opened in 1963, we know, for sure that everyone was shipping chemicals up to the north. That all being said, we don't' know all of what's there. We did do monitoring, we didn't find anything in the water. We showed the information to the Town and the DEC. I guess most of the time, I do a lot of work in landfills, the history of landfills is that you get a lot of impact pretty shortly after it is buried and then, over time, it trickles off. So, if we didn't find anything in 1990, we don't' believe there is anything going on. We are very concerned about the project to make sure that everything is done right, as we are about everything at Cornell. So, we do have a contingency in the project so that we are going to be on hand there, when they are digging up and then just about anything that is not native material, we are going to make sure that it is disposed of properly because the reputation of Cornell is very important to us. Board. Member Hoffmann — Can I just ask you, chemicals used in laboratories and research? when you talk about chemicals, do you mean Mr. Buyers — That is what the chemical disposal site was used for. 13 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann — Because there are also things, I mean pcb's were used in all types of building materials and such and nobody knew that they were as dangerous as they are and the same with mercury in lights witches and things like that. Mr. Buyers — You are right. For a lot of that period there was less of that. Some of those materials were used in the earlier days. We did stop using that site in 1973 and I think that is good. The EPA wasn't formed until 1970 and all the regulations came in after that. So, you are right. Board Member Hoffmann— My last question, I guess has to do with this mason's parking lot, where is that supposed to go and how does that tie in to this project? It's mentioned. Chairperson Wilcox — But it's not park of this project. Ms. Ritter.— It was mentioned in the storm water. management report because I think the hydrologists that were working on it were using those figures in the calculations. It is located on Palm Road. Mr. Walker — If you look at the aerial photo, there is a building that is kind of "u" shaped, there is a parking lot that is in this area. We have been talking to Cornell staff about this parking project, which will be coming before this Board probably some time later this spring or summer: What they did do when they did the storm water analysis for this building. They also included the impacts of that particular site being developed as a parking lot to show that the post- conditions runoff won't be integrated into the pre- conditions. Board Member Hoffmann — For both of them? Mr. Walker.— For both of them. They did a lot of the hydrology for that. I'm convinced that this building won't cause problems with storm water.. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay, thank you. Chairperson. Wilcox — I have a motion to approve SEQR, do I have a .second? Seconded by Tracy Mitrano. Any further discussion? Anymore comments from staff with regard to Environmental Review. There being no further discussion, everyone in favor, pleas signal by saying "aye ". Anyone opposed? No one is opposed, there are no abstentions. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 030:SEQR : Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, Cornell University Library Storage Annex Addition, Palm Road Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 -1 -1 MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Tracy Mitrano. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University library storage annex addition located on Palm Road, Town of Ithaca 14 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Tax Parcel No. 64 -1 -1, Planned Development' Zone No.9. The project _ involves construction of two additions to the existing storage facility totaling +/- 35,000 square feet to provide storage capacity for the growing collections of the Cornell University libraries. The project also includes additional walkways, driveways, landscaping, and a new loading dock. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Catherine O'Hora, Agent, and 2. This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has indicated its intent to act as Lead Agency. in a coordinated environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, and 30 The Planning Board, on April 20, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning Staff, drawings titled "Site and Landscape Plan" (CS100), "Existing Conditions / Demolition Plan" (CS 001), "Grading & Erosion Control / Utility Plan" (CS 200)9 and "Detail Sheet" (CS 600), dated 03/18/04 and revised 04/14/04', prepared by Stantec and Russell Scott Steedle & Capone Architects, Inc., and "First Floor Plan" (A1.1), "Mezzanine Plan" (A1.2), "Roof Plan" (A1.3), "Exterior Elevations" (A2.1), "Building Sections" (A2.2), and "Sections & Details" (A3.1), dated 03/17/04, prepared by Russell Scott Steedle & Capone Architects, Inc., and other application material, and 49 The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, having received no objections from other Involved . Agencies, hereby establishes itself as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the above - described actions; AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and therefore, an Environmental Impact Statement will not be required, and that a notice of this determination will be duly filed and published pursuant to the provisions of 6 NYCRR Part 617.12. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University library storage annex addition located on Palm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 =1 -1, Planned Development Zone No.9. The 15 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 project involves construction of two additions to the existing storage facility totaling +/= 35,000 square feet to provide storage capacity for the growing collections of the Cornell University libraries. The project also includes additional walkways, driveways, landscaping, and a new loading dock. Cornell University, Owner /Applicants Catherine O'Hora, Agent. Chairperson Wilcox opened the Public Hearing at 7:55 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Ladies and gentlemen, this is a Public Hearing, if a member of the audience wishes to address the Planning Board this evening on a particular agenda item, I ask that you step to the microphone, have a seat, give us your name and address and we would be very interested to hear what you have to say. Chairperson Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Alright, discussion, further questions with regard to site plan. Board Member Hoffmann= I have a question about some of the plants. They mentioned that there are going to be some Norway Spruce planted, it seems to be only on the north side of the building and I though Norway Spruce was one of the trees that we were discouraging people from planting. Ms. Ritter - You know that is on the list of Tompkins County invasive plant species and we are doing a little investigation because it may be that that is actually and error and it may be that it is Norway Maple that they mean and not Norway Spruce, but we have not gotten that confirmed yet. Board'Member Hoffmann - Who would confirm something like that? 1 .. Ms. Ritter - Well, we could go back to the source, which would be Robert Wesly, I think who actually developed that. But, all the materials that you see from some of the web sites for invasive plant species talk about alternative plants that you can use for various invasive plant species and there is no mention of the Norway Spruce, but plenty for Norway Maple. Board Member Hoffmann - Interesting. Could we get that clarified? Ms. Ritter - I would like to get it clarified too. We have to get a hold of Robert, as well as some others. Board Member Hoffmann - Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox -I'll get a motion and a second and then we will work on a few additions. Any other questions? Board Member Hoffmann - These trees are not going to hide the building, it will cover the lower, what did you say, the lower 15 feet of the height? Mr. Smith - The earth will hide the lower 15 feet of the building. 16 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Hoffmann — Oh, the earth does that. Mr. Smith - Then we would have the trees on top of the birm and, in time, they will hopefully hide the entire building. Board Member Hoffmann — How big are the trees going to be when you plant them? Mr. Smith — I believe that there was some caliber given on the plan. Board Member Hoffmann — Right, it says one and a half to two inch caliber. About six feet high. For some of those, like the oak, I don't know about the maple, how fast they grow. In that location, it would take a while. Mr. Smith — Yes, it does take time for trees to grow, that's true. Environmental Planner Smith — The plans do show the spruce saplings, which there are seven of those, which are already on site,. are remainirig. Mr. Smith — Those were planted six or seven ,years. and I've been up there, they are 15 feet high at this time. Board Member Hoffmann'— What kind of spruce is it, do you know? Mr. Smith — I don't know. . Chairperson Wilcox — Uh -oh. Are those Swedish Spruce? Board Member Hoffmann — I don't know. Chairperson Wilcox — Would someone like to move a motion for preliminary and final site plan approval? So moved by George Conneman. Seconded by the Chair. Mike or Susan, who wants to talk about the changes? Environmental Planner Smith — It would just be the last condition, condition "d" for the grading and erosion control plan, which was submitted after we put together, this material together, which Dan already mentioned. Chairperson Wilcox — Dan, do we need anything to address plans for on -site storage of fill, for example or something like that? Mr. Walker — That will be required before they start construction, as part of the construction site storm water prevention plan that they have to submit to the DEC. I believe, we probably have a condition in there _where we get a copy of that too. Sometimes the contractor is responsible for preparing that, sometimes the design engineer. I believe the contractor is probably going to be responsible on this project. 17 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox - We have a condition for the truck routing plan for those soils that are taken off site? Mr. Walker — Right. Any spoil areas within Precinct 7 would have to be included in the storm water prevention plan with a silt fence and so on. It is all within the site. They did not specifically identify the disposal area on this_ site plan, but I know Cornell has enough space there and there are some areas that are pretty. rugged back there for past activities and filling it can only be an improvement and I am comfortable that we can control storm water pollution runoff. Chairperson Wilcox — Are you comfortable with the changes. You all set? Any other comments? Questions, comments from the Board? There being none, all those in favor, please signal by saying "aye ". Anyone opposed? There is no one opposed. There are no abstentions, the motion is passed, thank you very much. PB RESOLUTION. NO. 2004 -031: Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval, Cornell University Library Storage Annex Addition, Palm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 =1 -1 MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Fred Wilcox WHEREAS. 1.. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University library storage annex addition located.on Palm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 -14, Planned Development Zone N6.9. The project involves construction of two additions to the, existing storage facility totaling +/- 35,000 square feet to provide storage capacity for the growing collections'of the Cornell University libraries. The project also includes additional walkways, driveways, landscaping, and a new loading dock. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Catherine O'Hora, Agent, and 21 This is a Type I Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as lead agency in environmental review with respect 'to Site Plan Approval, has, on April 20, 2004, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and 31 The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on April 20, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, drawings titled "Site and Landscape Plan" (CS100), "Existing Conditions / Demolition Plan" (CS 001), "Grading & Erosion Control / Utility Plan" (CS 200), and "Detail Sheet" (CS 600), dated 03118104 and revised 04114104, prepared by Stantec and Russell Scott Steedle & Capone Architects, Inc., and "First Floor Plan" (A1.1), "Mezzanine Plan" (A1.2). "Roof Plan" (A1.3), "Exterior Elevations" (A2.1), "Building Sections" (A2.2), and "Sections & Details" (A3.1), dated 03117104, prepared by Russell Scott Steedle & Capone Architects, Inc., and other application material, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board herebylgrants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University Library Storage Annex Addition located on Palm Road, Tax. Parcel No. 64 -1 -1, as shown on drawings titled "Site and Landscape Plan" (CS100), "Existing Conditions / Demolition Plan" (CS .001), "Grading & Erosion Control / Utility Plan" (CS 200), "Detail Sheet" (CS 600), dated 03118104 and revised 04114104, prepared by Stantec and Russell Scott Steedle, & Capone Architects, Inc., "First Floor Plan" (A 1. 1), "Mezzanine Plan" (A 1.2), "Roof Plan" (A 1.3), "Exterior Elevations (A2.1), "Building Sections" ()12.2), "Sections & Details" (A3.1), dated 03117104, prepared by Russell Scott Steedle & Capone Architects, Inc., subject to the following condition: a. submission of an original of the final site plan on mylar, vellum or paper, to be retained by the Town of Ithaca, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and bo submission of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from county, state, and /or federal agencies, including but not limited to the Notice of Intent and Pollution Prevention Plan for NYSDEC, and C, submission of a truck routing plan for the removal of excavation material, for approval of the Director of Engineering, prior to issuance of a building permit, and The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Talty, NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox — Mr. Rancich, we will do our best to get to you. If we do not get to you, my apologies to you right now. My apologies right now. We'll. do it another time, yes. I just want to let you.know now that you might end up sitting there for a while and go home and come back and I apologize in advance. I just don't know how long the next agenda item might take. AGENDA ITEM :PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Subdivision. Approval and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed residential development, Overlook at West Hill, located at 1290 Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -4- 14.2, Residential District R -15 (Medium Density Residential) and Multiple Residence District. The proposal consists of two .phases of residential development, consisting of 128 affordable rental apartment units in 16 buildings and a community center in Phase I on a 24.5 +/- acre portion of Tax Parcel No. 24 =4 -14.2, and 15 lots for single - family, market rate homes in Phase II on about 19 acres of the subject property to be subdivided in the future. The current owners would retain about 5 acres containing the existing medical practice fronting on Trumansburg Road. Song Ja Kyong, Owners Aris Investments, Applicants Grace Chiang, HOLT Architects and Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agents. Chairperson Wilcox- Peter, do you need to set up at all? Okay. IES Chairperson Wilcox - Before we get going on Overlool are comfortable with the Planning Board considering the Article 78 preceding pending? Any questions from the proceeding with consideration of the final approval even Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 <, Mr. Barney you have stated that you final approvals, even though there is an Board of Mr. Barney with regard .to our though there is an Article 78 pending? Board Member Mitrano — I'd like to hear more about the Article 78. What's the procedural posture, John. Mr. Barney — At the moment we have been served with a Notice of Petition and Petition challenging this Board's.decision. It's returnable June 11th before Judge Mulvey and we are in the process of putting the record together and getting ready to respond to it. Chairperson Wilcox — All right, all set then? Mr. Barney — I'd be. happy to talk about it further, but I think it's really an executive session item. Chairperson Wilcox — For the record, I just wanted you to say that you were comfortable with us proceeding. Chairperson Wilcox opened the Public Hearing at 8:04 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox ladies and gentlemen and members of the public, just briefly, if I may, before the Planning Board this evening is the consideration of final approvals for subdivision and site plan. The Board is being asked to determine whether the applicant has sufficiently met the conditions imposed as part of. site plan approval, the preliminary site plan .and subdivision approval. If this Board makes that determination, then we can go ahead and give the final approvals. This is not another review of the entire project. This is not another E.nvironmental Review. As I said, this is a determination of whether the applicant has sufficiently met the conditions imposed. Having said that, Peter, name and address and the floor is yours. Peter Trowbridge, 1345 Mecklenburg Road — As Fred Wilcox just said, what we've presented this evening is a part of the submission that was made on March 30th, was supplemental information, based on questions or observations that both staff and the Board has had. So, what I am going to discuss this evening is primarily new information that we're provided in the packet of March 30th. There are several drawings that I am not going to discuss in detail because there. are some very minor alterations. Those include the final subdivision plat, dated March 30th of this year, which is in your packet, it is C -001. I believe, once again, there are some very minor alterations to that drawing, that you have seen previously and all of the civil drawings, all the "C" drawings that you have in your packet, including C -003, C -004, and 5, as well as 6 and 7 and 8 provide details and both 9 and 10 and 11, what those are, are there were some minor grade alterations, as well as revisions to the inlet to the water quality basins and those have all been modified and I believe all reviewed by the Town Engineer and again, there were very minor alterations that were precipitated by changes in grade that were rather insignificant. The primary issues that were brought up both in the resolution and by staff and by the Board, I will address. will probably just walk over to the drawings to discuss those. The layout plan, there are two issues, actually there are three issues that are accommodated in the layout plan. There was concern that the primary roadway, which I think in the resolution has Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 been suggested to be Dates Drive, Westerly addition of'Dates Drive, at the end of each phase of work, it has been requested that we provide a turn around or hammerhead so that after the first phase of work, there would always be a turn around for maintenance vehicles, for snowplows, for emergency vehicles and those have been accommodated at the end of each of the first two phases of housing. In addition to that, there were some minor alterations to the TCAT bus turn around and, as long as-we are talking about that, we did have a meeting with TCAT staff yesterday, with Jonathan Kanter, Cathy Valentino, myself, Barbara Blanchard and the outcome of that was very positive, TCAT will provide service on the site and all they require is three months notice to make sure that the new bus stop is accommodated in their schedule and the only other consideration that they had is that the developer be responsible for maintenance of the bus shelter, which we will agree to do. So, we do have a positive response from TCAT. In addition to that, we made some minor alterations to all of the parking spaces so that they are of the size that is currently required by the Town, 180 square feet, per parking space. In terms of the grading plan, there were some concerns about the playing field out at the bus stop and that small green space, we have re- graded it so that the gradient is, roughly, three percent. For most people, three percent outdoors scene visually is flat. If you look at the L -006 drawing, what you will see, there was concern, as well about any kind of buffering or, at the low end, to make sure that we have a hedge that would stop any balls rolling in an easterly directions and the detail of that hedge and I will talk about vegetation, generally, but, as long as we're dealing with the playing field, there is a detail on L -006 that describes. that vegetation screen and stop for any play that would happen in that area. Otherwise, the only alteration to the grading plan, we did move the water quality basin. That is down near Trumansburg Road, away from the highway to accommodate any possible future expansion of the road, as requested by New York State DOT. As you know, as long as we are talking about DOT, we did receive. a letter saying that as a part of the re- signalization, that they would consider the pedestrian crossing that I think many Board Members were concerned about at the intersection. So, there will- be pedestrian crossings that are electronic as a part of the re- signalization of the intersection and you have a letter in your. packet describing that. Board Member Conneman — That means walk, no walk signs? Mr. Trowbridge — That's right. So, there are pedestrian- activated signals, George, that would have stops. in all directions to allow pedestrians to cross Trumansburg Road. The other issue is then, I think the best way is to follow along the table of contents that go to the landscape plan and I know that Board Members were concerned about species diversity. We did double the number of species of canopy trees on site and we've added, roughly, 20 new trees on the extreme easterly edge of the property. The Board's comments were, is that they would like the landscape plan on the easterly edge to be consistent with the housing on the westerly edge, think we have done that, in fact, probably added more trees on.the .easterly edge than we see on the westerly edge. So, there is a little more landscape development along this edge, as requested. As I said previously, it is not shown on the landscape plan, but on the detail sheet L- 006, the hedge development at the edge of the playing field. In addition to that, both staff. and the Board Members wee concerned about a number of details. One, to make sure that there was adequate play structures, seating, landscaping associated with the play structures and so we have a blow up of the community building and associated .play structure and we do have a cut sheet of that structure that has been proposed. It's for children from two or three years old 21 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 up through six and seven, so it's meant really for a younger group of children at that location. There is a, it's ADA compliant, a five bar base that is ADA compliant around the play structure. As you know, ADA requires that roughly a third of all of the play functions be ground. based and so we wanted to make sure that the play structure is consistent with. requirements that we have. As long as we are looking at details, we did work with TCAT, we are going to provide their newest bus stop, which is the one that you see here. This is also the bus stop that we recently installed at the PRI /Cayuga Medical Center combination bus stop, which you have seen previously and also what you see on this drawing are two different versions of signage, both the font, the color and the graphic for signage that you will see both at the entrance and associated with the project. The other issues, as we follow down, there are some additional architectural plans. Those really aren't different from what you've seen before, but what we did provide is dimensioning that weren't on the original architectural plans. So, again, the drawings are not different, but the drawings before were at scale and didn't have dimensions and now we show dimensions. In addition, staff did ask us to make sure that as a part of the Town Recreation Way, that we provide an asphalt sidewalk that would extend the full length of both phases of development for the affordable housing so on the north side of the new roadway that will be dedicated to the Town, there is a continuous walkway that connects, both to the bus stop, but also would be a logical extension of the Town Recreation Way when that occurs on the west side of Trumansburg Road. Chairperson Wilcox Peter, I just want to let you know that there is someone sitting behind you now,. just in case. Mr. Trowbridge — I believe that covers the.concerns, the questions that we had taken note of by the Board. David Herrick is here this evening and Chris Pappamichael, Grace. Chang from HOLT Architects to answer any questions that staff or the Board might have. Chairperson Wilcox — Questions of Peter or other members? Yes, Eva. Board Member Hoffmann — In the detail of the playground drawing I see two benches shown, is that all you are going to put in. Mr. Trowbridge — There is an arcade, Eva, that, there is two benches immediately associated. with the playground. We have positioned it in association with the arcade that exists at the community center. It is our assumption that there will be movable furniture on the arcade directly associated with the playground, so that, while there aren't more fixed benches, as you can see, less than eight feet away from the playground is the community center arcade. It's a covered porch. Chairperson Wilcox — What do you mean by arcade? Mr..Trowbridge — A porch. So, it's a covered area where there would be moveable furniture. Board Member Mitrano — That's not what my seven year old would think of when he hears the word "arcade ". 22' Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox —. I think of pinball, but I'm old. Board Member Mitrano — Peter the opening remarks we heard this evening, of course, were very interesting, could you easily point out where those structures are that were mentioned? Specifically the school. Mr. Trowbridge — Sure. They are just off the edge of the map, but as you can see, this is the Kyong house and barn complex. The church and school house are just at, in our previously presentations they were made more obvious, but they're north of the Town easement that runs up .to the water. tank. So, they're primarily adjacent to the five acre Kyongs parcel that the Kyongs are reserving for themselves. Board Member Mitrano — So there is nothing about this plan that we are voting on this evening that would disturb that area? Mr. Trowbridge There is nothing immediately adjacent. Again the buildings on the Kyong parcel are being retained and they're primarily acting as the architectural context for those historic buildings. Board Member Hoffmann — If l can follow up on that, are they on the Kyong parcel? Mr. Trowbridge — No, they aren't. They are on a separate parcel as you can see. This is the parcel line Eva. So, you can see that this is the access way up to the water tower. The Kyong parcel is south of the cemetery and those two historic buildings. Board Member Hoffmann — So, the chapel and school are owned separately? Mr. Trowbridge — Absolutely. So, they are on a separate parcel and owned separately from the Kyong parcel. Board Member Conneman — Peter, there was concern about walking on Route 96. 1 gather that TCAT has proposed that they not only pull buses in, but that they would have an increased schedule so that, like on Sunday, people would not have to walk on the phone to get downtown and back. Mr. Trowbridge — Well, there is two different routes. There is both Route 19 and Route 21. 21 goes out to T -Burg and comes back. There was a discussion yesterday about trying to accommodate ridership.on both of those routes. Chairperson Wilcox — Jon, you were at the meeting, is there anything you would like to add? Mr. Kanter — I did provide a memo summarizing it. TCAT was very excited about this opportunity. So, I think if they see good ridership here, they will provide whatever service is necessary. I think that, also; they are eager to work with municipalities. to try to fill in gaps in service, of course that may mean some municipal funding in the future. So, that largely can be .a continuing dialogue with the Town. 23 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Trowbridge — One other thing that did come up come up, which I thought was very valuable, but it's not directly related this evening, but if any development were to occur in the future on that five -acre Kyong parcel, the bus stop is situated that it were serve whatever might happen in the future on that parcel. So, they recognize that it is strategically located to serve, potentially anything. that might also happen on the Cornell parcel to the south because of, and that is.one other thing that we were asked to add,. was the potential for easement directly south of Overlook Circle, which would provide vehicular access to the Cornell parcel and, again, the bus stop is immediately adjacent. Chairperson Wilcox — I want to just touch on one thing again, just so I am clear. The March 4t' letter from Albert Vetter of State DOT, it says " The region accepts, in concept, the pedestrian facilities." Describe what they mean by pedestrian facilities. Mr. Trowbridge — They are pedestrian- activated lights, crossings, at that locations. Chairperson Wilcox — They also mean markings on the road, as well? Mr: Trowbridge — That's right, there would be zebra - striping on the road. Again, all .of this would be contingent on an intersection design that would need to be finalized by DOT, but-they've agreed with the SRF intersection as we've designed it, but, as you know, DOT will ask us for additional information as time goes on. Board Member Hoffmann — Is it possible to request bigger signs or bigger buttons to indicate that people have to push a button to get a crossing light? The intersection of Green Street and Cayuga downtown, which has .lights that work very well, whenever I go through there I see people who don't realize that you have to push a button to get the crossing light. Chairperson Wilcox— It's not that they don't realize, it's that they don't care. Board Member Hoffmann — I think that they often don't realize. Mr. Trowbridge — Well, I think that pedestrians will automatically be allowed to cross the street. There will be a pedestrian -free time, but individuals could speed up or facilitate that crossing if they electronically activated the signal. Board Member Talty — I have a question. On your buildings are there going to be gutters for rainwater? Chairperson Wilcox- Grace, we need you. Grace Chang, HOLT Architects, 217 North Aurora Street — Yeah, I think we would plan to have gutters. We really haven't gotten to that level of detail. Board Member Talty — On the coattails of that, if there are going to be gutters, would it be free - flowing? Is it exited down the side or would it be tied into piping underground, like French drains? 24 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Ms. Chang I think it might be free - flowing, but again, we haven't gotten to that kind of a construction document. Board Member Talty — I, personally, would like to see underground, like a removal to some waste -water master plan. Ms. Chang — The issues with that are when you get clogs, it is a lot harder to trace that; but that is certainly something we could consider. You know, when you have maintenance, problems, it is harder to deal with that. Chairperson Wilcox — Aesthetically, it looks nicer. Board Member Hoffmann — If the water would be free - flowing out of the down spouts, then you have to provide some other way of making sure the water runs into ditches or swales. Ms. Chang — That would have to be dealt with with the landscaping. Obviously, there would have to be some sort of splash or whatever.and drainable materials appropriate for.that. Mr. Trowbridge — I just think environmentally, I know we're not talking about SEOR issues this evening, it's better if we can utilize the water onsite, rather than discharging it into storm drainage because it is clean water. It's not as if we are dealing with gray water. Chairperson Wilcox — Other questions. There being none, why don't you have a seat.. Ladies and gentlemen, you have heard this before, this is a public hearing. Because the Board is considering whether the applicant adequately met the conditions imposed as part of preliminary approval,. I would hope that you would keep your remarks consistent with what is before the Board this evening. So, if you raise your hand, we will call on you, we'll ask you to come up to the microphone, we will ask for your name and address. Again, most of you have been here before, you know the drill and we'll hear what you have to say. Celia Bowers, 1406 Trumansburg Road — I was quite glad to see at the last hearing that the question was asked how deep are the drainage ponds going to be and the answer was between three and four feet. I've been, I think to every public hearing here and the center of this development is basically what they call a drainage pond. You've got 35 children under six years old, how deep is it possible this water is going to get? I'd also. like .to point out that I am really happy TCAT will go in, but I would also like to remind the Board, that at present, TCAT ; the last bus leaves downtown at 6:30 and I don't think this is safe teenagers are going to be going to movies. They're not going to come home on a 6:30 bus necessarily. The last point, you probably will think is irrelevant, but you know, I think maybe this Board, I think there was .a way this project could have been made more than acceptable to the community as well as fulfilling an affordable_ housing need. Barbara Blanchard pointed out, you know, there is affordable housing in other areas, however it is true that every other sizable affordable housing for families in the Town of Ithaca is on West Hill. The other sizable developments are for the elderly. Now, on the Trumansburg Road you do have safety factors. The traffic would have been mitigated if this was housing for the elderly because the elderly are not going to be driving to work in rush hour. 25 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox. Can I ask you to .keep your remarks pertinent to consideration of whether the applicant has met the conditions imposed? That is what is before the Board this evening. Thank you. Ms. Bowers — You did, in fact, mention traffic safety and I think. my proposal does have relevance to traffic safety. Okay? I really do. I would like to know how deep, under storm conditions or wet conditions, as there is a wetland there, these drainage swales will be because I think that is a safety factor and that was addressed. There is another safety factor that was also addressed, when this proposal came .before the Town Board, it was second on the agenda, the first item was increasing pollution, which is causing real problems in Cayuga Lake. I hope the Board is aware that there is a wetland on that property and Eva was the only person who asked a question about it. She asked one question and Mr. Kanter said the wetland was under the size that was governed by the Army Corp of Engineers. I don't think that's adequate. I don't think we should be getting rid of wetlands. Thank you very much. Chairperson Wilcox —'Sir in the back? Mr. Kanter — Just for the record, I don't believe I said anything about that, but anyway, you can check the minutes, if you'd like. Sidney Merritt, 127 Woolf Lane — I came up here tonight to express some concerns that I have had regarding the SFR Associates traffic plan. I wanted to raise a few .questions to the Board in hopes that answers might clarify some of the questions that were raised in my mind. So, my first question is, is it appropriate to raise these questions? Chairperson Wilcox — What is before the. Board tonight applicant has sufficiently met the conditions imposed. This environmental impact or of the project details. Mr. Merritt — What about the traff ic impact? is a determination of whether the is not another review. of either the Chairperson Wilcox — The traffic impact has been. studies and this Board has made a determination — Mr. Merritt — I find exception to it, am I able to express it? Chairperson Wilcox — I will let you go for a short time, as I did Ms. Bowers. Mr. Merritt — Okay, I'll keep it brief and to the point..The numbers that were provided.in terms of a.m. peak exit from Overlook; in terms of vehicular exit were 27 vehicles. Of those 27 vehicles, ten of them are school buses and that leaves 17 vehicles out of 128 working class residents in the area. Just simply expressed, this doesn't make a darn bit of sense to me. So, my question to this Board is, out of 128 residents, does 17 vehicles leaving Overlook make any sense to you folks and if it does, explain to me why and if it doesn't , explain to me why you approved this traffic plan. Those are my questions. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you sir, you may have a seat. 26 Mr, Merritt No, I am waiting for answers. Chairperson Wilcox — Sir, you may have a seat. now call on the next person. Mr. Merritt — Am I going to get an answer? Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 You have stated what you needed to state, I will Chairperson Wilcox 7 1 am not prepared to give you an answer as that determination has already been made. Mr. Merritt — Well, what was that determination? Chairperson Wilcox — This Board has made a determination in regard to environmental impact. Mr. Merritt You're not answering me, that's what the answer is. Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not going to go through the same material a second time. Mr:. Merritt - Just for your information, this did go to the State Transposition Department. They listened. Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you. Yes ma'am? At least you always have a smile. Ann Byrne, 137 Hopkins Road — I do still have some questions that haven't been answered regarding the safety of this proposal. The first is, I guess you answered part of the question with the pedestrian cross walks, although it's still not clearly laid out to me exactly how that's going to connect up with the hospital. The left hand turning lane, I still think it would be in our advantage to have the developer pay for that left hand turning lane because the way you keep .talking; it sounds like you want to develop all the land around this, this would be a perfect time to put in that left hand turning lane and make it a safe intersection. The meadow that is proposed in the middle of this project is of still great concern. We've asked about that several times, how deep is the water, if it a wetland? I know the property that I own has that wetland and it's pretty deep, . the water. Especially that storm we had the other day, the overflow was right over the banks of our pond. A child could easily fall into that water as what happened in Syracuse with the kid face up in the pond. you've got that. many kids there, right in the middle of that development. That just seems extremely dangerous to me. There is nothing to protect, there is no fence around it. It was also proposed, as heard Peter talk at one time, that they may not mow the meadow. Well, the ticks in that area are quite great as the deer population is very, very big there, in fact, I pulled ticks off my dog the other day, just in my back yard, which is mowed. So, I'd like something done without that being a meadow grown free. If you've been out on that property before, the growth that is there, there are many burrs, there's lots of, I don't know What the trees are, but they have needles on them that pop your bicycle tires very easily and can go up through the bottom of your foot like a spike. I think that vegetation ought to be cleared off and not kept if there is kids around. The rose hip out there is, there are many of them, of those plants. I have yet to still see, .as you've asked, and I've been here at most every meeting , to have a picture of what this really is going to look like with parking next to the buildings. They only show the graph laid out this way, but then they give you this nice picture of what it looks like and it is 27 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 not accurate. I do think they did a great job with buildings 9, 10 and 11, that parking makes a lot of sense. If you notice, it is in the upper left hand part of that picture and that parking is off of their Overlook Circle. Chairperson Wilcox — Ann, I don't mean to interrupt you, the same statement to you. Do you have comments relevant to our determination of whether they sufficiently met the conditions I mposed? Ms. Byrne- Well, you've asked them to propose a picture and they haven't done that, so no, in fact they haven't. Chairperson Wilcox — I do not believe that was a condition of the preliminary approval. Ms. Byrne - Your were asking about, this is safety. Chairperson Wilcox - I am telling you want the Board is considering tonight and I'm asking that you keep your comments relevant to what is before us. That's what I am asking. Ms..Byrne — Well, I think you need to spell it out a little more clearly then because, as understand it, you've got pedestrian path layout plans, those are all safety issues, which I am trying to address and point out to you to take into consideration before you approve this final site plan. We've also asked several questions about the culvert and that safety depth. Those were never answered. I'm quite confused as to how deep is that in a safety issues as well, that holds water..The view shed that is brought up on here, which was a question, it is said to only see the roof tops, if you look. But, that's.what I'll be seeing.from Hopkins Road, it's inaccurate. Chairperson Wilcox — The viewshed has been dealt with, Ann please. Ms. Byrne — The viewshed has been dealt with inaccurately. So, it's off of the road, it's not my viewshed and you didn't look at my viewshed and address that and that's not even inside the house, where it's higher. You said a veiwshed it important, I'm pointing out to you the inaccuracies of this. You believe the developer and I've brought a picture to you to show you what you could see. I can ,see the barn, I can see their house, their clapboard, I can see the lake and they're.telling you that the only thing I can see here is the roof tops, that's inaccurate. So you keep going back to the same people that give you inaccurate information. If it's a public. hearing, I would like to be heard and not interrupted. Chairperson Wilcox — It is a public hearing, but we ask that you be considerate of the Board, and the other people in this room and that you keep, your remarks relevant. Ms. Byrne — Well, .I'm trying to. Also, the question was asked regarding Cayuga Medical Center. My question is who else are they going to advertise to and they way this is written. It sounds like they may give preference to that. So, who else, so that we. don't get a discrimination suit slapped against the Town? The other big question was that Councilman Engman, Councilperson from the Board asked about discussing the dirt and spreading it over the ten acres, that it would smother an ecosystem. How can you make a decision on this site plan when he said he wanted a guarantee about the housing and I have yet it hear, if it's a final site plan approval, why can't we see what that site plan is that you are approving. That part of the project Im Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 is kind of important and it's just, oh we are going to do it late, well, it affects the way.that they excavate this dirt. So, if they are not going to put houses over that, why hasn't that been brought up and I'm asking you, as a Planning Board to ask that question tonight. I also wondered just quickly if that school bus is going to turn around where the TCAT is for safety issues. I don't think that was ever raised, but I think it is an appropriate question that you might want to ask , before you approve this final site plan. I thank you for your time. Oh, wait a minute, 1 am not done. The playing field. The play field, as you know, is pretty small and it's nice that they brought it up to three. percent grade, which is more acceptable, but if you've noticed, it is right next to the roads. It's right next to the TCAT turn around and a hedge, when you've got small kids, the kids go thorough a hedge with a ball, get caught in a hedge and why can't it be a fence, rather than a hedge. You are very; very close to a road there. You are asking for serious trouble if you approve this without some kind of a barrier. A hedge isn't going to cut it and you are right next to 96 , as well. You want the parents there, but they may not be there. I thank you for your time. Board Member Mitrano — Would there be any objections by staff or Board if I gave her my copy of the final site plan? Chairperson Wilcox — Nope. Who would like to be next. You've got to come up here to talk. Name and address again, if you please. Rosalind Grippi, 9 Orchard Hill Road — First of all, I am so distressed about the antagonistic relationship between the Board and the citizens who live nearby who are concerned. I think that often, the criticisms of the citizens are very pertinent to character of a whole town and particularly of a large district, like. West Hill and I am sorry to see that this has occurred, though obviously it has. I have a lot of questions, but of course they don't fit your...l'm sure you can cut me off at any point. So, maybe I'll submit one question, in the hope that somehow it fits the narrow corridor that you allow. This is just one statement actually, you see, I wish I could talk more, but at any rate, if you admit this, maybe I'll go. on o something else. If the present residents of the Town object to densely filled apartment. buildings in their area, would anyone consider building a market -based home in the remaining 19 acres or are we going to be faced with an additional complex of additional densely occupied buildings. Okay, that's simple, I don't. know whether that fits into the category you'll allow. Chairperson Wilcox — Have you been to any of the previous other hearing Ms. Grippi — No., Family health prevented this. Chairperson Wilcox — I understand now. Let me just explain to you. I am trying to think how many evening we have been here doing the environmental review and the site plan review, I am going to guess at least four and possibly a fifth for sketch plan review. So, I am guessing that we are up in the 12, 15 hours of our sitting here discussing, listening to the applicants and listening to the public. Ms. Grippi — This is something that is going to be permanent? Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. So, we're been through, presumably we have been through much of these issues already, as part of the Environmental Review or as part of our granting the 29 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 preliminary site plan approval. So, the fact that you are coming in late, does not necessarily mean that we have not addressed these issues. Ms. Grippi — Yeah, I understand. The other thing that, I think, Ithaca is such an enlighten town, I don't understand why it cannot set it's own standards for affordable housing, not only to preserve the neighborhoods, but to forward the interests of affordable housing who cannot shop widely for housing. Another reason that obligates the Town to these in this regard is that affordable housing is underwritten with public funds, but primarily, I think we could do so much better, in terms of beauty and .aesthetics, variety and installing the residents with this development with a feeling of personal pride, not a regimented,. one building is just like another. I don't .know why we teach art in schools unless we really do believe in aesthetics and in the soul and the spirit. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Is there anybody else this evening who wishes to address the Board? Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing at 8:46 p.m. Board Member Conneman - I want to make a statement. I think we handled this, I raised the question about public safety on the walkways and so forth. We raised the issue of expanding bus service: The issue of setting aside a turning lane is there. The houses were moved so that the view would be appropriate:: I think the person that said that we had not responded to the public was unfair because we. have. If you want to have a situation where you have nothing there, that's not what they were asked to respond to. But I think we have encouraged and the developer has responded to the changes that this Board has suggested. I feel that we have responded to your concerns, asp citizens. The issue of whether there will be built market housing up there, the view is beautiful, .1-think there will be. market housing. Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody else? Board Member Mitrano - Is there anything that we need to worry about with respect to the pond and safety of the children. Chairperson Wilcox — David, can you talk about the drainage? Is that you or is that Peter? I'm not sure, that could fall either place. David is mostly underground utilities. There are questions. about the depths of the swales and the amount of water that would be in the detention ponds and those sorts of issues. Mr. Herrick — The extended wetland design does have a permanent water elevation component to it. It's not to say that it will hold water year round, depending on droughty conditions, but the predominant perimeter of an extended detention wetland is between six and 18 inches. There are a couple of deeper pools, up to 48 inches in depth and these are design standards that an extended detention wetland is expected to provide in order to enhance water quality, that's it's function. Now, above the permanent marsh condition, you'll have some fluxuating storm volume. Depending on the frequency of the storm, whether it is a one year, ten year or hundred year even, you will get some fluxustion in the water surface elevation and it could go up between a foot to two feet, depending on whether you are looking at a ten years storm or hundred year 9 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 storm even. That water then subsides back down to the normal pool elevation within a 24 hour period. Mr. Trowbridge — The majority.of water is at six to 18 inches. Board Member Mitrano — If it were reasonable for a family to make a claim against the owner of the property for an awful event, such as a child drowning in there, my only question is this, would there even be any possibility that the Town could be brought into such. litigation based on our approval of that process? Mr. Barney — If you phrase the question that way, I'd have to say yes. There's never, never a possibility. You view these things in likelihood's and probabilities and the probability is no, it would be difficult to sue the Town because you approved a project. Board Member Mitrano - Have you ever heard of anything like that? Mr. Barney — Have I heard of people bringing suite for, basically, frivolous reasons,.. sure, but are those suits successful, no. Chairperson Wilcox— The suit might not be frivolous, but they sue everybody possible. Mr. Barney — Inevitably, the Town has a relatively :deep pocket, people try to figure out any way to rob it, but most of the time it doesn't succeed. Mr. Trowbridge — Just for clarification, I'm sorry John, there is a pre- existing pond on the site and I think there was a reference to wetland vegetation, the only place that wetland vegetation exisits on the property is in the perimeter of that pond, which is on the .north side of the easements up to the water tower, which we're not touching. Board Member Mitrano - The only difference would be that right now no one is living there. Mr. Trowbridge — Sure. Board Member Mitrano — And your attorneys have reviewed it for these kinds of questions, I assume. Mr. Trowbridge — That. is a good question Tracy. Mr. Kanter — I was just going to say, Tracy, this seems to be somewhat. similar to the wetland drainage system over at Summerhill Apartments that is' now pretty well occupied around the wetland. Isn't that pretty true? It may not have as much water regularly, but it is meant to store water and it is very close to the apartments there. Chairperson Wilcox — That's the apartments behind East Hill Plaza. East. of East Hill Plaza, Board Member Mitrano — Jonathan, I have a question, are there wetlands in lowercase and then wetlands I uppercase? In the sense of if a land is wet, it is a. wetland, but is there something known in law as "wetlands" that is defined by certain criteria? 31 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Kanter — Well, the capital "w ", is designated wetlands, which are the State Department of Environmental Conservation Wetlands, which are 12.4 acres.or larger.in size. Then there are, as we've been instructed by the audience, the Corp of Engineers regulated wetlands, that are determined on site, during developments, but of course, we are talking about a newly created wetland storm drainage facility, as opposed to the existing wetland. There is an existing wetland on the northern end of the property. Mr. Trowbridge — That's right, associated with the pond. There needs to be three conditions, Tracy, there needs to be hydric soil (saturated soils), There 'has to be. standing water for a certain period of time during the year and there has to be indicator species (plants that only grow in wet conditions). So, those need to be present, and I am simplifying, they need to be present for Army Corp Designated Wetlands. Board Member Mitrano - Do the lands that are there now fall into that? Mr. Trowbridge — The only one is the perimeter or the pre- existing pond. Again, it is on the north side of the easement up to the water tower. Board Member Mitrano — Okay, that's. Board Member Hoffmann — If there are these indicator species plants there, it's a wetland because it is wet certain parts of the year. Board Member Mitrano —,I see. Is it predicted that this development will create these wetlands? Mr. Trowbridge — Yes and-they'll officially be wetlands, at some point and be protected: Board Member Hoffmann — As far as the safety of children around wet areas, do you remember last time we heard some residents of East Hill off of Honness Lane coming in and talking about how they had water problems in their back yards, with a photo being shown.of a puddle in the lawn? A child could drown in that too. Maybe it is even a greater possibility in a case like that because it is wet only now and then so that the children don't have the opportunity to learn to stay away. Board Member Mitrano — I was thinking that too, Eva, and I think Peter actually got my. point, if there is something to worry about, maybe having your lawyers look at it and see what they want to do. Chairperson Wilcox — Mr. Pappamichael is sitting back there, this is his responsibility, if you will. Board Member Hoffmann — One of the things that I had also though about when I looked at the little detailed drawing of. the playing field and the hedge was whether, in fact, the hedge would be enough to prevent balls from going through and it depends, of course, on the plants. Maybe the plants that you are proposing are going to be very dense, even at the ground level or are you proposing to build up a little birm there? 32 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Trowbridge — We looked at, after the last Board meeting, we did go back and look at both the birm and planting. We thought the planting would be more effective both to stop children moving in that direction and they are very thickety plants and we put them very closely spaced. We also thought the birm exacerbated some other drainage issues that we looked at. We thought the hedge was the most effective thing we could do at that point. Board Member Hoffmann — And you think it will stop balls? Mr. Trowbridge — Yes. Board Member Hoffmann — Even small ones? Mr. Trowbridge — Well, there are all sorts of things that we can't predict, but in our best professional judgment, it has been our experience that this will be effective most of the time. Chairperson Wilcox — Let me just point out that there are 26 plants proposed there for the site detail sheet.' Board Member Hoffmann — You cannot, I think, create situations which are perfectly safe. In the end, parents and other adults are responsible.for looking after children and others who are not aware of dangers that are around everywhere. That's not the kind of thing that we can do everything to prevent, we can, do a little bit, but cannot. be prevented 100 percent. Chairperson Wilcox — I have one question that has to do with back to the New York State DOT. They will make the final determination as to whether the left hand turning lanes are necessary, at this time? Mr. Trowbridge — They've made a determination that the left hand turning lanes are not necessary at this time. Chairperson Wilcox — Nonetheless, the resolution requires that the land be set aside should those left hand turning lanes be required. Mr. Trowbridge — That's right. Again, just a clarification of why we moved the water quality basin back from Trumansburg Road to accommodate that. Chairperson Wilcox — Kevin? Board Member Talty — I would just like to reiterate that I would like to see it written into the current proposal for final site plan approval that this Board Member would wish gutters, drainage spouts, etcetera and a pretty well detailed plan so that water has a place where we want it to go and not where we don't want it to go. So, I think that is pretty important because I've seen apartments and condominiums and things of that sort that don't have gutters and that don't really channel runoff appropriately and I think that this could actually make a bad situation up in that neck of the woods. I don't know if anybody else would have a problem. Chairperson Wilcox — I don't have a problem. 33 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chris Pappamichael, Aris Investment — Actually, I think it's the opposite, a lot of the newer multi- family communities are going away from using gutters and part of the problem is the maintenance, particularly' if you have some .sort of French drain, the biggest problems that we have with these sort of things, just as Grace had mentioned, are these systems getting clogged and becoming more of a maintenance issue, than it is a convenience to have the water drain into these gutters. I don't' think that is something that should be considered. Chairperson Wilcox — I don't think we are talking about underground. I live in an apartment complex that has 18 units in each building and it has gutters and it is a nice amenity, it really is. Board Member Thayer — You're talking about eaves troughs, right? Chairperson Wilcox — Eaves troughs, that's right and then obviously the down spouts to carry the water down. I think that is a nice amenity. Board Member Mitrano — They do or don't have those? Chairperson Wilcox = They are not shown on the plans, but contrary to what Mr. Pappamichael says, I think it is a good idea.. Mr. Pappamichael — Are these going to be free - flowing gutters? Chairperson Wilcox — I think free - flowing is sufficient here. Board Member Hoffmann — But they still have to be lead above ground so that the water ends up in a proper place, it doesn't wash out the nice planting that you do and things like that. Chairperson Wilcox — It is one thing to have a gutter that may get clogged with leaves, or an underground transportation system that gets clogged where you have to dig it up, I draw the distinction between the two. Board Member Talty — As long as the grading is appropriate for when that water exits. Chairperson Wilcox — And away from the building, obviously. Mr. Herrick — I just would like to make a point on that, the tendency now is to get away from what they call connected drainage systems and, principally from building roof tops and that is to introduce the runoff in the old traditional way of adding a spill and a splash block and then run across the lawn and then ultimately run into a swale or some other catch mitt. There are some pollutants in roof top runoff, even though you might suspect it to be clear and adding a filter through a lawn is responsible. We certainly will, in this project,., provide those splash blocks and those pathways to get to the larger grass line channels and that is one of the objectives of our storm water plan, to provide that disk connect between the downspouts and the ultimate receiving storm sewer. Chairperson Wilcox — Alright, thank you. Anything else? 34 Board Member Thayer — I assume that if TCAT right, school buses? Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 is going to turn around there, the buses will also, Chairperson Wilcox — Any word from the school district? Mr. Trowbridge — We haven't spoke to the school district, but I know at Linderman the school buses follow the same path as TCAT. Again, we have not contacted the school district about their bus routing, but the radii and all the designs certainly would accommodate for school buses. Chairperson Wilcox — And the bus obviously would not have to back up. Mr. Trowbridge — And there would be an all- weather shelter at that location. Chairperson Wilcox - Anything else. I will, just for the record, remind Board Members that no matter how you voted with regard to preliminary approval, that does not affect, in any way how you vote here. You may have voted for preliminary, but decide to vote against.what is before us tonight because you feel, for whatever reason, they haven't met the conditions. These are independent votes. Having said that, Dan are you all set? Jon Kanter, you all set? Mr. Kanter - I think we are all set unless there are some more questions. Chairperson Wilcox - Would someone like to move the motion before us? So moved by the Chair. Do l have a second? Board Member Mitrano — I'll second it. Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by Tracy Mitrano. We would like to add the additional clause or, paragraph under the final site plan approval. I guess that would be "n" with regard to modifying the appropriate drawings to show eaves or down spouts on the buildings. That would be condition "n ". Mr. Barney - You want to add gutters? Chairperson Wilcox - That the appropriate drawings be revised to add gutters and downs spouts or eave spouts and downspouts, whatever the appropriate term is. Board Member Hoffmann — I have one comment and that is that I am sorry to see the roaa name changed to that rather long Harris B. Dates Drive West. Mr. Kanter — That was something that the Town Board discussed then. Board Member Hoffmann - I understand that. I still think it's not a good idea. Board Member Thayer — I agree. Board Member Mitrano — Yeah, what's up with that? 35 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Thayer — Can we talk about why they made a recommendation? Mr. Kanter— Sure if you would like to. Chairperson Wilcox — I would like to get to Mr. Rancich who has been sitting here. Board Member Talty — It will only take two seconds. Chairperson Wilcox — Alright, it will only take two seconds. Why did the Town Board decide the name change was important, do.you know? Mr. Walker — Well, if this is an extension of the existing Dates Drive, then with the 911 program and identifying streets, we have a number of different intersections where we have one street going one way in the opposite direction with another name and it gets very confusing for safety issues. So, we have an intersection now, it makes sense to expand that on. Chairperson Wilcox — That is the same reason that they renamed part of Judd Falls Road, Pine Tree Road: Mr. Walker — And we just renamed or are . in the process of renaming, up in the Eastwood Commons area we renamed there were three roads, Strawberry Lane and Strawberry Circle and something else. Now it is all Strawberry Circle that goes around for the continuation of the road. Chairperson Wilcox — Is Lois Lane still there? Mr. Walker — That's not Eastwood Commons, but Lois Lane is still there though. Chairperson Wilcox — Good. Board Member Hoffmann - I found most of us do what you just did when you first started talking, you said Dates Drive, it's really Harris B. Dates Drive. Maybe the right thing to do would. be to rename the old one and then add the same name for the new one calling it Dates Drive, instead of Harris B. Dates Drive because it could be confusing to the emergency personnel to have someone say Dates Drive when it's really Harris B. Dates Drive. Mr. Walker — It is Dates Drive, although the formal name is Harris B. Dates Drive. Board Member Hoffmann — But you could say that about all kinds of other roads too. Chairperson Wilcox - I have a motion and a second. Take it up. with your elected officials. Mr. Kanter— That's true, the Town Board can rename those any time they want. Chairperson Wilcox — Any further discussion? All those in favor, please raise your hand. I have one, two, three, four. All those opposed? Kevin Talty. Do I have an abstentions? I have. one abstention from Larry Thayer. The motion is passed, four in favor, one against, one abstention. Thank you all very much. 36 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 PB RESOLUTION NO.2004- 032:Overlook at West Hill, Final Site Plan and Subdivision Approval, Tax Parcel No. 244-14.2, 1290 Trumansburg Road MOTION made by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Tracy Mitrano WHEREAS. 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is considering Final Subdivision Approval and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed residential development, Overlook at West Hill, located at 1290 Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96), Town of. Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24- 4-14.2, Residential District R -15 (now known as Medium Density Residential) and MR Multiple Residence District. The proposal consists of two phases of residential development, consisting of 128 affordable rental apartment units in 16 buildings and a community center in Phase I on a 24.5 +/- acre portion of Tax Parcel No. 244-14.2, and 15 future lots for single - family, market rate homes in Phase ll on about 19 acres of the subject property. The current owners would retain about 5 acres containing the existing medical practice fronting on Trumansburg Road. Song Ja Kyong, Owner, Aris Investments, Applicant; Grace Chiang, HOLT Architects and Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agents, and 2. The proposed actions, which include subdivision approval and site plan approval by the Planning Board and rezoning by the Town Board, are Type 1 actions pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Town of. Ithaca Local Law No. 5 of the Year 1988 Providing for Environmental Review of Actions in the Town of Ithaca, for which the Planning Board at its February 26, 2004 meeting, issued a negative determination of environmental significance with regard.-to the proposed rezoning, Site Plan Approval and Subdivision Approval, and 3. At its meeting on March 4, 2004, the Planning Board granted Preliminary Subdivision Approval and Preliminary Site Plan Approval and issued an affirmative recommendation to the Town Board regarding the proposed rezoning for the above - reference project, and 41 The Town of Ithaca Town Board approved the rezoning of the 24.5. +/- acres for affordable rental apartments from R45 Residence to MR Multiple Residence on March 15, 2004, and 5. The Planning Board, after holding 6 accepted as adequate application Review Submission" for "Overlook including Drawings C001 — C0121 HOLT Architects, P. C., Trowbridge some drawings with revision dates Final Site Plan Review Submission, public hearing on April 20, 2004, has reviewed and materials, including the applicant's "Final Site Plan at West Hill Apartments ", dated 30 March 2004, L001 7L006, and A001A — A008, all prepared by & Wolf, Landscape Architects, and T.G. Miller, P.C., of 3- 30 -04, all as listed on the Drawing List on the and other application materials, 37 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 24 -4 -14.2, totaling 48 +/- acres, into four parcels, „ including Parcel A to be retained by Song -Ja Kyong consisting of 5.0 +/- acres, Parcel B proposed for the Phase la development of 64 apartment units and a community center on 12.224 +/- acres, Parcel C proposed for the Phase lb development of 64 apartment units on 12.351 +/- acres, and Parcel D for a future Phase 2 subdivision and development of 15 single- family homes consisting of 18.764 +/- acres, as shown on the drawing entitled "Overlook at West Hill — Final Subdivision Plat" (Sheet C001), dated 30 March 2004, prepared by Allen T. Fulkerson, L. S., T. G. Miller P.C., conditioned upon the following to be completed prior to signing of the plat by the. Planning Board Chair, unless otherwise noted: a. Submission of easement language providing access and use for all residents of the apartments on Parcels B and C to the Play Area, . Community Center, bus stop facilities, and the open play /recreational area on Parcel B., as . well as cross easements between. Parcels B and C to ensure rights of both portions of the development to all drives, walkways, utility lines, and other common improvements, for-'review and approval of the Attorney. for the Town and Director of Planning; and b. Submission of easement language allowing emergency access for the Phase 1 a development over the access drive to the water tank until Phase 1b development and the full main loop road is completed, for review and approval of the Attorney for the Town and Director of Engineering; and C, Submission of easement language providing access to the Town of Ithaca to all storm water management facilities, and sewer and water mains, and indication on the Final Plat of the location and dimensions of all such easements to be conveyed to the Town, for review and approval of the Attorney for the .Town and . Director of Engineering; and d: Evidence of the necessary approval by the Tompkins County Health Department on the final plat; and e. Before construction of any improvements anywhere on the project site is commenced, requirements of the Final Site Plan Checklist shall be met, and Final Site Plan Approval granted by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board; and f. Completion of the Phase la road and required utilities to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent, and conveyance of same to the Town, if required by the Town Board, prior to the issuance of any building permits for construction on Parcel B and completion of the Phase lb road and required .utilities to the satisfaction of the Town Engineer and Town Highway Superintendent, and conveyance of same to the Town if required by the Town Punning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board, prior to -the issuance of any building permits for construction on Parcel C; and g. Revision of the Final Subdivision Plat (Drawing C001) and Layout Plan (Drawing L001) to name the future public road to be dedicated to the Town of Ithaca as "Harris B. Dates Drive West"; and h. Submission of a'-declaration of restrictive covenant for the reservation -of the right of -way strip on Parcels A, B and C adjacent to. the existing right -of -way of NYS Route 96 for highway purposes sufficient in width to accommodate a future exclusive left -tum lane on Route 96, for future dedication to the New York State Department of Transportation, for review and approval of the Attorney for the Town; and i. Submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an original or mylar copy of the final plat and four dark4ined prints, all signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor or engineer with the required surveyors certification, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: i. That the Planning Board hereby grants Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Overlook at West Hill. Site Development for Parcel B proposed for the Phase la development of 64 apartment units. and a community center on 12.224. +/- acres, Parcel C proposed for the Phase lb development of 64 apartment units on 12.351 +/- acres, and Parcel D as a fill site for the placement of excess soil from the Phase 1 earthwork operations, as shown on ,Final Site Plan Review Submission for "Overlook at West Hill .Apartments ; dated 30 March 2004, including Drawings C001 — C0123 L001 — L006, and AOO]A — A008, all prepared by HOLT Architects, P.C., Trowbridge & Wolf, Landscape. Architects, and T.G. Miller, P.C., some drawings with revision dates of 3- 30 -04, all as listed on the Drawing List on the Final Site Plan Review Submission, conditioned upon the following to be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, unless otherwise noted: a. Preparation and submission of final design and construction details of all proposed structures and improvements, including drainage and storm water management facilities, roads /driveways, parking areas, curbing, walkways, sewer and water facilities and other utilities, design of the play area, and sedimentation and erosion control measures, for review and approval by the Director of Engineering; and b. Provision of record of application for and approval status of all necessary permits from other county, state, and /or federal agencies and obtaining the necessary curb -cut and road work permits from the New York State Department of Transportation; and 39 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 c. No development shall take place on Parcel D except for one single or two- family home until a subdivision plat for future subdivision and development of that area has been reviewed and approved by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board; and d. Submission of a .drainage facility maintenance plan to Town Director of Engineering for review and approval; and e. Completion of the necessary intersection improvements to the satisfaction. of the New York State Department of Transportation, to include appropriate striping, signs, and traffic signal phasing for a pedestrian crosswalk on Route 96 at the point where the proposed concrete walk terminates at Route 96, prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy; and f. Construction of the temporary hammerhead turnaround at the end of the Phase la road to the satisfaction of the Town Highway Superintendent and Director of Engineering, prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for Phase la buildings; and g. Removal of the temporary hammerhead turnaround at the end of the Phase 1 a road upon completion of the Phase lb road, and upon its removal, reclamation of the Phase is turnaround area with appropriate. grading, stabilization and landscaping, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering and Director of Planning, prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for Phase lb buildings; and h. Construction of the temporary hammerhead turnaround at the end of the Phase lb road to the satisfaction of the Town Highway Superintendent and Director of Engineering, prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for Phase lb buildings; and i. Removal of the temporary hammerhead turnaround at the end of the Phase lb road upon completion of the Phase 2 road (through to Hayts Road), and upon its removal, reclamation of the Phase lb turnaround area with appropriate grading, stabilization and landscaping, to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering and Director of Planning, prior to issuance of any certificates of occupancy for Phase 2 buildings in the future subdivision; and j. Revision. of Layout Plan (Drawing L001) to clearly indicate the required buffer within the Multiple Residence (MR) District, with labeling indicating that "no structure shall be placed nearer than 30 feet from any other district within the required buffer" • and k. Revision of Layout Plan, Grading Plan, and Planting Plan (Drawings L001, L0020 and L003) .respectively) to label the "informal play field" near Trumansburg Road; and 1. Completion of the informal play field, playground and community center building to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering, Director of Planning, and Director of .l Building and . Zoning, prior to issuance of any apartment units in the Phase la development; and Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 49 2004 certificates of occupancy for M, Submission of one original or mylar copy of the final site plan drawings, revised as required above, signed and sealed by a licensed engineer; and n. . Drawings be modified to show eave trough, and down spout on all buildings. BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED. That the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca understands that it is the developer's intent to make access and use of the informal play field near Trumansburg Road and the system of walkways in the Phase la and lb areas available to the public; and BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED. That the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby reiterates its request that the Town Supervisor, Town Board and staff pursue with the TCAT (Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit) Board of Directors the possibility of providing bus service on -site directly at the proposed bus shelter and turnaround, rather than providing bus stops on Route 96 in order to promote safe. access to and encourage use of the public transportation system. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, NAYS: Tatty. ABSTAIN: Thayer. The motion was declared to be carried. Chairperson Wilcox - Mr. Rancich, we will get to you. We'll go to at least 10:00. We normally end at 10:00, if we need to go a couple minutes longer, generally we are okay with that, but we'll go to at least 10:00.. My understanding is that the agendas in the future are very, very full. already. We really do need to get at this, this evening: I'd like to take just a two minute break. AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of Sketch Plan Condominiums located on the .north side of Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. Agricultural District. The proposal includes review for the proposed Sky Gardens Mecklenburg Road across from Rachel! 27 -1 -14.2, Residence District R -15 and the construction of 'approximately. 200 market -rate condominium units in twelve buildings, a swimming pool, a tennis court, a clubhouse, jogging trails, new roads and parking lots, and stormwater facilities. The proposal also includes a request to rezone a portion of the 93 +/- acre property from Residence District R -15 and Agricultural District. to Multiple Residence or a Planned Development Zone. John Rancich, Owner /Appliicant; Katrina A. Thaler, Agent, Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 9:10 p.m. 41 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 John Rancich, 363 Hines Road - I've got.a pretty exciting project planned for the West Hill. We want to build 200 very upscale condominium units with water gardens and jogging paths, biking paths, perhaps a cafe, a clubhouse with an exercise room, swimming pool, everything. We want the residents of these condominiums to have a lot of the amenities as if you were staying at a five star hotel, in terms of maid service, a lot of different things that we want. to offer the residents of this community. Some of it will be open to the public. Obviously the individual homes will not. That's part of what I'm here for. I put together a pretty nice team of folks that are all going to have a chance to talk and it's you folks on the Planning Board that I need the most input from and I'm going to propose a number of different ideas, none of which are set in stone, all are here to give you a flavor of what I've got in mind. We're in no hurry, we want to do this project absolutely right and we're going to need your input to make that happen. So, I'm going to turn this over to Katrina Thaler, my attorney, and she'll address some of the pertinent matters of the Town Law. Katrina Thaler, 309 North Tioga Street.— Good evening. I'm very happy to be here with Mr. Rancich and other members of team to discuss with you and present to you the .Sky Gardens Condominium project. There are two themes that I would ask for you to keep in mind as we go through this tonight, one is balance and the other one is flexibility. Mr. Rancich has spoken a little bit about flexibility, we are here tonight with several alternative concepts for discussion tonight. It don't. have to be limited to just tonight, but more importantly, we're here because we would like to have some input from the Planning Board and we feel that is a very bit part of this process and we are willing to be flexible and work with the Town. Perhaps more importantly is the concept of balance. Balance is something that is discussed in great detail in the Town's Comprehensive Plan. We believe that the Sky Garden's project will provide balance to the West Hill. Obviously, this Board is very familiar with the Overlook Project, which provides for affordable housing. There is also, on West Hill, another affordable housing project, Linderman Creek, thank you. Our project will balance out those two projects and provide market rate alternative housing selections for the town people. In addition, Sky Gardens project satisfies a need for housing that is identified on two levels that target the largest growing sections of the population, that would be, and again, these sections of the population are identified in the Comprehensive Plan to be the range 25 to 44 year old, don't have a family, but they are looking . to get into a condominium, maybe they are two busy to do the yard work and necessary maintenance that is associate with owning a single family residence. It also targets retirees, perhaps retiring from Cornell or Ithaca College who, again, are downsizing from the big house to a maintenance -free alternative housing selection. That is also another benefit of the project. In addition, this project is set back, the design concepts are setback off of Route 79. They're off on a private little circle, again, our design alternatives are done in a way that is consistent with the topography and elevations of the land and will conform and provide unique architectural designs to conform with the existing landscape and architecture of the area and I'll sort of defer to the architect experts and the landscape architect experts to discuss that in a moment. Again, this project also intends to provide balance, again, by keeping the project clustered in the northeaster portion of the lot, reserving a good portion of the lot for open space. Again, it serves to provide that balance and it also consistent with, not only, the plan of land use in the Comprehensive Plan, but also constant with the new zoning map. If I could just show you, we provided actually, in our packet, towards the end, the last page is the zoning map. John will show you where it is on that map. It is consistent, it's this corner right here. It is, under the new zoning map, all ag, but it's very close to and a portion of it is MRD. What we are proposing, 42 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 either by converting, it to Multiple Residence or by doing a Planned Development Zone, is just adding sort of a diagonal here, which would be more consistent because this kind of green square is sort of out of place, would be more consistent with the zoning as it is. So, we are not asking for something that really already hasn't been planned. Again, this provides benefits to the people of the Town because it provides and secures for the retention of open space so that people can always enjoy the 'view shed and the . views of Cayuga Lake. It also will allow the public to utilize the jogging path and the bike path. It also provides for the addition of roadways, which, I point the Board Members to the map behind Mr. Kanter there, there are various roadways and bike paths that are incorporated on that map, as well. One of the things that our project would do is provide 'a secondary access for Linderman. Creek will be a public road. So, those are some of the public benefits that this project envisions. I will turn it now back over to our architectural experts who will talk a little bit more about-the concepts. But, again the project is all about balance and flexibility. Thank you. Ryan Sherry, 87 Griffin Road —What I'm going to do is I'm gonna start with some site plans and followed by me is going to be Ota Ulc, architects, as well as George Frantz is going to finish it up. What I'm going to do is I a going to go through several site plans that we have been working on and I would like to reiterate what Mr. Rancich has already said, which is that none of this is set in stone. We have a lot of good ideas right now and we are just going to show you some of them right here. The development as Katrina Thaler spoke about already is set back off the road, off the Mecklenburg Road, as seen on the map. There will. be access in from Mecklenburg Road creating the second means of egress for Linderman Creek, which would be in the east off the map. 200 units are shown with a club house situated in the commons area for the entire community to use. As you could see, the bike paths, for recreation, it would be a very organic type of approach to the topography out there now. Most of these plans that you will see will be stepping down in grade to both take advantage of the views, the dynamic views of Cornell as well as give and experience of the existing land and the hillside, which exists out there. It's a very rolling, agricultural .type hill that, basically falls off and actually creates. some very dynamic views. So, we are trying to play up to that as well. Some of the other things that we have though about as you'll see in, some of these plans and mind you, these aren't all of the same scale so it . might be a little confusing, some get a little bigger or a little smaller because we have printed them at different scales. We wanted circulation, no dead end circulation in here, it's a very fire truck circulation friendly development in all of these. We are proposing water gardens, as you see some of these plans will see plans will have more water then others. Just to show you that we're basically at the stage where we are looking at new ideas. The topography, you could see in this lower roadway. Units would be flanking each side of this roadway, creating park spaces for the inhabitants of the dwellings. Everybody is getting the personal space, as well as a community building, which would, possibly, be open to the public. Other things that could be open to the public would be jogging trails. We are proposing to bring the new bike path, which would be proposed along the lake and extending up towards EcoVillage. Again, water gardens, a little less water here. The main retention areas would be at the lower ends of the property. There is an existing pond right now, where we would look into possibly doing some water quality through that pond and I think that's about it as far as the site plan. As you can see, and George will walk you through his, but I think we have a good 43 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 start here. We have some good ideas. I think it is a free- flowing plan. It's exciting. I'm going to hand it over to Ota Ulc, who is going to have a presentation, as well. Ota Ulc, 222 South Albany Street — So let me get my boards that been getting hidden back here a little bit from all this excitement .because it very much is a collaboration. As you can see, there is a variety of people here tonight. Let me start off this way by talking about the project. The idea is that that sight and I don't know if any of you have had the opportunity to take a look at it, but many of you may be familiar with coming down Route 79. It is a beautiful site, it has a beautiful view. It is just an incredible, a wondrous place and being that many of us, not all of us, are locals that we wanted to be very caring. to this site and whatever that we do there to make it a beautiful place that is something special. What we've been thinking about it trying to keep within as many of the natural elements as possible. These were just things that we had been talking about, whether it was natural materials and this is actually a board that we had shown to the Town Board a few weeks ago and then, of course, this is a development process, everything is changing. Let me please reiterate what you've already heard before that whatever that I show you .today and whatever you see today is not anything set in stone. We realize that this is collaborative effort and we are very excited about the fact of being able to make it so. I wanted to show you then. This is just a little swath through the site plan, which is of the lower section and the idea would be to create units that had a great sense of individuality to them. The idea that we didn't want to create just a giant block of housing, which is unattractive or have housing that just becomes so incredibly repetitive that when you arrive then to your.....) always think of it this way; if you are corning to:visit somebody and simply to say to them 9you need to take three lefts, the fourth one, they all look the same. Obviously, there is something wrong. There should be this sense of if you arrive to a-place, that this is the idea that each one is'individual in it's own way and, in our case, what we are trying to do was to have a sense of different units and different materiality and I think the idea of having different, whether it be stucco, stone, brick, nice materials that can be used so there is a nice sense. Not vinyl, not clapboard, things like that. The idea that each unit could be identifiable, that, if you think of it almost in a matrix, if that you have, say, ten different styles of units, you have ten different types of materials, the matrix leads you to about a hundred different ones, therefore there might be two identical ones in the whole scheme of things. Then the idea, again this is just a very first blush attempt. This is a process that has been developing, trying to create very much park -like environments in it. Again, . sense of materiality, sense of a very nice place that, hopefully, no I am going to take that word back, since I am being recorded I must take that back, it's not going to be hopefully that it will be a nice, place but definitely that it will be a beautiful place. Again, right here is a sense of materiality.. This -is just for the benefits of looking at just — different ideas of different materiality and different schemes. We were going to be talking about how we were. going to change different pieces and parts and then the idea of changing upscale so it's not completely, not scales, excuse my terminology, the idea of heights of the buildings to break it up .even more because we have been trying to hope, the idea of shifting the building in and out to create scales. The idea of creating so that they look like individual units, rather than the fact that they are units that are put together. Let me pass that at this point to George. I apologize, if l may be so bold to, if you would like, due to my technical faux paus, that this cord is of such an abysmal length, if you would like to come over here, I would be delighted to show you an animation, but it depends on whether you want to get up and take a peek. Can you see from back there? Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. MA Mr. Ulc — You have good eyes. Chairperson Wilcox — I have good glasses. Imagery presentation set to music (Somewhere Over the Rainbow) Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Ulc — I hope that helps to. give a sense and an idea. Again, please do not feel that just because we have a picture of 'this that it is going to look like this because one thing that we are sure of is that it's not. We realize that this will be a collaboration. And now George. Board Member Hoffmann — George, I think we will need some light on your drawing. Chairperson Wilcox — It takes a while for these lights to come back on. There is a advantage over there because the other members of the public can see as well. George can start talking and then he can start pointing. George Frantz, 604 Cliff Street — I was brought onto the team a few weeks ago and actually was quite excited because for the last two years, l have been lecturing up at Cornell on topics such as English'Garden Cities, Green Belts and here I have a client now, who is thinking along those some lines. I think we are looking to England for our.inspiration here. The English Green Garden Cities, Welwind, Lexworth. I happened to choose Regent Park, which is a classic example of high - quality town home development in London from the 1700's in fact. My scheme is different from the others, I am proposing total, in this scheme of 216 units in four buildings, what I have tried to do if take advantage of the vies more, especially to the southeast, up Six Mile Creek Valley and also utilize the English garden tradition and so what we have is this cluster here, overlooking roughly 5.3 acre area that would be lawns and gardens. It's about 400 feet, in fact from these units to these units. The reason really for the distance is so that residents in these units can actually look out over these units towards east- hill and Six Mile Creek. Then down . here, again, same thing, another smaller, about three, three and a half acres or so, which would be a garden and lawn area for use by the resident. I have the main through street corning through as before from Mecklenburg Road, down to Linderman Creek, The Community Center is here in the southern part of the parcel between the existing pond and a new pond that would be combination recreation and storm water management. The homes, themselves would be served by smaller, slow speed streets, 20 feet wide, waving, undulating as the buildings do in order to, again, slow traffic down. These units, the lower units are proposed to actually have, . each unit would actually have a one -car garage and plus a driveway long enough so that they could park a second car in the driveway. The same thing with these units here, the bottom level would actually be garage, walk up to the apartment or condominium. There is approximately, actually 408 parking spaces. Altogether, this and the bicycle /pedestrian, there is actually a jogging trail that works out to be 5/6 of a mile in length and, of course, that would connect to the future Town system. Let's see, what else can I say? That sort of sums it up. Oh, one more thing that I think is important. You notice how I'm proposing that most of the structures actually step back a full building width and that's both to enhance the views from the individual units, but also to, again, break up this scale so that residents of any units in this area would actually look either direction and really, if you were here they would see the end of this building, look this direction, they would see nothing. So, it's a way of, again, being able to put a lot of fairly large number of dwelling units on a site, but in a manner 45 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 which, visually results in actually a very small -scale type of development from the perspective of the residents, and again, this is, we're evolving here with this project. This is one of the concepts and we are still considering the other two concepts. Thank you. Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you George. Mr. Rancich — The summation of this is we've got an enormous amount of ideas, most of them, we believe, are fabulous. Some of .them maybe not. We want the assistance of this Planning Board in sorting those out and I want this to be a community effort. So, what'I'd like to. get from this meeting tonight is a list of things that you might like us to do in terms of, I'm assuming you'll want a traffic study. I'm hoping you won't want a full environmental statement and that my long form will be acceptable, but I am willing to go along and do whatever it is that you folks think is reasonable and explore getting this project started. Chairperson Wilcox — What is it about large developments on West Hill in the Town of Ithaca all of a sudden? Board Member Thayer — It is a beautiful piece of land. Chairperson Wilcox — It is a nice piece of land sitting up there. Board Member Thayer — And it's not being used for agriculture currently. Chairperson Wilcox — You're used to being in court aren't you? Sit, enjoy yourself. When was the last time it was used ?. Do you. know? Actively farmed other than the deer going through. Mr. Rancich — Nelson Eddy was the previous owner. Right now it is a gravel mine. Mr. Walker — They had crops on it last year, parts of it, corn. Board Member Thayer — I tried to drive back in there, but it was so muddy, I couldn't get in there. This is the part that is the gravel pit now? Mr. Rancich — The gravel pit sits right in here. This is the power lines that run across there. The driveway to EcoVillage is right across there. The driveway to EcoVillage is directly across here. So, this is quite a lot further west than my development. is. I am planning to keep it crowed down here and the gravel mine sits about here. Board Member Connemara— Then the other part of it, your plan is to leave that as agriculture? Mr. Rancich — Well, that is part of what I am here to find out. I have had a mention to the Town Board about, perhaps, putting a golf course and they didn't like that idea. Chairperson Wilcox — They didn't like that idea at all. Board Member Conneman — I read that. EN Planning Board Minutes April 20, .2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Rancich — I don't know whether that's a good decision or a bad one, but that it's okay with me. Part of what I am doing here is to get everybody to say, here's what I would like to do. What is it that you folks would want from me? Mr. Frantz — There is a number of options for this area. One of which, perhaps lease it out, rent it out for active agriculture. Another thing would be to maintain it as a meadow, which actually is advantageous because, especially for these units, there is a very nice view westward and up the hill. But the plan is some sort of open space. .Board Member Conneman — That's where the golf course would have gone? Mr. Rancich — I had a number of different proposals and one of them included a golf course. Board Member Conneman — That was the location? Mr. Rancich — It would have come down in to here because I am trying to keep this project from coming back in here. This is over a thousand feet coming back in here before I start building. So when you come down 79 and you're already looking at the City of Ithaca laid out beneath you,. the City Lights place is here and Hubbs is here, you have to actually turn your head and look over to the left to see the site, it's not just going to be in your face. It will be off the road. There was one plan of an orchard there, an apple orchard. I suppose it could be a corn field, it could be left a meadow, we could put a Walmart.there, oh we already have one. Chairperson Wilcox — All comedians here aren't we? Board Member Thayer — When you say "market rate condominiums" I am sort of confused by that term. Mr. Rancich — I'm expecting that these condos will start somewhere in the neighborhood of $150,000. Maybe a $125,000, maybe $175,000. What I'd like. to see happen is that I have this big proposal, before I get started, I'm able to show some models of units that my $150,000 price has carried upwards and that there is enough demand and people like the whole project enough and whatever the market will bear is what I would look for. These people that would buy, would also, obviously, be able to sell. It would become their homes. Board Member Thayer — I do like the idea of balance on the West Hill. That's why I was asking the price. Mr. Rancich — I want it to be upwards. The Town, one of the members of the Town Board said to me at my first meeting, well this doesn't seem like affordable housing to me. I didn't really,quite know how to accurately answer his question, so I said it is affordable housing, just not affordable by everyone. Board Member Talty — Good answer. Mr. Rancich — So, I think folks that have worked their whole lives or are still working and want a nice place to live with a minimum amount of home maintenance, ought to have the opportunity in our community and, more specifically, on West Hill, which I drive past two or three times a 47 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 day on my way to. town. I am looking for a very upscale'... My whole community center with the health club and the tanning booths and maybe if the ladies want to get their fingernails done, that's available. A maid service for an extra cost to the residents. If the public wants to be involved in some of this, if they want to use my tennis courts, my swimming pools, I say mine, the condo association's property, it will become, then I'm sure there could be a fee set up so that, like a membership thing. My idea fora cafe, is that, again, that could be open to the public. You know, a guy gets up at 6:30 in the morning, a retired guy gets up at 6:30 in the morning and wants to go down and have some coffee with his buddies or his girlfriends. and sit in the cafe that he can walk to, right on West Hill and hang out with his buds and look at.the swimming pool and look at the view. I've got plans for a lot of water gardens, fountains. I want to have a rotating kind of artwork thing. Ithaca has a lot of this stuff on the Commons, I would like to see a lot of that move around though this complex and change. I've got some good ideas, I've got some . expensive ideas. They're not quite all congealed yet. Board Member Thayer - This statement about EcoVillage and where are we going to stop is an interesting question. Chairperson. Wilcox - It's funny, I was thinking about the same thing. Where does, where do we stop, just based on water and sewer? As I look to Dan. Mr. Walker — The medium density residential line on the Comprehensive. Plan is basically the limit of the water and sewer. Mr. Rancich —This is my property. This whole irregular square. What I'm proposing for my development is down in this area and what Katrina made reference to, if you drew a diagonal line from the corner of this MDR up to the corner of this MDR, you would have something like this that goes along with the Town's plan, instead of this little chunk of ag down in the Multiple Residence or Medium Density. So, I think it fits. Chairperson Wilcox — We're certainly at or near the edge.. Mr. Walker — We're right on the edge of the surface area. In fact, the upper buildings. would be.. right outside the normal pressure zone, those up there. The lower two rows probably would be within the service area of the water pressure right now. It is all within the service area within the sewer because it all flows down hill, hopefully. With this kind of a condominium structure project, a privately owner public water service system can work like it does at EcoVillage where there would have to be some additional pumping and stuff to serve the upper buildings up there. With the large entity owning it and maintaining it, it could work. Chairperson Wilcox — It also can not work too, right. Haven't we had experienced some problems with private water and /or sewer systems in the Town or pumps or something. I'm thinking of the Commonland area. Mr. Walker — Commonland, .yeah, those are privately -owned sewers right now. I am not recommending privately -owned sewers. Water is a little bit easier to take care of. The sewer pumps tend to really..., especially if you low grade them, which happened at Commonland. They didn't build them to our standards, they put in five or six pump stations instead of one large one that the Town could have taken over. They decided it was too expensive and now they are Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 paying the price, the Commonland Community people are. I think that, EcoVillage has got their own water system, they are finding out that it is a little bit more expensive to maintain that they had hoped, I.think, but that was their choice to put the buildings up at that elevation. With some of the .improvements they have made, it is going to improve a little bit, but they still have limitations on fire flow and so on. So, with this type of facility, they may just have to put fire pump in to keep the fire department happy. Mr. Rancich — Part of what we are here pfor is line that the Town Engineer can draw across below here, you won't need any additional pu if you do need them, that will be your cost. exactly.what I am talking about, getting with how this all works, to answer exactly that question and so; if there's a my property and say you keep your building down mping, you put them up here, you may need them, That will be something I can address this part of this Board and the Town staff to decide, together, Chairperson Wilcox - George, were you going to say something? Mr. Frantz — I was just going to ask how, what is the upper limit? Mr. Walker — It goes above through pumps there. It follows the contour and I don't remember the number right.now. Mr. Frantz — That highest showerhead in the development would be about 1050. Mr. Walker — Yes, I think we are talking about 1025 is the limit.. Chairperson Wilcox — To go back to what Larry said, I think this is really at the edge of development on West Hill, in terms of at least public water. Easy access to public water. Board Mem.ber Thayer — Big development. Board Member Conneman I was just going to say, everything west of here, you said will not result in other developments, is that right? Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not going to say that. It would difficult to make the development as dense. We do have a proposal or a sketch plan for the next property up, which is the Drake. property right there. Mr. Kanter — That will be coming in for a sketch plan probably in .May. Board Member Conneman — That's why I asked because it seems to me already the western edge, there is a proposal for the western edge to go beyond Sky Gardens, Board Member Thayer — And Dick Perry has a lot of nice land there too. Chairperson Wilcox - .Conifer's got land behind their current development that we'll see plans for. Mr. Walker — The Perry property is all still in a Medium Density Residential. RZ Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Kanter — Yes. Mr. Walker — There is an approval already of another road just below Perry Lane, they'll have 15 or 20 houses in there or something like that. Board Member Hoffmann — But that's been in the works for a long time. Mr. Walker — Oh yeah, that was approved back in the 90's. Board Member Hoffmann — And the Linderman Creek expansion is something we have heard of and thought of a long time ago. What concerns me when we are beginning to look at agricultural lands, which are further west and large parcels of it, is that it;is beginning to eat away at that agricultural land that we have been trying to preserve and that concerns me a little bit. I can see that one could make some arguments for using part of this parcel. Beyond that, I would be very hesitant to begin to change things from the Comprehensive Plan concept that we have talked about for such a long time. I would like to make some specific comments about what I though about what you presented. The basic concept is nice, I like it. I didn't like what I saw in the visual presentation, the video presentation because I felt that, it would be alright to have maybe some small differences in looks in between the houses, but it just looked too different. There were facades that were like squares with flat roofs — Mr. Rancich — As Ota had said to you and to the whole Board, please don't take, we've got a lot of different ' ideas and we needed to come here and present something so that we can get started here and have you say exactly what you just said, it looks too commercial. I agree, when this all came down, when the visuals came down, I .said to Ota we are getting closer, but this is not right. I said, but let's present this so that we have something. So that is why we are here. Board Member Hoffmann — Right and that is why I am making the comments. I was glad to hear you, George, say that there would be some units that would have a garage in the unit and some parking closer by because, again, in that moving visual, it looked like the cars were quite far removed from the units. You mentioned that you would imagine retired people living here.. They would have to be pretty fit I think to live in, what I assume will be three -story walk ups. Mr. Rancich — Well, we haven't even discussed with this Board. or the Town Board or amongst ourselves actual floor plans. This is designed to have some two -story condos with bedrooms and bathroom upstairs; kitchen, living room and half bath downstairs and other units that are all on one floor. Board Member Hoffmann — Okay, ,that wasn't obvious, but I 'am glad to hear that. Mr. Rancich — Well, we haven't talked about that. I am planning for 53 bedrooms and 152 bedrooms. George's plan is for 216 units. There is going to be some that are all on one level because the older . folks don't want to deal with the stairs. There are going to be some that are all stacked up. Again, that is in all of our futures here. Board Member Conneman — When you say stacked up, you mean three? 50 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Rancich — I imagine it would be a three story building with a, perhaps a three bedroom unit on the main floor, on the ground floor. That ground floor, maybe as it slopes up the hill, that might disappear in to the earth a little bit. Then on top of the three bedroom, may be to two bedrooms, so that you have a three story building with a pair of two bedroom townhouse style units on top of a three bedroom flat type of unit. Mr. Ulc — We'd be looking at a variety of configurations. There would be a real rarity whether there would be even a three. Level one, unless there was a garage underneath as we had been discussing because of the fact, I don't care if you are young or.old running up and down stairs, if you want be fit, you have the outdoors and Ithaca is beautiful for the outdoors. Chairperson Wilcox — Can we go another ten or 15 minutes? Board Member Mitrano*— I'm not sure about ten or 15 for me. Board Member Conneman — At first 200 units seems like an awful lot for a city the size of Ithaca. Do you have some market study that tells us something about that John? Mr. Rancich — Yes, first off I have been in the real estate business for 30 years right here in Ithaca. I was buying refrigerators from Larry when I was a kid. I've got a good feel for the real estate market. I am not positive that 200 units, how that will affect my market rate. Whether 200 units will push that rate down or up. What lam looking-for in terms of a number of units, is I want each individual family to be able to afford the cost of all those amenities. In a condo association, all the.swimming pools, all that stuff I've talked about will be added to their common area fee and if you have that much stuff that you want to provide and you want to do it with ten units, they. can't afford it. Now, is it 200 units, is it 150 or 250? 1 picked 200 units based on some conversations I had with Mr. Kanter that under the pre- existing zoning regulations;. I could have as many as, and this would be a max, 300 units on that 93 acres. I've scaled it down to 200 and clumped it in the northeastern corner, which is the lowest part of the farm. So, I think that I am lightening the load that used to be there or could have been there in the past, I should say. Board Member Mitrano — I don't know about real estate, I don't work in that area at all, but just some reflexive thoughts that I have had, I am going to echo Eva's about garages because it would seem to me that people who would be buying in the price range don't want to just be walking out in the front and dusting off their car every morning to go to work. It is just a thought.. As I said, I don't know anything about real estate. Mr. Rancich — I agree with you. Board Member Mitrano — And then maybe to reinforce what George was saying too, that I am not sure, say if I were thinking about getting a place like this, it might make a difference to me to be investing that kind of money, whether there were 200.units, I might feel that no matter how attractive the outside was and what you have done inside, that's it would still feel like a big apartment complex to me. So, again, I am thinking maybe bigger apartments or whatever with garages. Mr. Rancich — You certainly could be right. 51 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Board Member Mitrano — It could boost the money up a little. Mr. Rancich _ That's all part of what we are here for. Exactly what you just said is very valuable to us. We're not trying to come in here with a plan arid say here's what we got in mind and want to build this and we want to get started next week. We're not trying to do that. We want to sit here and go we got a lot of ideas and we want to run them past you. Mr. Ulc — The number of ideas that we have been throwing back and forth just amongst us, whether it was two units, three units, nine units, 25 units, what worked. It is exactly the idea. If anything, the feeling is what you've hit upon, it is to make it a pleasant place, the idea of making so much space between each of the zones and you've seen this reflect in the different site plans. The idea of trying to keep a park environment as much as possible. Chairperson Wilcox — I want to accomplish a couple of things, if I may. Kevin, were you going to say something first? Board Member Talty - Go ahead. Chairperson Wilcox — What was passed around was the Town Board's resolution. Could I go through a couple of those things? Prohibition of any golf course, that's been discusses. Concentration of dwelling units'away from the road, the plans we've seen have done that so far. Maintaining open spaces in the upper part of the site, that's been done so far. Whether any proposed rezoning should be to multiple residence or to a planned development area, what we used to call SLUD. SLUD provides far more control over everything that the owner /developer does. I'm not prepared in any way to talk about whether MR is sufficient. or whether a SLUD, excuse me it is not called a SLUD anymore. Whether-the planned development area, the PDA is necessary. I very well might be. Mr. Kanter — One thing the planned development zone could do would be to zone the whole property, the whole 90 some odd acres that and then you could address all the different things would be going on in the context of that zone. An MR zone would most likely be zoned just on the development area and then you really wouldn't be talking about what would happen on the remained of the property. Chairperson Wilcox — You would have more control over the PDA, over the open space, for example. Mr. Kanter — Right, and the planned development zone would also allow you to address some of the other uses, like the cafe or other "commercial" types of uses o public uses. It might not be necessarily part of the normal MR zone. We talked about that with the Town Board and they really wanted to get some feedback from this Board. Chairperson Wilcox — Sounds good Jon. Mr. Kanter — I mean not to answer it tonight, necessarily. 52 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox — I know; but I think at least some idea of where we are thinking. Reducing number of dwelling units from the number previously proposed; I'm not sure what the number was that was. previously proposed. Did you propose 300? Okay, so now you're talking two -ish. Mr. Kanter — I'm not sure that the resolution is exactly what they said. Not that what my memo said is any more accurate, but I think what the Town Board was really asking was for this Board to consider what the appropriate level number of units should be on the site and using, at least as a start, the assumptions that we had in our property analysis that you were all provided. It showed a range of different possibilities. Chairperson Wilcox — Then the answer to that is what. is the appropriate number? Then, now we are talking about land use and market studies and all that sort of.thing to make a determination. Desirability'of a small cafe as part of the project, whether the cafe should be solely for the residents? I don't have a problem with a small cafe. I mean, it's going to have a traffic impact, potentially if it's open the residents, some may drive, some may jump on their golf carts and get there, I am not sure. Residents may stop along Route 79, 1 don't know. In terms of amenities, unless there is a real issue with it's design or it's size, we're going to wind up with, use the Walmart example, we're going to wind up with a 5,000 square foot cafe, then I have an issue. If it's design and it's purpose is for the residents and, if somebody is driving along Route 79 and wants to stop and grab a cup of coffee, I don't have:a problem, that is fine too. I don't have a real issue. Board Member Hoffmann — I had envisioned the cafe 'as being part of the community center, but maybe that is not true. Mr. Rancich — That is part of our idea,. that in the: community center., with all the rest of. amenities, will be a place where after you get off the treadmill, you want to go have a sandwich with your girlfriend or drink .a cup of coffee, you sit down there and it is all in the same building or contiguous or something like that. Board Member Conneman — The term cafe, I think, may disturb some people, maybe coffee shop is better. . Mr. Rancich - Could be coffee shop, could be restaurant or bar, I don't know Board Member Conneman — I think the point that Tracy and I are making about this being sort of a small and intament development and cafe sounds... Mr. Rancich — I am trying to create a little community. Board Member Conneman — I understand that. Chairperson Wilcox — I would not be comfortable with alcohol there, for example. Mr. Rancich — What's that? Chairperson Wilcox — I would not be comfortable with alcohol being sold, for example. 53 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Mr. Rancich - Then that's fine. Chairperson Wilcox — I think that changes it's use. Mr. Rancich - I agree. I think the alcohol part came in when there was the golf course contemplated and then the bar with the golf course, that's where that whole idea came in. So, when the golf course got nixed, so did the bar. Chairperson Wilcox — I think the dynamics change when you serve alcohol and allow public use. That changes a lot. Mr. Rancich — Without a doubt. Chairperson Wilcox — Increase in people and car trips to and from the project site, clearly traffic studies will have to be done, we'll have to identify the intersection to be looked at, there's no doubt about that. Adequate pedestrian access, we have, as a Board, an opportunity to here to really work with Mr. Drake when he comes in and still work with Conifer, with their subdivision, to really try to get together and, Jon, I don't know how much time we have to run through your chart over there, but to really try to put something together here in terms of internalizing traffic between the properties and pedestrian bikeways and other things. You want to take a couple minutes right now? I don't' mean to put you on the spot, but if you are prepared. Mr. Kanter — Real quickly, this was really done for the Town Board and now the Planning Board to show development that is happening on West Hill and how it relates to some of the transportation issues out there. So, we started with Overlook up here, which we talked about earlier tonight. Sky Gardens is right between Linderman Creek right here on the east, which the third phase is being completed right now and the future Conifer Subdivision, which is going to come into this Board also pretty soon for sketch plan. It will be, right now they are thinking about a hundred lots of single family and 72 units of assisted living in an apartment building over on this Conifer area. Then the Drake property, over here, which they are proposing 29 single - family lots on two, three, and four -acre lots. Here you see the proposed future road connecting Mecklenburg and Bundy Road, which really came about between the two subdivisions; the Conifer property, the subdivision plat shows this part of the road and when the Sterling Cottage Development went up here, the Perry Farm Subdivision showed the remainder of the road, so this part is actually platted and that, in a sense is actually like an official map, this part up north is not shown on the plats, but there is actually a 50 foot right of way, actually property boundary that comes with Bundy Road, goes up through the Cornell property and could conceivably connect with the Overlook Road here. So those are some of the road issues that could be developing up in that area. In terms of trails, of course you have the Black Diamond Trail that is planned along the West Hill area, through the City, connecting Taughannock State Park up north with Robert Treman State Park to the south and there are several possible interconnecting trails with that. For instance, Overlook has proposed, through the hospital, a potential pedestrian bicycle connection here:. Down south of Mecklenburg Road, there is actually shown in our Park and Open Space Plan, future trail connections. This is the future park down at Glenside, that we have been talking about. Then there are various ways of connecting that whole system with the Black Diamond Trail down here. So, that is just a real quick and dirty overview of some of the things that we have been talking about. This map sort of, for the first time, put a lot of this stuff together just to get a better idea. 54 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you Jon. George? Mr. Frantz — This is sort of my fault. I came up with the concept. of putting the garages underneath and what happened was, it jumped the height of the structures to about 46 feet and also, we would at least like to attempt to contemplate some type of tower like fixture that you see on Victorian structures and also in the older Engiish -style townhouses. So, they will also exceed the 36 foot height limitation in the Town Zoning Ordinances., Chairperson Wilcox — And exceed it by quite a bit. Mr. Kanter.— That's also something the ,Planned Development Zone could address, as opposed to variances. Mr. Frantz — But again, because we are so spread out and so far away from other structures, they. are going to look like 36 foot. Chairperson Wilcox — I was in Arlington, Virginia offices and the people were talking about all the building that is going on in Northern Virginia and the Toll Brothers are building now million dollar condos down there, four stories tall and with private elevators. That's what's happening with the market down in Northern Virginia, believe it or not. I hear $150,000, $175,000 and $200,000 and I think, granted they are not affordable for everybody, but I wonder .how people can afford million dollar condos. Mr. Rancich --- I wanted to raise, or at least just give my opinion on the Multiple Residence or the Planned Unit Development or spot or whatever you call it. I realize that the Town Board and the Planning Board have much more. control over what I want- to do if they do the special unit development, but I also realize that along with more control can very easily be more leniencies, . in terms of design or spacing or any number of other things. So, I am not opposed to that. If you decide that multiple residence is the way for me to go, then I'll work within that. If you want to go with this special land use, then that is fine too. I think it works in favor of both of us. Chairperson Wilcox — We are quickly running out of time, actually we are over.our 10:00. We probably haven't given you everything you've wanted to hear from us tonight. Hopefully, we've got a good start. Mr. Rancich — What I'd like to do, even if it doesn't happen tonight, if . somebody in a conversation with Mr. Kanter or something say hey, we are going to need this, this and this and let hire get started on that. That is what I would like to see, so I can get going. If you are going to require a traffic study, I want to order one. Chairperson Wilcox — We are going to require that. Gotta have it. Board Member Conneman — You ought to have a market study of some type, particularly after looking at.... Mr. Rancich — Without a doubt. There is stuff that I am .going to do on my own anyways and if you want to make it a requirement, I'll certainly submit it. 55 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 49 2004 Mr. Kanter = John raised an interesting point, I don't think the idea is to go right. out and hire a traffic consultant and do the traffic study, but I guess Mr. Rancich's is what would the next step be to come back to this Board. My idea right now is that probably what you want to see is, if you are giving fairly positive feedback on the overall concept that you've seen, for them to refine that concept and probably come back to talk a little bit more specifically about layout building design. Mr. Rancich — If that's what you want, that's fine with me. Mr. Barney — And have a specific plan. We want one plan not a'menu. Chairperson Wilcox — Start focusing on a given plan and how to modify it. Board Member Thayer — I like George's plan, I'd like to see a little more open space, but I like the offset buildings. I like the concept of the garages. Chairperson Wilcox— The height is going to be a problem. It could be a problem. We'll have to wait and see. Before we forget, we.do have to do one piece of business related to this. We have members of the public here, so f just want to let them know what we are doing. We have a resolution in front of us tonight with regard to this which says, I'll skip the boiler part at the beginning, "Therefore be it resolved that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board herby proposes to establish itself as lead agency.to coordinate the Environmental Review and proposed site plan approval, possible subdivision approval and rezoning for the proposed Sky Gardens." So that is the resolution in front of us. It simply says that we're going to be the lead agency for Environmental Review and we ask other agencies to concur with that. Board Member Thayer — I'll move it. I. Chairperson Wilcox — So moved, Larry, you moved it right. George seconded. All those in favor? Anybody opposed? Okay, very good. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004-033: Lead Agency Designation, Sky Gardens, Tax Parcel No. 27444.2, Mecklenburg Road MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by George Conneman WHEREAS. 1. The Town of Ithaca Planning Board is.considering a .Sketch Plan for the proposed Sky Gardens development consisting of approximately'200 market -rate condominium units, a community center, recreational facilities, wafer- gardens and other amenities on the eastern portion of Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -14.2, while leaving the western portion of the property as open .space available for recreational or agricultural use. The site is currently zoned R -15 Residence and Agricultural (prior to the April 1, 2004 effective date of the .new Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance) and contains 93.49 +/- acres. The applicant is requesting consideration of rezoning the development area to either MR Multiple Residence or PDZ Planned Development Zone. John Rancich, Owner /Applicant, Katrina A. Thaler, Attorney, Agent, and 56 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 20 The proposed actions, which include site plan approval and possibly subdivision approval by the Planning Board and rezoning by the Town Board, are Type I actions pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and Town of Ithaca Local Law No. 5 of the Year 1988 Providing for Environmental Review of Actions in the Town of Ithaca, and 3. An informational .report for sketch plan review entitled, `Proposed Residential Development, Sky Gardens" (received April 12, 2004), which includes a draft Full Environmental Assessment Form, Part 1, has been submitted by the applicant for the above - described actions, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby proposes to establish itself as lead agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed site plan approval, possible subdivision approval, and rezoning for the proposed Sky Gardens development, as described above, and BE iT FURTHER RESOLVED. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby requests the concurrence of all involved agencies on this proposed lead agency designation, said concurrence to be received by the Town of Ithaca Planning Department within thirty days from the date of notification of the involved agencies. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman,. Mitrano, Thayer, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox — You're right the idea of trying to narrow down the various plans, I appreciate the fact that you brought in various plans. It lets me know that you are thinking about it and bouncing ideas around and you've got at least three different people out there, hopefully with at least three different plan in mind and they put their heads together. Board Member Conneman — I appreciate the fact that you looked at clustering.. Mr. Rancich - It works for us. The whole clustering idea works excellently for us and I think it worked great for the Town. I think everybody is a winner. That's what I want to do with this project. I'm not interested in up a bunch of vinyl and filling them up and walking away. I am going to drive past these things everyday myself. As a matter of fact, I am living in one of them, if they are there. Chairperson Wilcox — I just want to mention real quickly, when we're talking about views -and view sheds. I want to talk about views. I think one of the things that we want to look at is what is this going to look like from the other hill, East Hill. We very often thing about what it is going to 57 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 look like in the vicinity, but we forget because we are 'the donut and the City is down there below, very often the views across the hill are very important. Mr. Rancich We have that Board Member Hoffmann — Of the things that you mentioned that could be done on the easternmost part of the parcel. I like the idea of a meadow best. The golf course is out. Chairperson Wilcox — Golf course is out. The Town Board said golf course is out. Mr. Frantz — Actually speaking of the view from east — Chairperson Wilcox — I haven't changed have I? Mr. Frantz —Well, neither has Carrie, look at out there. Speaking of the view from East Hill, that was one of the considerations in, actually, our planning, but this one, what I was looking at was making sure that these units were low enough down on the hill so that they would be dominated as West Hill. continues up into Enfield. So, the roofs, in fact, of these units are about ten feet below the western property line and of course, they are long- and narrow, so I suspect they are going to sort of disappear into the hillside. Chairperson Wilcox - Unless they've got big red roofs. Mr. Frantz - They won't have big red roofs, but brick and stone will help them. Chairperson Wilcox — Is there anything else you require of us this evening? Mr. Rancich — I don't believe so. Chairperson Wilcox — Jon are you all set for now? Mr. Rancich — 1 just wanted to mention that we did get a couple of letters from concerned residents, so that is certainly something that we will need to be thinking about as this proceeds. Chairperson Wilcox — For those of you who have sat her tonight, I would love to give you an opportunity to come up and speak, but we end at 10:00 and I've already gone to 10:20. Hopefully, the next time this application comes before us, whether it's a public hearing or not, we will give you an opportunity to come up and speak and tell us what you think. Certainly, when and if we get to the public hearing stage, we will. Yes? Female voice from the audience- Because I -am away a lot, can we write a letter to you? Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely, we've got two already. Please do, we appreciate it. So. if we're all set then. Thank you all. AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Minutes: April 6, 2004 w Chairperson Wilcox - Let me. move approval of the minutes of All those in favor with Eva's changes? All those opposed? Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 April 6. Seconded by Kevin Talty. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -034: Approval of Minutes — April 6, 2004 MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty. RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the April 6, 2004 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meeting as presented with corrections. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: Approval of Minutes March 2, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox — Now, I, am told by, you are the Deputy Town Deputy Town Clerk that we need to approve the minutes of March 2 "d of the minutes of March 2 "d, seconded by Kevin. All those in favor? abstentions. Clerk? I am told by the So, I'll move the approval Anybody opposed? Any PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -035: Approval of Minutes — March 2, 2004 MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty. RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve: and adopt the March 2, 2004 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meeting as presented with corrections,: The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS Chairperson Wilcox — Jon Kanter can you do a quick minute on the May 4th agenda or not? Mr. Kanter — Actually, one thing that I want to ask the Board. One of the agenda items tentatively is the County Comprehensive Plan to come give a presentation. It is a rather lengthy 59 Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 part of the agenda. I think they want about 35, 40 minutes so we do have a pretty busy agenda otherwise, but I just wanted to. make sure that that was going to be okay with you guys. Chairperson Wilcox — Next meeting. They've been going from town to town and board to board. Mr. Kanter — The other items are this Drake 30 -lot subdivision sketch plan, that would probably be at the end of the meeting; the Westview subdivision on Danby Road is coming back, that is the 32 -lot. Chairperson Wilcox — 32 lots in the wetland; the wet area. Mr. Kanter — Yeah. That is Coming back for preliminary approvals. So, that is going to be a rather lengthy and then, there is also the Cayuga Medical .Center emergency room addition. A fairly substantial addition to the hospital corning in for approvals. The County as asked to be on at 7:00, that's actually what they have been advertising the meeting at. As much as I hate to propose that, the thing we could do those is really specify that they've got unit 7:30. That may not be as much time as they want. Board Member Talty — Who is that that's here Jon? Mr. Kanter — The County, Tompkins County is working on their Comprehensive Plan so they are going out to all the communities with their presentation. Chairperson Wilcox — This is the County's charge and I actually have a brochure of where they are going. Mr. Barney — Since when did the County get into land use regulations? Chairperson Wilcox — They are not into land use regulations, Mr. Barney. Mr. Kanter — You are talking to someone on the County Planning Advisory Board. Chairperson Wilcox — Don't worry, they're not grabbing control Mr. Barney — If they don't have statutory grounds, they are grabbing control. With all the resources we have and all the money that we have to spend as taxpayers, why is it that the County is... Chairperson Wilcox — Maybe the County should have a Comprehensive Plan so that. when they make a decision, - Board Member Conneman — It's ridiculous for them to have all the stuff that they do at the county level because they have no control over it. Chairperson Wilcox — But it's good for them to have a Comprehensive Plan that guides their decision - making process, whether it is funding or building or whatever. Board Member Conneman — Well, we should have a plan to guide their funding. reff. h., Chairperson Wilcox — Well, that may be true. Board Member Conneman — That's a different issue. Chairperson Wilcox — That's a'different issue. Board Member Talty — That was well put George. Planning Board Minutes April 20, 2004 Approved May 4, 2004 Chairperson Wilcox — So, I'll make it clear in my own way to keep them to half and hour here okay. I gave you all some light reading, which was the story out of the west coast, Los Angeles area about somebody giving approval to build a 19 square foot building on a 20 square foot lot. A 19 by 19 building on a 20 by 20 foot lot. It would appear their planning board turned it down, but then their elected officials approved it. It's going to have a one foot side setback all the way around. I don't have anything else under Other Business. Are you all set? Board Member Conneman — Everything I can think of, it's. a contrast between what Larry Fabbroni presented us with, that map and what these guys did. Mr. Kanter — You might not be too happy with the Drake, subdivision when that comes in, but to be fair about it, they came in under the April 1 s' deadline for the change in zoning and they have a perfect right to do it, but it's basically a cookie_ cutter. Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else? AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the April 20, 2004 meeting of the .Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10:25 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, .Lori Love Deputy Town Clerk 61 4/20/04 Planning Board Attachment #1 T�K =JJ � .PrZa., ot� �Co� ►� pos =Tr )" ON. `THE Pry oPosE D SK'r' C's-/!2DCOyS DE\ja [L aoPAI ANT; How CZ tR, S�T� d1�JG -L._Y pN D. OP1v TN Es v�J� �ArZ v\ L-A �1 D SP\cG All ON G- 7H.e7 To\,./N ZL i HA,cA s w�s'��t�N . Bo R D A A s ais FOR a�t%�4j TH G:- 0 �N le df= CALL�C PLAk OF THm-S �a/v�P��HENSZv� i HE THEE 1?LAN P�ovzsra� T °►�J Ti::) DcD Vim, J ST�wATZD %�12 ]-� OF RE ivuzfw, ( Soa to �✓�-I �� ��/E�opM�i` ALL .ST-o P AN D pr=E �1 4-t 2 �✓0 2Us� 7 H M y 5.�. U�c� DE �- 'HE1�E' TH'� �✓� N P/\A tEj,/�_ �5nAC� ALL C� ANI7 L. -�LI.Y FED G� oU"�5 N of T�-} TowN S GoMP TZIE= H EEI�15m/� \ IA/ L- T % J TH IE� 1_ow G RU Nl B To 13�C - =�t�1 woW< Coy <s--LeEtj Dzs--fTZZcT PL_4 -T - ON ""T"'H C o N 5 tEETZ\/A -��oNo N Cr �NcE SPi�C�s N ��4TZ TcvG ; TH=s PT��SSUTZ� I H E: Co Y PEE sSu 1ZC o o�! 7�HE- =S oPCN =T'NT Z MPEE- ID zN6- 1 -�,►�/ J� S BL S_ TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, April 20, 2004 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. . Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). 7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell University Library Storage Annex Addition, Palm Rd. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University library storage annex addition located on Palm Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 -1 -1, Planned Development Zone No.9. The project involves construction of two additions to the existing storage facility totaling +/- 35,000 square feet to provide storage capacity for the growing collections of the Cornell University libraries. The project also includes additional walkways, driveways, landscaping, and a new loading dock. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Catherine O'Hora, Agent. 7:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed residential development, Overlook at West Hill, located at 1290 Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -4 -14.2, Residential. District R -15 (Medium Density Residential) and Multiple Residence District. The proposal consists of two phases of residential development, consisting of 128 affordable rental apartment units in 16 buildings and a community center in Phase I on a 24.5 +/- acre portion of Tax Parcel No. 24-4 - 14.2, and 15 lots for'single- family, market rate homes in Phase II on about 19 acres of the subject property to be subdivided in the future. The current owners would retain about 5 acres containing the existing medical practice fronting on Trumansburg Road. Song Ja Kyong, Owner; Axis Investments, Applicant; Grace Chiang, HOLT Architects and Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agents, 8:30 P.M.. Consideration of Sketch Plan review for the proposed Sky Gardens Condominiums located on the north side of Mecklenburg Road across from Rachel Carson Way, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 27 -1 -14.2, Residence District R -15 and Agricultural District. The proposal includes the construction of approximately 200 market -rate condominium units in twelve buildings, a swimming pool, a tennis court, a clubhouse, jogging trails, new roads and parking lots, and stormwater facilities. The proposal also includes a request to rezone a portion of the 93 +/- acre property from Residence District R -15 and Agricultural District to Multiple Residence or a Planned Development Zone, John Rancich, Owner /Applicant; Katrina A. Thaler, Agent, 6. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary). 71 Approval of Minutes: April 6; 2004 8. Other Business: 9. Adjournment. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS LINABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, April 20, 2004 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, April 20, 2004, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7 :15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed Cornell University library storage annex addition located on Palm Road, Town of,Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 64 -1 -1, Planned. Development Zone No.9. The project involves construction of two additions to the existing storage facility totaling +/= 35,000 square feet to provide storage capacity for the growing collections of the Cornell University libraries. The project also . includes additional walkways; driveways, landscaping, and a new loading dock. Cornell University, Owner /Applicant; Catherine.O'Hora, Agent. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of Final Subdivision. Approval and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed residential development, Overlook at West Hill, located at 1290 Trumansburg Road (NYS Route 96), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24 -4 -14.2, Residential District R -15 (Medium Density Residential) and Multiple Residence District. The proposal consists of two phases of residential development, consisting of 128 affordable rental apartment units in 16 buildings and a community center in Phase I on a 24.5 -+- /- acre portion of Tax Parcel No. 24= 4 -14.2, and 15 lots for single - family, market rate homes in Phase II on about 19 acres of the subject property to be subdivided in the future. The current owners would retain about -5 acres containing the existing medical practice fronting on Trumansburg Road, Song Ja Kyong, Owner; Aris Investments, Applicant; Grace Chiang, HOLT Architects and Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf, Landscape Architects, Agents. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections. thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person.. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearings. Jonathan Kanter, AICP Director of Planning 273 -1747 Dated: Monday, April 12, 2004 Publish: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 P731 �y V. 3 Flth�J u_r�nRa� ��ti } Y y y rh 9"'zC i4 ,,W v d r a c3ayAri4„ 20Q TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SIGN -IN SHEET DATE: April 20, 2004 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINTADDRESS /AFFILIATION �4L, Dc 0 /� ► �'7 C) i 112- D V ISiL,0 s. sz� P�(�u�Z 0 0 P, E,LL r7 Cie 1 2.7 >o.) - 0 fl-� e -s6-.::)�. L-V� cl/� lzi� TOWN OF ITHACA AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION I, Sandra Polce being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following Notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly, published in the local newspaper, The Ithaca Journal. Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday, April 20, 2004 commencing at 7 :00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town C1erk.Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting: Date of Publication: April 12, 2004 April 14, 2004 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 14th day of April 2004. Notary Public ,. Ho" Noigry Nom. Ok1 giate Of ew Yolk . Seneca County my Commission Expires Dec, 26. OO