HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2004-11-02FILE
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD DATE
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2004
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, November 2,
2004, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT: Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; George Conneman, Board Member; Tracy
Mitrano, Board Member; Larry Thayer, _.Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member,
Kevin Talty, Board Member; John Barney, Attorney for the Town (7:10 p.m.); Jonathan
Kanter, Director of Planning; Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering; Mike Smith,
Environmental Planners Christine Balestra, Planner,
EXCUSED: :Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning.
OTHERS: Enid Ruoff, 216 Texas Ln; Dave Auble, 111 King Rd W, Kash Iraggi, 967
Taughannock Blvd; Scott Wiggins, 967 Taughannock Blvd; Fred Bonn, 904 East Shore
Dr; Faith Chase, 106 Comfort Rd; Diana Vrabel, 209 King Rd W; Ira Goldstein, 155
Compton Rd; Tessa Flores, 154 Compton Rd;, Jagat Sharma, 312 E Seneca St; Jean
McPheeters, 904 East Shore Dr; Bill Goodhew, 674 Coddington Rd; Neal Howard, 306
King Rd E; Fran Spadafora - Manzella, 370 Stone . Quarry Rd; Wally Wiggins, 961
Taughannock Blvd; Mary Tabachney, Park Way; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf;
Tony Ingraham, 368 Stone Quarry Rd; Christiann Dean, 330 King Rd W; Charles Light,
Ithaca; George Frantz, 604 Cliff St; Daniel Tourance, 221 Sand Bank Rd.
Chairperson Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:07 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 October 25, 2004 and October 27,
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 October 27, 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
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of .the
I
embers of the public to address the board on ar
With no persons present to be heard, Chairperson
meeting at 7:08 p.me
meeting at 7 :07 p.m., and invited
item that was not on the agenda.
Wilcox closed this segment of the
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination: Ruoff ./ Todd 2 -Lot Subdivision, 216 & 217
Texas Lane
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:08 p.m.
Enid Ruoff, 216 Texas Ln
Because of a buried pipe for the last 45 years, we thought we owned some property,
which we didn't own. The people who had our house before us also must have thought
that because they planted trees on that area and we planted flowers and all that. So the
Todd's are very kindly selling us this little .038 of an acre.
Chairperson Wilcox — Environmental concerns?
Board Member Howe — No.
Chairperson Wilcox — Would someone like to move the SEQR motion?
Board Member Conneman — I'll move it.
Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by Kevin Talty.
Approval, Todd /Ruoff Two -Lot Subdivision, 217 Texas Lane, Tax Parcel No. 71.-1-
4
MOTION made by George Conneman, seconded by Kevin Tally.
WHEREAS.
1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 217 Texas Lane, Tax Parcel No. 7144;
Medium Density Residential zone. The proposal involves subdividing off a
0.04 + 1- acre (1672 +/- sq. ft.) parcel from 217 Texas Lane and consolidating it
with 216 Texas Lane (Tax Parcel No. 71 =1 -3). Michael J. and Marina B. Todd,
Owner; Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff, Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with
respect to Subdivision Approval, and
36 The Planning Board on November 2, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as
adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the
applicant, and Part ll prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey entitled
"Survey Map ~ Lands of Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff and Portions of Lands of
Michael J. and Marina B. Todd To Be Conveyed to Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff"
dated July 21, 2000, by Michael J. Reagan L.L.S., and other application
materials, and
2
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
4a The Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED.
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination
of environmental significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental
Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither
a Full Environmental Assessment Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement will be
required.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:09 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
for the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 216 and 217 Texas Lane, Town of
Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 71 -1 -3 and 71 -1 -4, Medium Density Residential Zone. The
proposal is to subdivide off a 0.04 +/- acre parcel from 217 Texas Lane to be
consolidate' with 216 Texas Lane. Michael J. and Mari
na B. Todd, Owner; Arthur
L. and Enld .S. Ruoff, Applicant
Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:10 p.m. and invited members of the
public to address the board. With no persons present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox
closed the public hearing at 7:10 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox — Its nice to see the neighbors work it out amongst themselves
instead of coming to the board.
Larry Thayer moved the resolution, seconded by Kevin Talty.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -107: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval,
Todd /Ruoff Two -Lot Subdivision, 217 Texas Lane, Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -4
MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Kevin Tally.
WHEREAS.
1.. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed two -lot subdivision located at 217 Texas Lane, Tax Parcel No. 71 -14,
Medium Density Residential zone. The proposal involves subdividing off a
11 1
3
0
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
0.04 + 1- acre (1672 +/- sq. ft) parcel from 217 Texas Lane and consolidating it
with 216 Texas Lane (Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -3). Michael J. and Marina B. Todd,
Owner; Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff, Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for ,which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
lead agency in environmental. review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has
on November 2, 2004, made a negative determination of environmental
significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and Part ll
prepared by the Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board on November 2, 2004, has reviewed and. accepted as
adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the
applicant, and Part II prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey entitled
"Survey Map - Lands of Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff and Portions of Lands of
Michael J. and Marina B. Todd To Be Conveyed to Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff"
dated July 21, 2000, by Michael J. Reagan L.L.S., and other application
materials.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and
Final Subdivision Checklists, having determined from the materials presented
that such. waiver will result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of
subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision
Approval for the proposed two -lot subdivision of 217 Texas Lane, Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No. 71 -14, as shown on the survey map entitled "Survey Map
Lands of Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff and Portions of Lands of Michael J. and
Marina B. Todd To Be Conveyed to Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff' dated July 21,
20002 by Michael J. Reagan, L.L.S., subject to the following conditions.
a. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an
original or mylar copy of the final subdivision plat, and three dark -lined
prints, including the name and seal of the registered land surveyor, 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
b. within : six months of this approval, consolidation. of the 0.04 + 1 acre
subdivided parcel from 217 Texas Lane (Tax Parcel No. 7144) with the
neighboring property at 216 Texas Lane (Tax Parcel No. 71 -1 -3), and
submission to the Town Planning Department of a copy of the request to
the Tompkins County Assessment Department for the consolidation.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination: La Tourelle Country Inn. Addition, 1152
Danby Road
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 7:13 p.m.
Wally Wiggins, 961 Taughannock Blvd
This project consists of two parts. I assume that you have drawings before you that are
self - explanatory, if not, Mr. Hoover from the Downing Firm of Architects is here to
respond to any questions you might deem appropriate.
The two parts. ..the first of the two parts relates to the construction of 19 rooms to
be added to the existing hotel facility, which we call La Tourelle. It presently has 35
rooms, which were initially approved 20 years ago along with the expansion, which was
also approved at that time. The initial approval allowed us to build-up to a total of 80
rooms and we have indeed come before you to take the second step. It has only taken
us 20 years to get here, but we are here to take the second step by adding an additional
19 rooms.
We have submitted plans to you, which we believe, are in total conformity not
only with the law, but in the spirit of the hotel and what we envisioned initially and
promised to produce. I hope you agree that we have done that. So I don't think there
should by many questions about that except technical ones in which I would be pleased
to have Mr. any
answer if I cannot.
The second element is more interesting, perhaps, and more exciting facet of this
project and that is a spa, a health spa, which will be located in the addition that is being
constructed within the footprint of the initial and original plan and with roof heights and
building heights exactly the same as they existing building, again within the framework
of your ordinance and the responsibilities you gave us when you initially approved this
project. This spa, health spa, is designed to offer therapeutic services for healing and
soothing the body and aesthetic services for adding beauty to those who need it I
guess.
These facilities will be made available to the hotel guests and to members of the
community who choose to avail themselves to the spa, if they think on a winter day in
Ithaca it may spark life a little bit and of course share the joys and sorrows of our winter
here.
5
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
The hotel is located on 70 acres of land, 20 acres of which have been devoted to
and allocated for the use of the hotel, restaurant and barn, which we retained in its
original condition and actually there are three apartments that are located within that
that barn. The concept here was to provide facilities in a country setting that would be
within proximity of the joys the City can offer and the University and College can offer
and indeed' the substantial number of natural resources that are available within our
community by maintaining a country setting that is both spacious and gracious in its
design.
I have before making this offer to the board sought council from those are skilled
in this area of expertise. I would like to take a little bit of time with the chairman's
permission to allow them to speak briefly. Dr. Mary Tabachney who teaches spa
management at the hotel school at Cornell University. and is known nationally and
internationally for her expertise .in health spa management throughout the world. I have
also taken council from Jean McPheeters and thirdly, I think his title is Chairman of the
Tourism Council for Tompkins County because I wanted to make certain that indeed
this was the type of facility that the community not only needed in the opinion of the
experts, but was also desired by the members.of the community who felt that it would
be an asset to the Town of Ithaca and the surrounding community. I would like to
introduce them now if that would be appropriate or I could take questions now if that's
your policy.
Chairperson Wilcox — We'll hear all of your...
Mary Tabachney, The Parkway
I do indeed teach at Cornell hotel school and have indeed done so for a long period of
time and have studied spas for about thirty years.
Chairperson Wilcox — I think Mr. Wiggins said you were going to make a statement in
support of the addition of a spa facility.
Ms. Tabachney — I feel that Ithaca needs a really, truly good upscale spa, one, that we
can be really proud of. One that when we go to we feel that we are getting top -notch
service thatiiis well established and a service that we would be proud of. We have some
facilities in Ithaca, but they are not up to the par that I believe that can happen at La
Tourelle. I've looked at the design. I've talked to Mr. Wiggins in great detail. I believe
that this is a boom for tourism and I believe that this is good for townspeople. I for one
will be using that spa when I don't use spas in Ithaca.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you very much.
Board Member Mitrano — My benchmark might begin with Mirb.eau. How would you
place it next to that one?
Ms. Tabachney — I would say it's very close. I have indeed worked with the Mirbeau
folks and th "ose of you who have visited Mirbeau know that it is a very nice facility. Mr.
D
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Wiggins doesn't have quite as much room to do as much as Mirbeau, but I believe the
quality would be there.
Board Member Mitrano - I have sort of a broad -based historical question to ask. It
won't have any bearing on the outcome of this decision or anything like that, but that
which we now think of as sort of upscale spa .services, Mirbeau, I'm thinking Ten
Thousand Waves in Santa Fe and those kinds of places. Is this some amalgamation of
different cultures or is this coming down through history as some sort of particular
cultural direction?
Ms. Tabachney — It's interesting and exciting. Spas have emerged in the US as an
amalgamation. When spas first started in the US, it started in colonial times when our
settlers came we had a very European bathing type spa. We had many of those as in
White Sulphur Springs, as in Berkley Springs, as in Saratoga Springs. All of those kinds
of spas were bathing spas where the rich and famous went and played horses and they
introduced their sons and daughters to the right people and it was a nice thing and they
drank a lot of water and since they drank that instead of drinking a lot of wine and rum
they got better and they relaxed at the spa. Then that lasted until the two wars at which
point we decided that tranquilizers worked better than spas and that we had penicillin so
we didn't have to let people get a cure and so it kind of went out. Then in the late 60's
the "modern day American spa ", which was based on fitness and beauty and models
and movie starts went and you went to be seen more than anything. Finally we adapted
eastern approaches to where now we are really into healing and health, into relaxation,
which I believe this spa will offer. Students and faculty and townspeople who are or
might use some relaxation for their health's sake.
Chairperson Wilcox — Any other questions?
Ms. Tabachney — I believe this will be a first class spa and I intend to work with Mr.
Wiggins to help that happen.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you.
Fred Bonn; 904 East Shore Drive
Director of Ithaca Tompkins County Convention and Visitors Bureau. I find this project
extremely exciting. This has the potential to continue to deliver a product for tourists to
our area. liThe Ithaca area is recognized regionally, nationally, internationally as a
community of wellness. We have the Finger Lakes School of Massage; we have a
tradition of alternative medicine of being practiced here. This product will help elevate
that position even more across the United States and the rest of the world. We have
another great opportunity here to also have something fit in with other components of
the tourism ('product so that fine dining and theatre and staying at a spa, shopping, all of
those sorts of offerings will really position this product, this project and Ithaca as a
destination. You talked about Mirbeau experience. I'm quite confident that this project
will equal if ' not surpass the Mirbeau experience in that what we have to offer here in the
community s a broader experience than is available right in Mirbeau. There's Mirbeau,
7
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
but there's not a whole lot around it. What we have surrounding La Tourelle is a lot
more dynamic, a lot more exciting. Another great component of this is that it will also fit
extremely well with the direction that the convention and visitors bureau is going in with
respect to developing packages. Consumers are looking for package buys that have an
activity, a room stay, a meal associated with it. They are shopping for that on -line. We
have those tools to deliver that sort of a package to the rest of the world. Having this
tool in our resource chest will greatly aid us in the dynamic marketing of Tompkins
County. An it attracts in a real key demographic. People who go to. Mirbeau who will
be going to ;this spa are consumers. They will be shopping. They will be dining. They
will be attending theatre and performance in the community and I just wanted to voice
my full support for this project.
Chairperson Wilcox — Any questions? There are none.
11 Jeanne McPheeters, President of Chamber of Commerce
I'm here tonight.. the Chamber, as you know, has a contract with the County to run the
Convention iland Visitors Bureau. So I want to look at this both from a tourism aspect as
well as industry here. This spa project will provide some jobs in the community,
particularly for graduates of one of our institutions, the Finger Lakes School of Massage,
which is a very nice thing. As Fred said, we are building this codery of people in the
alternative health care industry here. It is one of the things we actually feature in our
visitor's guide. What we really try to do with the Chamber of Commerce with our
association with the Convention and Visitors Bureau is attract the visitor here and
encourage the visitor to consider relocating here. It is also very much about building the
quality of life in our own community for people here so that our industries and our
businesses 111located here will have a great workforce, who.wants to stay and work here.
And that people who come here will think, wow that's a great place, I could live here.
Also the people moving in could afford the housing prices, which. unfortunately the
locals can't any more. So that's another whole story.
The other thing Ir wanted to comment upon in terms of the convention and visitors
bureau is we are finding in our sales, when we try to go out and attract conventions and
small group meetings here that having a spa experience seems to be incredibly
important any more, particularly for small meetings, which is the size that we can attract
really up to ijabout 200 =250. We don't have the big convention hotels here and we are
probably never going to. We are a good location for a meeting of 20 to 200 people.
Cornell and; Ithaca College get a large number of those, but we also get kind of board
meetings or regional conventions and this concept of having the spa experience while
you go there is increasingly important and not something that we are able to offer
currently. So I am very excited about that. I also think it will help to do some things for
our workforce locally and build jobs here.
Chairperson Wilcox— Very good. Thank you. Questions?
Board Member Conneman - There is a statement by the Environmental Review
Committee that says, "the positioning of the addition appears to oppose no particular
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
problems, however; we hope the developers will work to carefully grade the general
slopes in the area that will become the northwest corner of the new parking lot next to
the existing two tennis courts. Similarly, we assume that the new 21 -space parking
area to the south will require fill to make it level with the existing parking lot. In this
case, care must be taken to protect the interface between this parking lot and the
adjacent pond. Every effort must be.made to avoid excess erosion during construction."
Mr. Wiggins - Yes. We will accommodate each of those recommendations. They will
be included in the final plans and specifications that are submitted for approval by your
staff. There is nothing there that we think is inappropriate. We think it is quite
appropriateiand certainly intended to do all of those things, but the preliminary plans do
not appear with the detail that you have the right to request.
Chairperson Wilcox - While we are on that subject, Dan, the memo we were provided
states that !engineering staff has reviewed the storm water plans and feels that the
proposed method and features to have a storm water on site appears to be appropriate.
Do you wish to add anything or is that sufficient?
Mr. Walker The basic concept is there. There's a lot of details that need to be worked
out, but that's part of the plan. There is plenty of room on that site to.. the main concern
that I had was that they showed filling in part of the existing pond and I definitely don't
want to see;, that. I want to see the parking area reconfigured so they are not putting fill
into the existing pond.
Mr. Wiggins - I didn't even know that there was something that shows the filling in of the
pond. If it was, it was inadvertently there because it certainly took us a lot of time and
effort and money to.build the pond. We wouldn't fill it in intentionally, that's for sure.
Board Member Mitrano - There was a gray herring in there as well.
Chairperson Wilcox - Other questions regarding environmental review? Mike, you are
satisfied the 164 parking spaces is reasonably appropriate?
Mr. Smith - It seems that way. I tried to do the calculations based on the zoning and
then looking at some other documents it seemed like if they needed more than what
was presently there, especially with the new uses coming in, they were close to the 164.
When they reconfigured that parking lot with the pond area, if they lose 8 or 10 spaces
there I. don't think that will create any problems.
Chairperson Wilcox - As its pointed out, if you have a banquet you have. a different use
than if you simply have residence or people staying in the hotel and people having
dinner at the restaurant next door plus the occupants of the barn..
Mr. Smith - In just looking at the banquet facility and the restaurant and the occupancy
those two could be up to. 140 something and zoning would only require 49 parking
spaces.
E
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Chairperson, Wilcox Which seems inappropriately low. I don't want to create too much
I surface for parking either but I don't have a problem with the calculations. It
is not obvious the amount you need. It seems reasonable.
Board Member Mitrano — I'll move it.
Motion seconded by Kevin Talty.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004408: SEOR, Preliminary Site Plan Approval & a
Recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment, La Tourelle
Country Inn - Room Expansion & Spa, 1152 Danby Room, Tax Parcel No. 36 -14.2
MOTION made by Tracy Mitrano, seconded by Kevin Tally.
WHEREAS.
1. This action is Consideration. of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a
recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the
proposed addition to the La Tourelle Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road
(NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36 =1 -4.2, Planned
Development Zone .No. 1. The proposal involves construction of a three level
addition on the west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new rooms, a
spa, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional 11
parking and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development
Zone; No. 1 is required to allow the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner %Applicant, and
28 This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is
legislatively determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with
respect to Site Plan Approval, and
3. The iPlanning Board, on November 2, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as
adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the
applicant, and Part Il prepared by Town Planning staff, plans entitled "Site Plan"
(A 10;1), dated 09120104, and revised 09130104; "Ground Floor Plan" (A 102), "First
Floor Plan" (A 103), "Second Floor Plan" (A 104), "South Elevation" (A 105), "West
& North Elevation" (A106), dated 0912012004, "Site Lighting" (A108), dated
0912812004, prepared by William Downing Associates Architects; "Topographic
Survey — Portion of Lands of Walter J. and Joyce Y. Wiggins" dated Oct. 8, 2004,
prepared by Reagan Land Surveying; and "Site Plan" dated October 13, 2004,
prepared by Gary L. Wood, P. E, and other materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
10
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
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.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion' was declared to be carried unanimously.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:34 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a
recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the
proposed addition to the La Tourelle Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road
(NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 14.2, Planned Development
Zone No. 1. The proposal involves construction of a three level addition on the
west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new rooms, a spa, an
elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional parking
and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development Zone No. 1 is
required to allow the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant.
Chairperson. Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:35 p.m, and invited members of the
public to address the board. With no persons present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox
closed the.public hearing at 7:36 p.m.
Attorney Barney — Wally, have you seen the proposed local law?
Mr. Wiggins — I did. Yes. Michael was kind enough to send that on to me. It looks
good to me. The only question that I guess I have is that whatever you might do to
expedite whatever has to be expedited. I'm trying to get into the ground before frost.
Chairperson Wilcox — I believe you were talking about the price of steel the last time I
saw you.
Mr. Wiggins — Thank you.
Board. Member Howe moved the motion and Board Member Thayer seconded the
motion.
11
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -109: Preliminary Site Plan Approval & a
Recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment, La Tourelle
Country Inn -Room Expansion & Sva. 1152 Danbv Road. Tax Parcel No. 36 =1 -4.2
MOTION made by Rod Howe, seconded by Larry Thayer.
WHEREAS.
1. This action is consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a
recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the
Proposed addition to the La . Tourelle Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road
(NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 14.2, Planned
Development Zone No, 1. The proposal involves construction of a three level
addition on the west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new rooms, a
spa, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional
parking and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development
Zone No. 1 is required to allow the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
lead agency in environmental review with respect to Site Plan Approval, has, on
November 2, 2004, made a negative determination of environmental significance,
after ° having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental
Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II prepared by
Town Planning staff, and
39 The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on November 2, 2004, has
reviewed and accepted as adequate, plans entitled "Site Plan" (A 101), dated
.09120104, and revised 09130104; "Ground Floor Plan" (A 102), "First Floor Plan"
(A 103), "Second Floor Plan" (A 104), "South Elevation" (A 105), "West & North
Elevation" (A 106), dated 0912012004, "Site Lighting" (A 108), dated 0912812004,
prepared by William Downing Associates Architects; "Topographic Survey —
Portion of Lands of Walter J. and Joyce Y. Wiggins" dated Oct. 8, 2004, prepared
by Reagan Land Surveying; and "Site Plan" dated October 13, 2004, prepared by
Gary L. Wood, P. E., and other materials, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED.
10 That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist,
having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in
neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies
enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan
Approval for the proposed addition to La Tourelle Country Inn, including 19
rooms, spa, elevator, exercise room, parking and landscaping, located at 1152
12
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Danby Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 1 -4.2, as shown on plans entitled
"Site Plan" (A101), dated 09120104, and revised 09130104; "Ground Floor Plan"
(A 102), "First Floor Plan" (A 103), "Second Floor Plan" (A 104), "South Elevation"
(A105), "West & North Elevation" (A106), dated 0912012004, "Site Lighting"
(A 108), dated 0912812004, prepared by William Downing Associates Architects;
"Topographic Survey — Portion of Lands of Walter J. and Joyce Y. Wiggins"
dated Oct. 8, 2004, prepared by Reagan Land Surveying; and "Site, Plan" dated
October 13, 2004, prepared by Gary L. Wood, P.E. and other materials, and,
subject to the following conditions:
a. granting of the necessary zoning amendment by the Town of Ithaca Town
Board, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and
be submission of construction / engineering details of all improvements, prior
to Final Site Plan Approval, and
co revision of the plan showing landscaping to include the accurate driveway
and parking layout as shown on the revised "Site Plan" prepared by Gary
L. Wood, a planting schedule, and any necessary planting comments or
notes, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and
do revision of "Site Lighting" (A 108) plan to include the accurate driveway and
parking layout as shown on the revised "Site Plan" prepared by Gary L.
Wood, prior to Final Site Plan Approval, and
e. submission of final stormwater material including appropriate calculations,
sedimentation and erosion control plans, and all stormwater facility details,
for approval by the Director of Engineering, prior to Final Site Plan
Approval, and
to revision of "Site Plan" prepared by Gary L. Wood, to eliminate the filling of
existing pond on south side of property to create a parking area, prior to
Final Site Plan Approval, and
go submission of an original of the revised 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
he 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 stormwater Notice of Intent and Pollution Prevention
Plan for NYSDEC, prior to the issuance of a building permit, and
i. revision of "Topographic Survey" to include the name and seal of the
registered land surveyor or engineer who prepared the topographic and
boundary survey, prior to issuance of a building permit.
13
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of
Ithaca Town Board enact the proposed local law to amend the Planned
Development Zone No. 1 (Section 271 =3 of the Town of Ithaca Code) to allow the
spa use for the Inn guests and the general public.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM: SEAR Determination (continuation): Country Inn & Suites Hotel,
Danby Road and West King Road
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting 7:40 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox — Mr. Auble had some letters that were provided to him, which he
has provided to Carrie and Carrie is going to make copies for each of us. Then we all
have a copy of the map that has been provided to us:
Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge and Wolf
Since the meeting was adjourned last time, we had previously made a presentation, but
I guess I Would leave it open to the board to what extent additional information is
needed. We did provide the board one additional map this evening because I know
there has been quite a bit of conversation about neighborhood context and scale of this
building. So we tried to pull back a bit within a two to three minute walk of the Country
Inns site to look at other related buildings including La Tourelle that was just discussed
and we provided a map of the existing conditions and scale of La Tourelle, the proposed
Country Inn and some other buildings to the north, which as you know are College
Circle that Ithaca College is currently using as residential halls. So we tried to give the
board a,.. more of a neighborhood sense of the scale of buildings, the length of buildings
and how this project might look in terms of context. I would be happy to answer other
questions. I don't know to what extent we want to repeat any of the presentation
materials that we provided last time.
Chairperson; Wilcox — Rod, Larry, George and I were at the last meeting. Tracy and
Kevin were unable to make it. I guess I will give Kevin and Tracy the first chance of
asking any questions that you may have that either you didn't see the question asked
and responded to in the minutes of the meeting from two weeks or you have your own
individual questions.
iEl
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Board Member Mitrano - I don't have any questions. I'm delighted that it has finally
come down to the appropriate degree that we have been discussing over a number of
meetings so I'm prepared to vote for it.
Board Member Talty - At this point, I think the developer has come back and done
everything that we have asked them. I am prepared to move forward with this project.
Chairperson Wilcox - Any questions from other members of the board?
Board Member Conneman - I just want to remind Peter that La Tourelle is on 20 acres
and is way l!back from the road so don't say ... this picture doesn't prove anything in my
opinion. I know that's your perfect right and my perfect right to make that statement.
Chairperson Wilcox; - Any comments in addition to those from two weeks ago?
Mr. Smith No. The only thing in your packet was just the same resolutions, just
Updated the dates.
Chairperson Wilcox - Well, I should point out that we had a letter from Jennifer
Terpening. i It was on the desk in front of you. Ms. Terpening also provided some
pictures that I will pass around. One copy of the pictures came with that letter. Then,
just before we got started either Peter or Mr. Auble has provided us with copies of
letters, one' that we have already seen from Brett Wyllie and then some additional
letters. Copy of an editorial. Copy of an article from the Journal.
Board Member Mitrano - Are these pictures associated with the Terpening letter?
Chairperson Wilcox - Yes.
Board Member Mitrano - And what's staff's response to this?
Mr. Kanter ° They are nice pictures.
Board Member Mitrano - Do you suspect that this development will cause any more
erosion to my land "?
Mr. Smith -,The location of that house or the general area of those pictures are down
King Rd W from the project and the storm water here from the inn will still be going
through the storm water facilities that were designed as part of the Holly Creek
subdivision.
Board Member Mitrano - So it would have that much effect is that what you're saying?
Chairperson Wilcox - Lets take it back to Dana Dan, you commented two weeks ago on
the storm water management.
15
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Walker The storm water management plan that was first developed for the Holly
Creek subdivision was designed to maintain the existing rate of storm water runoff from
the site with two detention ponds. That original storm water management plan took into
account development on the upper two sites and then this site has bee reviewed by TG
Miller's and confirmed that the original study did adequately address this level of
development on this site. So we should be seeing no major increase of runoff off the
site, actually no increase in runoff off the site.
Board Member Mitrano — Okay. Great. Thank you.
Chairperson Wilcox — Any other questions, comments with regard to the environmental
review only at this point? Would someone like to move the SEQR motion?
Board Member Thayer moved the motion and Board Member Talty seconded the
motion.
Board of
Appeals Regarding Special Approval, Country Inn & Suites Hotel, Danby Road &
West King Road Intersection, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 =1 -17.1
MOTION made by Larry Thayer, seconded by Kevin Tally.
WHEREAS,
1. This 'project involves consideration of Preliminary Subdivision and Preliminary
Site !!Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel located
at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B),
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C: The proposal
involves subdividing off a +/- 2.74 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre parcel for
the construction of a 58 -room hotel at the intersection. The proposal also
includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David
Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J.
Trowbridge, 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, Subdivision Approval, and Special Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, on November 2, 2004, has reviewed and accepted as
adequate a Full Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the
applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by Town Planning Staff, a packet of drawings
and details titled "Country Inn and Suites Hotel" (Preliminary Site Plan Review),
dated September 1.7, 2004, prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Jagat P.
ire
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Sharma, Architect, T.G. Miller P.C., A. D Dixon and Company, and SRF
Associates, and other material, and
4. The ;Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Approval,
Subdivision Approval, and Special 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, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Tally.
NAYS: Conneman.
The motion was declared to be carried.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 7:49 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING. Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval,
Preliminary Site Plan Approval, and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of
Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel
located at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route
96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C ". The
proposal involves subdividing off a +/- 2.74 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre
parcel for the construction of a 58 -room hotel at the intersection. The proposal
also includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting.
David Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant;
Peter J. Trowbridge, Agent.
Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:49 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox — Peter would you or any member of the applicant team like to
make a statement at this point?
17
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Trowbridge — Just reiterating some comments that we made to the board last time.
This is the sixth time we have been in front of the board and we quite purposefully came
in for sketch plans at four different occasions to carefully listen to the board and I hope
each and every time to respond: The comments that had been made about reduction
and overall height, reduction in the number of rooms, reduction in acreage that the
project occupied relative to set asides for additional retail development have all been
incorporated into the site plan. I know that there are additional staff comments relative
to landscape that would help buffer the parking in front of the hotel and the developer is
certainly willing to add that as well as all the other technical information that is outlined
in the resolution. So I think everything that staff has provided is ... as part of the
resolution is acceptable to us and the developer and additional technical information
would be provided at final site plan approval.
Chairperson Wilcox — Questions of Peter Trowbridge while he is sitting there?
Board Member Mitrano — No. Just a comment ... very appreciative of all of the
amendments that have been made from the original site plan all the way through.
Chairperson Wilcox invited members of the public to address the board.
Fred Bonn, 904 East Shore Drive
I wanted to share with the board some more exciting news with respect to this project.
This is another project that will continue to enhance our ability to deliver a memorable
experience for visitors to our area. This weekend it is going to be cold. It is going to be
raining; you can't find a room in Tompkins County this weekend. There are enough
activities taking place between the Turkey Shoot Lacrosse Tournament, Ithaca College
has a. campus tour taking place this weekend. There are no rooms available. As I was
leaving the office this afternoon, we were referring people down to Route 88 and up on
5 and 20. Cortland was full as well. So there is the demand to accommodate additional
room space in Tompkins County. The nice thing about this project is it addresses a
couple of different markets that we are under serving. First off, we do no currently have
within our capacity a quality experience for extended corporate stay. This program has
the opportunity to,, this project will deliver an opportunity for folks visiting campuses,
working in industry to feel much more at home and have a sense of place in our
community. i Additionally, one of the markets that we are actively engaged in trying to
recruit to our area are athletic tournaments, the hockey tournaments, lacrosse
tournaments, families and this product is extremely attractive to families that have
traveling or part of traveling teams. Parents can stay in one room and children can stay
in another room. I personally have two young boys and we are always out there in
search of a suites product so that we can have a little room to breathe, all of us. I just
wanted to share that comment as well.
I think that it is extremely well located with respect to the balance of the two
campuses and the City of Ithaca and again very excited of the prospect of this project
coming on -line.
iuse
Ira Goldstein, 155 Compton
It is a great day for people tc
and I'm happy to be here. TI
the board has had concerns
few stages �'in the design of
about the neighborhood cor
context in terms of care abc
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Rd
give voice to how things go in our community and nation
ank you. I have concerns about this project and I noticed
all along about the size and that's been...there've been a
his project to try and speak to that. I'd like to talk more
text. Some people have already been speaking about
it and concern for visitor's experience to our communitv
and I'd like to approach it a little bit from the point of view of care for the quality and the
experience of living here for the people that reside here.
So some of the things that point to what the community's concerns and intentions
are in the area are.. well lets see what are some of the things that are already going on.
There's Buttermilk Falls State Park close by and then also in terms of what the
community has investigated and expressed about how it would like to design things
going forward is there has been a lot of interest in the area for preserving open space,
probably everybody here is familiar with the Town of Ithaca Park, Recreation and Open
Space plan, which pinpoints areas close by this site. There's also the South Hill Swamp
that's been studied and the desire expressed to protect it. In the area, the community
has already' expressed a lot of interest and care for preserving a certain quality to the
surroundings in the neighborhood. I'm very interested in it because I live in that
neighborhood.
Part of the project and proposals that we are considering here tonight and you
are considering tonight is the project that was grandfathered into an older zoning in the
way that the. area is zoned now in terms of commercial enterprises is general in that
area is for businesses that serve the neighborhood on kind of a neighborhood scale.
This piece is grandfathered into a zoning that calls for a 30 rooms max. And it seems to
me that in order to recommend something larger, there really has to be a compelling
need and a tremendous. benefit to the neighborhood. I don't exactly see that myself. La
Tourelle is nearby. The Hampton Inn has just been completed on Route 13 and right
downtown there is a new hotel being built with 104 rooms, 47 of those rooms are suites.
So a lot more capacity is coming on board for visitors coming. This place downtown, for
instance, is 'a great place to have a place to stay as well as experience the benefits that
are available downtown for people. I, myself, it doesn't feel like there is a compelling
need to recommend a variance that will okay building an enterprise like this greater than
30 rooms. In general in the area, the community has expressed a kind of interest and
intention in keeping things low key and I think 30 rooms max is generous and I urge that
you don't recommend a project larger than that. Thank you.
Fran Spadafora- Manzella, 370 Stone Quarry Rd
am one of the concerned neighbors..) don't have the expertis
Planning Board or Planners or Builders, but 1 do know that I am
as many of us are, the size. I know some of our neighbors
totally, but I would say that the majority, based on the ones
similar to what the gentlemen said, we support that there
e of the members of the
concerned about again,
are against the project
that I've talked to, and
is a need for greater
19
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
accommodations in the Ithaca area as Fred had talked about and I certainly respect
what Fred,, has to say. However, the neighborhood, "the zoning is commercial
residential. " It is not commercial solely and I feel that we really need to consider that and
we really need to look at a hotel that fits in with the environment and the neighborhood.
I can tell you since there has been some expansion since I've lived ... I've lived here
about four years on Stone Quarry Road. Its very heavily trafficked...it has heavy at
certain times of the day and certainly I accept that. I knew that when I was moving in,
but certainly it has grown. I think that with a hotel of that magnitude it can only get
worse both on that road and on the road leading past the park, which I think will serve a
danger to the people participating in activities at the park. So I hope that you will
consider... again I am not against the project, I am against the magnitude of the project.
think to have it be a win -win situation that we need to look at that so it can be a win for
the neighborhood and the people of the neighborhood and also serve the Ithaca
community in an effective way. So thank you for listening and have a good evening.
Tessa Flores, 154 Compton Rd
have the same concern ... the size. I would...) don't know that I would welcome a
Country Inn and Suites the way it really looks at 30 rooms, but I certainly would not
come here and speak against it. I urge you all and ask you all to really consider the
goals of the new zoning. I think a lot of time and energy of a great many people must
have been put into that vision and I see you people as the stewards of that vision for the
future of Ithaca for all our children and their children and everyone who is going to be
here years from now. I would urge you as much as you can within your legal definition
of your function here to uphold the intent of our new zoning, which in my understanding
would mean to recommend to the Zoning Board of Appeals that they approve this hotel
at the 30 room level or at 40 or at 42,. but I think that 58 is just asking too much of that
location in terms of scale with the neighborhood. It certainly is the largest thing around
if you look at that map and consider the parking lot and the surrounding area. It is going
to dominate. Also I think the fact that we do have this new hotel coming downtown with
the 47 suites, they all have two rooms, they have a microwave and a refrigerator and
two baths in each one. I don't want to set up too much competition, I understand that
we need more hotel rooms so I am here to ask you to please recommend to the Zoning
Board that they approve this at a smaller level than the current plan. Thank you.
Daniel Tourance, 221 Sand Bank Rd
My land is contiguous with another parcel that I own at 342 West King Road so I'm
pretty closet to the site of this place. I have some serious concerns about traffic. If there
are going to be 57 rooms, I am going to assume there will be at least 57 people there
and they will be traveling into Ithaca everyday to eat or do whatever they are doing.
Pretty much all of the roads leading into Ithaca from there do have problems. You have
Aurora Street, which is pretty close to gridlock at various times of the day. Then you
have Stone Quarry Road, which is extremely narrow, no shoulders, steep. Then you
have West King Road leading to Sand Bank Road, which is pretty much the same
situation. All of those roads have had significant numbers of accidents. I live right at
the hairpin „curve on Sand Bank Road. I can tell you I've seen many cars in there.
Twice in a day at one time. I'm wondering if you are going to approve this hotel are you
20
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
prepared to improve those roads, spends millions of dollars of our tax payers money to
do that. I'm a serious bicycle rider and I already find it pretty scary to be on Sand Bank,
King and Stone Quarry Roads. I am concerned that with a lot of out of town drivers at
the hotel who are unfamiliar with these roads, it is going to be a lot more dangerous
than it is now.
Tony Ingraham, 368 Stone Quarry Rd
I'm approximately 1000 feet from the site. Where do .I start? Mr. Trowbridge says this
is the sixth time he has been back, but it could be the tenth time that you come back if
you come back with something that doesn't fit and keep coming back with something
that fit, at least in my view and the view of many people that live around the site. It
doesn't make any. difference. What has been proposed here, the 58 rooms, is really not
much of a change in terms of the impact on the neighborhood and the community so
that everybody might be getting tired of considering it because they want to keep
coming back with something that is still inappropriate. I don't see that as an excuse to
pass it, to approve it. I think they could do it 50 times, if it was still not appropriate, it
would still not be appropriate.
Yet, you folks are the representatives of the public interest in the Town and of the
neighborhood. I know that you take that role very seriously and I appreciate that, but it
seems to me that in most instances like this, it is the. developer that trumps the public.
The developer has the resources, has the momentum, has people who can work
fulltime on planning a project, can lobby and they don't have any reason to go away if
this is what they want to do. We can look at some of the other things that have
happened in the .County and they keep coming back.. Eventually, they get what they
want and the public has to live with it. Now the folks that are building the hotel, own the
hotel, are going to make money from the hotel directly don't live around the hotel with
one exception. The rest of us will have this hotel in our neighborhood for the rest of the
time that we live in the neighborhood. I want to be there for many more years. I love it
on Stone Quarry Road. It is a lovely area. It's a beautiful residential neighborhood,
modest commercial development there. I look forward to seeing some modest
commercial development that would serve the neighborhood because I think that might
take some '1 of the pressure off some of the roads actually if we had some small
businesses there that would say, oh you don't have to go to Elmira Road to get a loaf of
bread or something like that. That is the kind of development I think would be really
appropriate„ for that corner would be things that serve the neighborhood. This will
certainly take out some of that possibility of having businesses that serve the
neighborhood and what will it do for the neighborhood, virtually nothing. I've got people
that will come to town now and again and I certainly have places I can send them to
stay and so forth, but I don't think I'm going to use that hotel a lot.
So, it's just too big. People have spoken. I have spoken to say to try to reduce it
down. I try to think of all different ways that we could reduce it down. Maybe we could
lop off one whole wing or something and get it down to 40 rooms or something like that.
Make it more box like and it wouldn't have such an impact at least visually on the.road.
I don't think that is what the developer wants to do at all. I think they want to do what
21
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
they want to do. I'm not going to argue with that. It might very well be that this is what
you have to do. If you have to do something this size and perhaps this configuration of
this site for it to work, that may be. I'm not arguing that point. So it seems to me that it
is an up or down. Its 250 long. That's just 50 feet short of a football field. So you put
one end at one goal line, the other is on the 16 -yard line on the other end. The width is
half the width of the football field, the main trunk of the building, plus the extension in
the back and the extension in the front. So it's a substantial structure and way out of
scale with everything else.
The,, Aast week or two weeks ago there was a discussion about the agricultural
district, the agricultural area on the other side of Buttermilk Falls State Park and West
King Road „and discussion of buffering residents and farmers and so forth from the
development pressure as well as things like light and noise and traffic and that sort of
thing from those areas. Someone said, well you have the gorge as a buffer. You have
the park as a buffer. Is the park a buffer ?! The park is not a buffer! The park is what
needs to be buffered. That's one of the reasons we have this neighborhood commercial
zoning around the park. We need to take care of that park. Now I know that Mr. Auble
did sell some land to the State Park and I approve of that. I think that is wonderful, but
this is totally out of character with that spirit. So the park needs protection. The
neighborhood needs protection. We need to...that park is a gem. Its one of the most
beautiful parks in New York State and I know. So lets pay sacred respect to this
resource because once it is done, you can't go back and we live with it in the
neighborhood and everybody that visits that neighborhood lives in it and maybe the
folks in the ;hotel will be happy to have a park nearby, but I'm not so sure that people
that go to the park will not happy to have the hotel nearby. I urge you to turn this thing
down.' They are not going to make it smaller. I am convinced of that.
I have no objection to having this hotel in Tompkins County. Put it where it fits.
Thank you very much.
Chairperson Wilcox — If I remember right, you are a former New York State Parks
employee? I
.
Mr. Ingraham — I worked for 24 years in charge of environmental education for the
Fingerlakes State Parks. I was at Taughannock Falls regional headquarters.
Chairperson Wilcox — Tell me about this particular park and what's threatening it or this
particular piece of the park if you will,, Upper Buttermilk?
Mr. Ingraham — We will talk about the visitor experience. The visitor experience... the
upper Buttermilk, for instance, the upper Buttermilk is a place where a lot of people walk
their dogs. They go for walks on what is called the bear trail, which is one of the
premier wildflower trails in the area and in our parks, bird watching and that sort of
thing. It is` a quite place to walk around Lake Treman. It is a quiet place. The
encroachment of development on all sides of the park is eroding that atmosphere. So
you have to take it in the picture of not just one single isolated thing, but all the different
22
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
things that are going on. For instance, the widening of the Comfort Road Bridge. That's
just one little thing that makes it a little bit noisier down at that end of the park. That was
an issue a few years ago. The building of houses up on the other side of the park on
Yaple Road and that area up there is another issue. The Buttermilk Falls estates
property that Mr. Wiggins owns has been an issue with park encroaching on the park
that hasn't been built yet, but it is an ongoing issue that the regional staff have been
dealing with about negotiating with... possible purchase of the back acres and so forth,
but l don't think anything has happened there. Then in the lower part the widening of
Route 13 and the widening...the building the new bridge over Inlet Creek has greatly
increased the noise in the lower park and has taken some acreage from there. The
building of l,Home Depot and the other development along Route 13. The park is
surrounded 11by increasingly intense development. This is another intense development.
So what are its impacts going to be on the park? More people. Well you can't
say you don't want more people in the park, but there will be more people. There will be
more impacts and so forth. I'm not going to begrudge people going to the park. Lights,
traffic, noise, but a more intangible impact, which I think is probably more important is if
you have what's essentially an urban type development right next to what is a scenic
gem that has an impact upon the entire ambience of the park and the park experience,
but I can't take it out of this whole picture of the park being under assault from all
corners and it is not a surprise. The County is suburbanizing. The City is growing and
so forth. This is an issue that I think Robert Treman appreciated when they gave it to
the State back in 1920. So they wanted to preserve it. In fact, you can go back and find
the newspaper article where they say we envision the suburbanization of Tompkins
County with the automobile so we are buying this land and we are going to donate it to
the people of the State of New York so it will be protected. That's the spirit that park
was created in and I think we ought to continue to protect it as best we can. So I think
that is the spirit of the zoning. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that is part of the
feeling that, went into the neighborhood commercial zoning to have a conservative,
conserving approach to this location.
Once again, I am not opposed to having this hotel in Tompkins County. I think
maybe it's a great idea. I've seen some pretty good people say it's a great idea. Maybe
it will be an economic success. Maybe it will serve part of the market here, but that
doesn't say, this is the place it ought to happen. Finally, there isn't anything that says
that you have to or anybody has to have a hotel there. You don't have to have a hotel
there just because they want to have a hotel there doesn't mean that we have to have a
hotel there, at least one that exceeds the appropriate zoning. If it were within zoning,
we wouldn't be talking about this. Thank you very much.
Christiann Dean, 330 King Rd W
I'm puzzled at why you have the SEQR consideration before you have the public
hearing, but since you do, I have to fit my comments about the SEAR review now
because this is when I'm allowed to speak. I know you received a letter from the chair
of the Town of Ithaca Agriculture Committee. She is not able to be here this evening
and so she asked me to speak both on her behalf and on my behalf. We looked
23
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
together at the points in her letter that she particularly wanted to be discussed here. So
I have a summary of some of those points here that I'll bring up now and I would like to
ask you all some questions if I might about it. But before I do that, I want to respond to
the point that was made earlier that the developer has been back many times and has
made changes that were requested and has incorporated points made by the Planning
Board. That certainly is true. I have like, many of you, been here many times to make
points and the point about agriculture, the whole issue of the impact of this proposed
development on agriculture on West King Road and indeed on the entire Town of Ithaca
has never been incorporated into ... has never been acknowledged or incorporated or
responded to in any meaningful way at all by the developers. So its.. so that needs to
be noted here. Let me just also say before I read this that as I was leaving to come
here tonight...we have a multigenerational farm. I established our farm 25 years ago
before we had children, before I was married and as I left to come here tonight, my
oldest son who is old enough to comprehend what this proposal means said mom did
they Auble build that thing yet? And I said tonight's the meeting. I think they'll probably
vote tonight. And he said mom, and I'm paraphrasing him, but he said mom if they put
that hotel up there I can't farm this place and he's right. Our youngest son is too young
to comprehend that.
So this is my paraphrase together with Debbie Teeter of her letter. She asks you
to carefully consider any large -scale development in proximity to existing farmland and
its potential' impact on agricultural and specifically Country Inn and Suites proposals.
Farming in the Town is dependent upon the existence of a critical mass of agricultural
land. In the western part of the Town there are several medium sized farms that exist in
proximity to each .other as well as farms just over the border in the neighboring towns of
Enfield and Ulysses. In the Southern part of the Town, and that's West King Road, one
landowner owns the vast majority of existing farmland with over 480 acres. on West King
and Sand Bank Roads in Ithaca and another 317 acres next door in Danby. This land is
particularly vulnerable to encroaching development. As development gets closer, the
likelihood that anyone will be able to continue to farm it decreases. The nearby small
farm, that's mine, will not be able to, this is Debbie Teeter speaking, will not be able to
survive if the critical mass of agricultural land that helps the small farm to exist
disappears. Other remaining larger farms in the Town would also be affected and that
is because there needs to be a critical mass of farms in the Town.
So when I hold up my hands right here, I hold up the number of fingers that there
are farms in the Town of Ithaca and if one of those farms disappears, the critical
mass... this ':isn't 100 farms that can afford...we can't afford in the Town to have one
farm disappear and so she said it would be grossly inaccurate for any SEQR to suggest
that projects of the magnitude of the proposed Country Inn and Suites in as close
proximity toil any of the Towns already limited agricultural land, especially West King
Road farmland, would have no significant environmental impact and yet as I understand
it you have ijust voted no significant environmental impact. Is that correct? With Mr.
Conneman being the sole hold out on this?
Chairperson Wilcox— That is correct.
24
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Ms. Dean So I want to ask you to revisit this issue. That that is simply incorrect. I
know you to be people... intelligent people and people of who wish to do . the right thing.
It is simply lincorrect says the Chair of the Town of Ithaca Agriculture Committee and
echo the information that she provides here that it is in her words, "grossly inaccurate"
for you to pass a SEAR that says that there is no significant environmental impact here.
If the Town!!lis serious in its stated desire to preserve remaining farmland, it needs to be
extremely sensitive to decisions it makes that impact agriculture. What is the difference
between East King and West King Roads? Well, I'll read you what she says and then
I'll tell you my own experience. The answer is simple. Farmland became available for
development on the east side of 96B and it's now heavily developed. There is not
reason to expect anything different on West King Road. Lack of public water or sewer
has not deterred development anywhere in the County, including Lansing with its
notorious water problems. Well, when I bought my farm it was right at the time that La
Grand Chase still owned his farm on East King Road. Now it is a development called
Chase Farm, Chase Pond. Nobody is farming up there. It's a farm that has turned into
a development. So I ask you to ask yourself, is that what you want for West King Road
because if this hotel goes in, I've said this before and I will say it again, it sounds the
death mill of agriculture on West King Road.
Board Member Mitrano - Why is that? I still don't understand. What is the formula with
respect there needs to be a critical mass of farming or is it just the momentum that
develops? '' Is there some sort of social scientific formula for what you are calling a
critical mass that is required in order to maintain farming or is it just the momentum that
develops around the circumference of a city? You look at any urban area and you trace
it back historically, you will find farms were probably sitting where is Town Hall is or
many other things are and that isn't to suggest that we just roll over things and keep
going. I'm trying to understand your position of a critical mass necessary to maintain
agriculture farms in a certain area of the Town of Ithaca. What is that formula?
Ms. Dean - Your question is regarding a formula. I will put it in a broader term and
there is an ,established concept and an established concept of development pressure
and what development pressure is the critical feature here.
Board Member Mitrano - So it is the momentum. Its not like if you have nine then you
lose the critical mass. Critical mass usually is a scientific term usually related to very
specific numbers. Once you lose a certain number, you no longer have the atom that
you had. I.
Ms. Dean I will give you an example of critical mass. Most of the farmers in the Town
of Ithaca and in this area used to use Masouric Farms in Newfield to buy their tractors. I
mean we've bought farm equipment for Masouric and as farms are pressed out by
development pressure the farm implement dealers like Masouric can't make it any
more. So there isn't any specific number, but if it becomes too difficult for a farmer
to...if it becomes so much easier for a farmer to sell his or her land for development
than it does to keep farming...it's a hard life farming. The only reason that there are
25
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
farms...well I won't say the only reason, a major reason...let me put it differently. Any
one farm wife of these farms that we can number on my hands here, any one farm wife
gets laid off from Cornell or Ithaca College, that farm goes belly up. That's a critical
feature.
Let me go on here and I will answer further questions you have on that. This is
from Debbie Teeter, this paragraph. The Town's fixed ration agricultural zoning, which
she regards to be an inappropriate farmland protection tool for the Town will not inhibit
development. Sixty houses could be built on the three lots involved, she is talking about
West King Road, leaving lovely, large lots for the estate inclined. A perfect
demonstration that this protection tool that does not work without successful farms and
land owners''able to continue farming. A common misconception is that agriculture is
something you do until you build houses on it. Agriculture is intricately woven into the
quality of life and not because it provides pretty view and open space, but I would say
that is something that people want in the Tow of Ithaca and I'm sure if we were to ask
what Mr. Bonn what his job would be like if there weren't those nice pastoral views up
there surrounding the City of Ithaca. I think ... people would not want to come and visit
Ithaca any more if all of those pastoral views looked like East King Road looks now.
West King Road farms provide a buffer to Buttermilks Falls State Park and Finger. Lakes
Land Trust property. Unfortunately the best agricultural soils are also the best soils for
building house and the farms on West King Road are no exception.
As is common with farmland in its glaciated region, soil types are diverse and
then she goes on and lists them all. I can tell you from the soil types on my own farm
and. the soil types from up the road .9.is the best soils. ..is one of the best soils both for
farming and' for., and makes for easy development too. There was an undercurrent of
conversation at the last meeting here about the soils and so she is clarifying for you
those are the best agricultural soils on West King Rd. Every farm has a mixture of soil
types. So its not 100 %, but there are significant parts that are.
The most common soil related agricultural problems in this region are related to
water. It either runs off to quickly creating erosion problems or flooding land down hill or
it doesn't drain quickly enough resulting in wet areas. She says the slopes on the large
farm on West King Road are very gentle, comparable to farmland in North Lansing.
Debbie says the large farm on West King Road is a gem, both in terms of the quality
soils and acreage. The fact that something like this still exists in the Town of Ithaca is
rather amazing. She concludes ... I urge the Town to ensure that any development as
close to West King Road farmland as the corner of West King Road and 96B reflect the
Town's Comprehensive Plans intention for that area, neighborhood commercial. The
Town should make clear to West King Road farmers that they regard this area, in
particular the large farm there, as critical to maintain farming in the area. If the Town is
genuine in its commitment to maintaining its remaining agricultural lands, it must take
action to limit nearby commercial and residential development and then she goes on a
little further.1
11 So I am here to answer any further questions you might have about that
issue. I am also .here to ask you some questions. I don't know how we have a dialog
here. I don't understand. how you can pass the SEAR review before the public hearing
26
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
at which there is an opportunity to address the environmental issues. I am asking you,
Mr. Conneman voted no on the SEQR review and I appreciate that, I am asking the rest
of the Planning Board how you get to the conclusion after reading the letter that read
and my comments of the last five or six meetings, how you can conclude there is no
significant environmental impact?
Chairperson Wilcox — John, if you want to address the legal question, why don't you do
that.
Attorney Barney — Sure. The State of New York in its wisdom has provided that before
you can hold a public hearing on an application, the SEQR application or the entire
application has to be complete and part of the application, the completeness of the
application, is either a draft environmental impact statement or a negative determination
that there is no significant environmental affect. So the way the SEQR and planning
statutes are set up by the State of New York, you have to reach a conclusion on SEQR
before you hold a formal public hearing on the application itself. Now, we're not
Unsympathetic to the concern that it really kind of cuts the public out of an opportunity to
speak. So I think historically, and I think in this case too, before this board takes a vote
on the SEQR issue, it invites the public to come in and comment on the environmental
aspects in a particular proposal and that was done. It wasn't done tonight. because it
was done at quite a considerable length a meeting that this initially appeared at two or
three weeks ago. So there was an opportunity for the public to express itself with
respect to the environmental aspects at that point in time before the board voted. We
just didn't go back and do it all over again tonight because it gets a little bit repetitive in
a sense to keep going around and around on it. So I think I have to kind of contradict
you slightly "and say the public did have an opportunity to talk about the SEQR aspects
of this before this vote was taken. It was done at the prior meeting.
Chairperson Wilcox — The only thing that I will add is the question before us with regard
to environmental review is significant environmental impact. It is an interesting phrase
because significant to one person maybe insignificant to another person and the
example that I use is an automobile racetrack. If you put an automobile racetrack in the
middle of cornfield in the middle of a very rural town, the residents there may consider
that it has ,very little impact and may determine that it does not have a significant
environmental impact, but you put that same facility within ten miles of here or certainly
five miles from here and I for one would probably think it has a significant environmental
impact. So certainly location has something to do with it and we are all individuals and
we all have to make that determination individually. Certainly George Conneman
tonight and Eva Hoffmann at the last meeting raised some issues with regard to the
environmental concern and thought that there was the potential for significant
environmental impact, but for right now the majority of us have felt that, contrary to what
you believe, that there is an environmental impact, but it is not significant.
Ms. Dean — Thank you for your clarification and I want to make one other short point
about the environmental impact. I begin with a question of clarification. Did I
understand that at the last meeting when Mr. Auble's team spoke to the ... did I
27
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
understand at the last meeting that the traffic study that was done addressed only 96B
and not West King Road?
Chairperson iWilcox You are asking us to remember....
Ms. Dean - My recollection was that over the several meetings there was discussion of
traffic impacts both on 96B and on West King Road, but that the final determination
addressed only 96B. Is that correct?
Chairperson Wilcox - I'm sitting here looking at the traffic study right now and I'm
looking at the various figures provided, which have left hand turn volumes from the site
and it shows; the traffic counts both onto East King Road and West King Road and onto
Route 96B.
Mr. Kanter -That basically shows I believe in the peak hour one left turn out of the site
exit onto West King Road, which is very insignificant.
Chairperson Wilcox - One in the am and two in the pm if I read it properly. So that was
part of the materials provided. q .
Ms. Dean -,So that's hard to believe. It's hard to believe that there will be two cars
going up West King Road. That's difficult to believe. So it undercuts the credibility of
the entire traffic study.
Board Member Thayer - There is a "No Left Turn" sign there, right? Coming out of the
proposed 11 hotel?
Mr. Kanter I think the more recent plans showed that there would be a no left turn
sign, actually. That's a good point. So that study was done without the establishment
of that sign. ;;That would be a normal distribution that you would get. That's an excellent
point.
Board Member Mitrano - So if someone wanted to go to Home Depot from this point,
they would have to go out onto 966 and take a left hand turn?
Chairperson Wilcox - And they would have to take a left...
Mr. Kanter -According to the sign. I mean how much a sign will actually stop people
from doing that I don't know.
Chairperson Wilcox - The intent is to try to prevent them from going out directly from
the property 'onto West King Road.
Ms. Dean. The traffic study...
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
j
Board Member Mitrano — Why was that? I'm mean if they are going to go down West
King Road.
Mr. Kanter:. They would go only a short distance on West King Road, probably to
Stone Quarry Road if they were going to try to cut down through to the southwest area.
Mr. Smith — Part of the reason for the no left turn was also the site distance from
intersection land the light. The way the slope comes down it is hard to see traffic coming
down the slope over there to make a left hand turn across the traffic.
Ms. Dean 7 There are two junctures at which there are traffic. One is during the
building phase and one is when something is actually built. I can tell you that even the
day that the; road and I don't know if you realize that a road has already been bulldozed
back into this site several weeks ago now. The day that that happened, it was noisy
and that's a drop in the bucket for the kind of noise that there is going to be. I've been
working skillfully and I appreciate the skillful response from the Town's road man, who
has been working with me to. ..he calls up the trucking companies and says don't go up
West King Road because its too much noise there. You know he can't hold this level of
traffic at bay. So the construction noise of those trucks hauling gravel. Those trucks
hauling all the construction materials are a very significant noise and traffic factor and
you are sensible people. You can certainly see that that's going to be much more
significant traffic impact than Mr. Auble's team says with one car in the morning and one
car in the evening.
Chairperson Wilcox — Can I ask you to...
Ms. Dean — ',Thank you very much and good evening.
Chairperson Wilcox - Thank you, Christiann. Anybody else?
Charles Light, Ithaca
I was born ;and raised in Ithaca. I first spent time on a local stage with Wally Wiggins
when I wasl'ieight years old. My father lived and died at Ithaca College. My mother is a
1942 graduate and still trods the boards in Ithaca. I came tonight to watch mostly. I've
known Dave Auble since he was a great wrestler and I've known many of the families
that live in Ithis area. I would like to speak not so much in favor of this particular
development, , but more about how the Town of Ithaca responds to stresses upon it
because the stresses are inevitable. Cornell is bigger by 100% or 150% since I was a
boy. Ithaca College, downtown never had more than 1500 students and today Ithaca
College, the campus, which was designed for 3000 maximum when it was designed and
built by Tallman and Tallman between 1960 and 1970 now holds 6000 plus students
and owns or is in the process of acquiring those circular apartments that form a part of
that corner.
Farming is important, but my understanding of what is happening here doesn't
have anything to do with agriculture. Size is important, but my understanding of what is
29
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
happening here, I don't believe you would be here today considering a 58 -unit hotel if it
had not already been determined that you had to. That for some reason under the laws
this hotel is proper for this property as zoned previously or currently. Otherwise, you
wouldn't be here. You would have said you are not within the zoning. My
understanding, if I'm correct, is that this facility takes up 17% of the site. Permissible is,
as I understand it, 30 %. So what you have is a problem of pressure and demand that is
going to have to be released somewhere and some how. Housing is increasing on
South Hill because there really is nowhere else for it to go. The demand for hotel space
is astonishing. For the...like the homing football game that happened Ithaca College
earlier this fall, which was homecoming weekend. An alumnus came up for the football
game and got a room at the new hotel the Hampton Inn and he said it was $160 and I
said for the' weekend and he said no, it was a $160 a night for a hotel room in Ithaca,
down on Elmira Road. So you can't tell me that there just isn't huge pressure for more
rooms in this county and in this town.
Now, Dave Auble wants to be a lot like Wally Wiggins is. Dave Auble has a piece
of property that Lis zoned for a hotel that is permissible to have a hotel. Dave Auble
wants to be a responsible developer. Dave Auble wants, if I understand this correctly
and you have to forgive me, its been a long time since I've been back to Ithaca, but my
understanding is that the benefit, the actual monetary benefit to the Town of Ithaca from
this development as currently designed, 58 rooms, will be approximately $190,000
every year in increased tax revenues over its current base. Even if it was only $50,000
a year completed over its current tax revenues. I don't believe there is one member of
this board or one employee of this Town who can say that that revenue is unnecessary.
Does Ithaca College need more space for its visiting professors? Does it need hotel
rooms close to the campus for orchestras or concerts that people who come to perform
at Ithaca College to enrich the student body at Ithaca College? Certainly it does.
believe that there is a letter before you from Grant Stewart, which addresses that as
well as from George Prenti, I believe another letter. Both of which address the need if
Ithaca College is to continue to become one of the finest general colleges in the
northeast. Its going to need facilities nearby its campus so that the people who come to
Ithaca College to help train those young people don't have to get rooms down on Elmira
Road or over in the Pyramid Mall area in Lansing and drive all the way over. I believe
that what this development will do is it will simply provide a greater opportunity for
Ithaca College to utilize its facilities for the benefit of the community.
I'm not. ..l grew up. ..l went swimming for the first time at Enfield when I was 3'/2
years old. My father used to take me to Buttermilk Falls all the time. I'm familiar with
the park. I ithink the park is vital to this community, but my understanding is that that
park is a couple of miles down the road to the entrance and contrary to the views of
some people I can envision people coming to use this hotel with SUVs or more
environmentally friendly vehicles with bicycles strapped on the top and leave their car in
if
the parking 'place and take their bicycles and go ride down into the park..) can envision
hikers coming into the area, staying there because its at the north end of the park or
actually at the east end of the park and using that as a walk off point to go and enjoy
some of thell pastoral scenery of Ithaca. I see this as a win -win. I don't see a downside
30
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
with the exception to the people who live in the immediate vicinity of the development
and I see ajj benefit to all of the people of the Town of Ithaca. I think it will reduce traffic
coming through Town because at least 58 people coming to visit Ithaca College will be
able to stays away from Town and won't have to come up in the morning and go down at
night. So what I would ask you to do is to recognize is that when these kinds of
pressures develop, you have to respond to them in some way that takes some of the
pressure off even if it has...even if people who live in the immediate vicinity of it find it
offensive to them.: You represent the Town of Ithaca. I believe that this project will
benefit the !,,I Town of Ithaca and I would hope that you would welcome Mr. Auble's
developme i t with the same enthusiasm and enjoy with which you anticipate the
expansion of La Tourelle and the spa because Ithaca needs hotel rooms and not
everyone can afford Mr. Wiggins hotel or the restaurant there.
So I ;want to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. I understand the
significant concerns that the local residents have, but I hope that I have been able to
express what I believe has to be done here in terms of the pressure on Tompkins
County andl on the Town of Ithaca for rooms. I don't think as long as we are here and
as long as it has been determined that Mr: Auble's project fits within the perimeters of
the zoning ,11 as it exists today or as it existed when this project began, if it was
grandfathered. If it fits within the zoning, I just think it would be punishment to tell him
that you don't like his, but Wally's is okay. I'm sure Wally wouldn't mind if I said that.
I
Board Member Conneman = Wally's is on 20 acres or 70 acres or something like that.
Mr. Light — Wally's is off the road.
Board Member Mitrano — Completely different application.
Mr. Light - And this one unfortunately is at the corner of King Road and Route 96 and
that's a heavily area.
Board Member Mitrano — It also does not require a variance.
Board Member Talty — This is not a true apples to apples scenario.
Board Member Conneman - He has to get a variance...
Chairperson" Wilcox— Stop. One at a time.
Board Member Conneman — The zoning law says 30,000 square feet, which would be a
small sort of village °type facility there. Unless the Board of Zoning Appeals gives them
an exception, he can't build as 58. Okay? That's what zoning says.
Mr. Light — I'm sorry. Then I misunderstood.
Board Member Conneman - Do you live in Ithaca?
31
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Light - I live in the Town of Ithaca now, yes.
Chairperson, Wilcox - All right. My understanding is that the proposal meets the zoning
as laid out as before it was rezoned. The reason this needs to go to the Board of
Zoning Appeals is not for a zoning variance, but for special approval. Which is if you
will a second review of this because of its potential impacts on the neighborhood, but it
is consistent! with the zoning in place before April 1 st of this year.
Mr. Light - I' don't want to misstate the facts and I don't want to misunderstand myself.
It is my understanding that this project is designed under the old zoning rules before
April 1St and that's permissible.
Attorney Barney - With special approval. It's not permissible automatically.
Mr. Light - My understanding as far as the Planning Board is concerned at this step, the
Planning Board has to decide within the zoning as it existed prior to April 1St that this
project is with in those prior April 1 st 2004 perimeters.
Attorney Barney - This board has the function of approving a site plan and also making
a recommendation to the Board of Zoning Appeals with respect to the granting of a
special approval. They have a whole series of criteria, which include such things as
what is the impact on traffic, what is the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. I just
want to make clear that it is not automatic.
Mr. Light . Then I guess what I would ask the board is to approve the site plan because
if another level is necessary and the question is whether the site plan fits within the
zoning that it must fit within and that it meets the other statutory and environmental
planning criteria then this body can move this process along by approving the site plan
and allowing the next step to take place. And I think that that would be a wonderful idea
especially since my understanding is that the developer, Mr. Auble, has worked very,
very hard to satisfy:. many, many of the concern, which you have expressed. And
would simply ask in closing that you adopt this site plan, act to permit Mr. Auble to go
the next step and seek the special approval, which he needs from the Board of Zoning
Appeals because at a certain point, you may be taking from Mr. Auble and I would
rather see that this process go forward. I think it will be a great benefit to the County
and I think that all you need to do is ask the City of Ithaca. I don't know how long it took
them to get this development approved down here in the southwest part of the city and
there will bel�people that will tell you till the day they die that they hate it.
Chairperson) Wilcox -Can I ask you to finish? I think you are getting a little off.
Mr. Light - But nobody doubts the benefit as far as revenues are concerned and I think
this will provide benefit to the Town by the way of revenues. I know it will provide
benefits to Ithaca College and I hope it will take some of the pressure off the need for
hotel rooms! in Tompkins County because I think it is important that we provide those
32
rooms to the public that needs them. So
and I would ask that you approve the site
step. Thank you very much.
Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody else?
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
I want to thank you very much for your time
plan and pass this matter along to the next
i
Chairperson Wilcox closed the public hearing at 9:00 p.m. and brought the matter back
to the board.
Chairperson Wilcox — Peter, do wish to make any statements with regard to what you
heard or not? I only have a couple of comments based on what I heard. The one
interesting thing in terms of traffic, hotels are actually surprisingly, small amounts of
traffic that are generated according to the reference manual, specifically to the traffic
manual. If you think about it, it makes some sense. The employees might show up in
the morning and leave for lunch and come back after lunch and then leave. But the
residents tend to show up, you know, drive away in the morning and drive back at night
and unlike retail establishments whether its fast -food with or without a drive -in or a dry
cleaning establishment or a food store, you don't have those numerous short trips. The
other thing is that many of the trips are not during the peak hours in the morning and. in
the evenings when people are commuting to work, which also helps mitigate the impact
of traffic. I think I have said it before and I'll say it. again. I don't think I have ever
considered the potential of increased tax revenues when I've made a land use decision.
I think that is one of the reasons that Planning Boards exist is that we don't have to take
that into account.
Board Member Mitrano — Let someone else, deal with that matter. This is virtually
irrelevant as part of the consideration.
Chairperson Wilcox — To Tony Ingraham, I apologize. I was the one that says the park
acts as a buffer and he is absolutely right. The parks need to be buffered and I stand
corrected. I said that and I apologize. You are correct. He could have pointed me out
by name, but he didn't. As I expressed at the last meeting, I am somewhat troubled by
the size. I wish it were smaller. I think it would be a slam -dunk if it came in at 45 or
maybe 48 rooms or 50. Who knows? But it is down from 67 and I wish he had come
down farther, but...
Board Member Thayer — Where do you draw the line?
Chairperson Wilcox — I know. I'm kind of that wishy -washy in favor of it and I admit
it...that's where I was when we took the straw vote two weeks ago and I'm still there
and its La Tourelle. It's totally different from La Tourelle, La Tourelle has huge acres.
Its set back off the road. It is a big building. Lets not deny that, but its setback off the
road is ... makes it quite a different issue in front of this board.
33
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Board Member Mitrano - Wally is an attorney. He is part of a community that we know.
The kind of jest has nothing to do with approval or not approval of this project. It's just
sort of a community....
Chairperson Wilcox- That's all I have to say. And the process, just so we're clear, if
this board should grant preliminary subdivision and site plan and make the
recommendation then the applicant goes to the Zoning Board of Appeals with the hope
of getting the special approval and should they obtain it and there. will be a public
hearing as part of that, then they will come back to this board for final approvals, which
would also entail another public hearing as well. So that is the process. When they get
back here, I can't predict. Questions? Comments?
Board Member Howe - Fred, I still have concerns about the number of rooms as well.
Is it whatever message we send to the Zoning Board is it within our purview to suggest
that ... we argue with that issue of rooms because it is still an issue for me as well.
Chairperson Wilcox - I think George Conneman and Eva made the similar statements
that character of the neighborhood was their and that concern came about because of
the size of the building and whether that building size was consistent with. other
commercial structures in the neighborhood. I don't mean to speak for George and Eva,
but they thought there were significant environmental. impacts resulting from the size of
the building.
Board Member Mitrano - Just a point of clarification. Isn't the character of the
neighborhood part of the criteria of the general site plan? I didn't think it was part of the
criteria of the environmental impact.
Attorney Barney - Both. Its part of the SEQR and its part of site plan.
Mr. Kanter - In particular, its part of the special approval recommendation that you need
to make under the first resolved 1b, you need to basically make the finding that the
existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be adversely
affected as a result of the proposed project and what you have before you is a proposed
58 room hotel.
Chairperson Wilcox - So that is part of our recommendation to the Board of Zoning
Appeals,
Board Member Mitrano = Well I share those concerns, too, on that criteria in particular.
I guess I wasn't remembering my law well enough or my charge here. I thought it was
just part of the site plan. So when it came to environmental, I wasn't focusing on that
issue. I certainly think it is a concern on the site plan issue and again, it's not the
absolute nature of the proposal as a hotel. I recognize some of the things, Fred, that
you said. I can imagine many, many worse kinds of proposals to come into that
location. So it is not the concept of a hotel, but it still is the size of the hotel and the
number of rooms.
0
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Chairperson Wilcox - Let me just repeat what Mr. Kanter said. I think it is the one issue
we are really struggling with for those of us that. don't have definite opinions one way or
the other. As part of making our recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding their special approval, one voting in favor of granting preliminary site plan
approval, subdivision and recommendation, then included as part of that is the
determination that there is a need for the proposed used in the proposed location as
demonstrated by the applicant. The existing and probable future character of the
neighborhood will not be adversely affected as a result of the proposed project. The
third one is the specific proposed change in land use as a result of the proposed project
is in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan development in the Town of Ithaca. In
voting for this, if you should vote in favor of this, one would presume that one agrees
with those three statements. If one disagrees with those. statements or one of the three
or possibly some other aspect of the site plan or subdivision, then one needs to vote
accordingly.
Board Member Thayer - The future character of the neighborhood, this could be a strip
mall. It could be anyone of several different types of commercial establishments, which
I think in my mind, would definitely be not as appealing as this particular structure. If it
were to generate more traffic, generate more noise, deteriorate the neighborhood more
than this particular structure would do and I just don't .think it is out of character at all for
that particular corner. I think it is...like I mentioned at the last meeting, they've come
back. They've lowered it into the ground. They have reduced the size height wise.
They've done what I set as everything that we have asked and I think it is a very
attractive building as one of the neighbors mentioned in one of his letters. He said he
would rather look at that building than a gas station or another Big AI's or whatever.
Board Member Conneman - No. What he said, Larry, was that he did not want to look
at sort of a cheap strip mall. If you...
Board Member Thayer - Exactly. That's what I meant.
Board Member Conneman - You are assuming that this Planning Board would allow
that kind of a facility to be built and I argue that they would not allow that, we would not
allow that.
Board Member Thayer - There is going to be some commercial establishment there.
Board Member Conneman - That is correct, but that could be a very nice commercial
establishment if it's done correctly.
Board Member Thayer - It could generate more traffic, which could generate more
noise, which might not be as nice looking.
Board Member Connemara - But you would not have people going downtown. You
would have a community.
35
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Board Member Thayer — It depends on what it is, George.
Chairperson Wilcox — One at a time. You have the floor, George.
Board Member Conneman — What I want to say is...l don't want to sound like a pol...l
take two thinks seriously. One is the job of this Planning Board and the second thing is
I take neighborhoods and communities very seriously. I feel strongly about them. I
don't want to sound like a politician, but if I were to make a statement and some of you
may agree or disagree with the politician who makes this statement. This is the wrong
place, the wrong size for the wrong reason. That is what I would say.
Board Member Thayer — Did you win or lose?
Board Member Conneman — It doesn't even make any difference. I don't even know if
he is right according to some of you but that is another thing. The other thing is that I do
agree with Christiann or whoever said it that developers tend to get their way. There is
an old statement that says what developers do they cut down all the trees and then they
name the streets Elm, Oak, Maple and everything else and that's true. But. more
importantly, I think this will have an impact on the neighborhood and I'm concerned
about the neighborhood. I'm concerned about the park. I think neighborhood
commercial means something other to me than a big hotel. If this was a little country
inn or something, which could have the same impact that they talk about, I think it would
be kind of nice. You want to go to Westchester County and other places where you see
that kind of a development and I think that is what we ought to go for. I voted for Holly
Creek development because then there would be this buffer in front of it from all the
neighbors and you all know about that. I think we have to stick by the zoning as best
that we can. I would say to my colleagues that we have had other issues on this board
where you have all voted with the neighbors, in this case, I plan to vote with the
neighbors and say no because I think it is not the right thing to do.
think it would also encourage sprawl to some extent. This proposed hotel is
9/10 of a mile from the Danby line and you just know what is going to happen down that
way and I think that anything we do would be better to do that. I think that Mr. Light
makes a lot of assumptions in what he said. The other thing is that I understand that
the, before someone else said it, that in fact the Hilton was going to have a number of
suites. Incidentally, $169 for a room, I assume that this hotel might also charge $169 on
the right weekend, but no one has talked about Court Yard by Marriott. I took it upon
myself to call up Mr... I believe his name Carvello, Jim Carvello and say to him you are
up there by Cornell and Cornell has all these visitors and people stay for three to five or
two weeks, do you have suites. He said we have suites, we have eights suites and our
suites are really great. And I said what do you mean by that and he said we have
French doors, and we have a separate living room and all that kind of stuff. According
to what we heard last time, Peter, the only difference between a regular room and a
suite room in the Country Inns and Suites is it is 26 feet wide and its 300 -some square
feet and that's the only difference. So I'm saying that there is...there are some other
36
places or will be some other places
only charge per day more for the r,
nights. You can't rent the place for
neighborhood and I object to that.
that the Board of Zoning Appeals
consider all the other issues.
and
nom,
one
I hor
will
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
in this town when you have a big event they not
they lots of times ask you to take two or three
night. I just think it would be a bad thing for the
ie that the ... if my colleagues vote the other way
at least read the minutes to this meeting and
Board Member Mitrano - Would you feel more amenable, George, if it had 20% fewer
rooms?
Board Member Conneman - I would not.
Board Member Mitrano - And can you explain to me. how and in what ways it will
deleteriously affect the neighborhood in such a way that is causing you to vote
accordingly even if it were reduced in size. So the whole damn thing is out as far as
you are concerned on that point?
Board Member Conneman - I think it changes the character of the neighborhood
entirely.
Board Member Mitrano - In what ways?
Board Member Conneman - Because what you have is a big hotel there as opposed to
a small community center and that is a heck of a lot of difference in how the neighbors
look at things and how people look at things.
Chairperson Wilcox - Let me remind members of the board that reasonable people can
disagree.
Board Member Mitrano - I'm just trying to understand.
Board Member Conneman - I'm not saying to Tracy you have to vote my way.
Board Member Mitrano - I just don't see entirely a big...(not audible)... neighborhood.
So I'm trying to understand better what. ..because I'm sitting on the fence. I'm not trying
to argue. I'm trying to figure out how the hell I'm gonna vote.
Chairperson Wilcox - Please continue. There's. no reason to stop this.
Board Member Mitrano - That's why I'm asking.
Board Member Thayer - The Sam Peter building is pretty good size. It's not a pretty
building at all.
Chairperson Wilcox - I just want to make sure...
37
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Board Member Conneman - I was not on the Planning Board when Sam Peters...
Board Member Thayer - Well, it exists, George. It is there and it is unattractive.
Board Member Conneman - But don't lets build another one.
Board Member Thayer- We're not. We are building a very attractive building, I think.
Big AI's is there. We had quite a discussion over Big AI's. I.
Board Member Conneman - I was not on the Planning Board when you approved Big
AI's because I would have never approved Big AI's. I would have voted against that too.
Board Member Thayer - Its there. Its got lights and its got noise and this isn't going to
produce that.
Board Member Conneman - I just believe in neighborhoods and communities and you
just don't want to go the next step.
Board Member Thayer - I totally agree with you. There was a letter about the Vass
farm. I would never approve this on the Vass farm. Its 50 acres or 100 acres, you
could set it back and you wouldn't see it, but I wouldn't approve it on the Vass farm.
Board Member Conneman - I wouldn't either. I agree with you.
Board Member Thayer - This is the proper place for it, up on a main road.
Board Member Conneman - I think the proper place for it is in the City of Ithaca
someplace.
Board Member Thayer - Downtown? Give me a break. No way.
Chairperson Wilcox - Again, disagree politely.
Board Member Mitrano - I'm curious. I'm turning to my other board members to help
me figure out what is going on. What do you guys think?
Board Member Howe - This is a question for Peter. Was there consideration to reduce
it any more from 58 and why.. because you heard us last time this issue came up. So
when I opened the packet I was thinking of course they're going to reduce it. So can
you tell us the thinking if any about the 58 was just you couldn't go below or whatever
the thinking was behind that.
Mr. Trowbridge - There are a number of issues and I know people don't want to talk
about economics, but there are economic issues of land values, site improvements and
there was a conversation with the developer who was here last time. He has been in
the hotel business here in the community for almost 30 years and understands what it
38
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
takes to run a hotel and we did crunch the numbers over and over again. Fifty -eight is
not an arbitrary number. There are some architectural issues that when you start to
build a two -story building and you have bays, they tend to come in pairs because it's
two - story. So there is a way that you get to a number that is both financial and
architectural. We began to look at what happens if you take all the constant costs of
building a building and they are fairly constant, I'm mean the roof and the sidewalls, you
can reduce it by a little bit, but there are still amenities like swimming pool and all the
things that people look at and what Jay began to see and we sat down and he has been
talking to banks about this that the rental cost per room starts to exponentially rise as
you have fixed costs and fewer rooms so he started to price himself out of the
marketplace. You know longer had the kind of family sort of oriented affordable project
that he started with. And so its not as if it is an absolute number 58, couldn't it be 56,
but it can't be 42. It couldn't be 50. We did sit down for a long time after we came to
the board with a much larger number, almost 70 rooms, and said to what point is a hotel
not even economically viable given this location. I mean if land were free, sewer and
water were free. I think all of you know in the last year or so with new DEC regs and the
stormwater quality, extenuation issues are more expensive and just getting it through
the planning process is expensive. The cost of the team is not relevant in the big
scheme of things, but that number was not arbitrary and it came about by looking at
really sharpening a pencil and looking at all the other costs of site improvements at what
point did you get a product that people weren't willing because the cost of the room
would go up to such a point that the product wasn't feasible necessarily within this
marketplace and that's how it came about.
Attorney Barney - What is the approximate cost of building this particular structure?
Mr. Trowbridge — I have to go back and look at that, John. Off the top of my head I can't
tell you exactly what that...
Attorney Barney — Well, just ballpark it.
Mr. Trowbridge — I think Jagat could talk about square foot costs. He is certainly much
more familiar with the square foot building cost than I am, but the site costs are high
relative to often times normal site development costs, but I will let Jagat talk about
building costs.
Jagat Sharma, Architect
The cost of building a two -story hotel would be in the range of $125 per square foot.
Attorney Barney — And the total square footage is?
Mr. Sharma — I don't know off hand
Attorney Barney -1'm sorry,. who designed it.
Chairperson Wilcox — If I had said that you would have chastised me.
39
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Attorney Barney — I probably would have. I'm sorry ... must be the election is getting to
me.
Mr. Sharma — It is on one of the. drawings.
Board Member Talty — I find it a little disconcerting that you guys don't know the square
footage of the building. What is the square footage of, you house? I know what mine is,
2444. Like that. You don't know what the square footage of the building is?
Attorney Barney — Jagat is designing a lot of buildings.
Mr. Trowbridge — Its almost 40,000.
Chairperson Wilcox — So where are we going? 40,000 square feet at $125 per foot?
Attorney Barney — Are you talking $5 million for the building?
Mr. Sharma — Plus site work.
Board Member Howe — John, where were going with that question?
Attorney Barney — I was just trying to get a sense of the economics of it because if you
have a 58 room hotel for $5 million you can kind of back into what you have to get for a
room rate to cover the financing costs of it and make a profit.
Board Member Talty — Well, I'm going to make some assumptions, .but the initial
investigation that I made going around is there are plenty of nights that occupancy rates
in the Ithaca area are below 30 %. Then there are plenty of nights that are 100% and
that's what dictates, getting back George and what he said, is that often hotels will make
you stay two or three nights to maximize the weekend event that is going to be there.
So it seems to me like right now in order to make this project profitable, which is what it
all gets back to whether we mention it or not, is that once you deem your fixed and
variable costs, the variable costs is how many people you are going to be able to get in
the 365 nights a year and getting back to the other gentleman's point when he brought
in the book with all the 40 rooms and 50 rooms across -the United States, the problem is
New York State with all the taxes versus Alabama and the actual per square footage
rate to build is a lot cheaper in the southern United States than it is in the northern
United States. So there is a lot of factors that go into construction, both pre - build,
current -build and post -build when you are trying to attract a market.
Chairperson Wilcox — Rod, I'm not sure. Did you have follow up questions for John
Barney or are you all set?
Board Member Howe — I'm set.
e
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Chairperson Wilcox — There's conversation going on back here between Tracy and...
Board Member Mitrano — I'm not telling you because you will yell at us for talking.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not sure. I don't know. This is not a clear -cut one. I agree.
Board Member Mitrano - By the way, I feel good about every decision I have ever made
on this board.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm impressed.
Board Member Mitrano — One of the comments was something about previous
decisions and I just want to be on record that I have no regrets and so I am certainly not
going to be persuaded to vote one way or another on this application based on...
Board Member Conneman — Fred, I think this board has always considered every
proposal independent of everything else.
Chairperson Wilcox — Yes. I just wanted to make sure that our conversations are civil
and... All right. Anything else you want to say to, Peter?
Mr. Trowbridge — Not
Chairperson Wilcox Staff? Welcome Chris. I'm sorry. I didn't see you when you
walked in.
Ms. Balestra — That's okay.
Chairperson Wilcox — Further discussion? Questions? Would someone like to move
the motion as drafted?
Board Member Talty — I'll move it.
Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by Kevin Talty
changes to the wording?
Attorney Barney — I had none.
Seconded by Larry Thayer. Any
Chairperson Wilcox = All set? All those in favor please raise your hand (Chairperson
Wilcox, Board Member Mitrano, Board Member Thayer, Board Member Howe, Board
Member Talty raised their hand). All those opposed? George Conneman. There are
no abstentions. The motion is passed. Thank you all very much..
PB RESOLUTION NO.
2004-111:
Preliminary
Site Plan Approval,
Preliminary
Subdivision Approval,
and a
Recommendation
to the Zoning
Board
of Appeals
41
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Regarding
Special Approval,
Country
Inn
& Suites Hotel,
Danby Road & West
King
Road
Intersection,
Town
of Ithaca
Tax
Parcel No. 37 =1 -17.1
MOTION made by Kevin Tally, seconded by Larry Thayer.
WHEREAS,
1. This project involves consideration of Preliminary Subdivision and Preliminary
Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals
regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel located
at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B),
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C: The proposal
involves subdividing off a +/- 2.74 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre parcel for
the construction of a 58 -room hotel at the intersection.. The proposal also
includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David
Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J.
Trowbridge, Agent, and
2. 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,
Subdivision Approval, and Special Approval, has, on November 2, 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 11 prepared by Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on October 19, 2004, has reviewed
and accepted as adequate, a packet of drawings and details titled "Country Inn
and Suites Hotel' (Preliminary Site Plan Review), dated September 17, 2004,
prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Jagat P. Sharma, Architect, T.G. Miller
P.C., A.D Dixon and Company, and SRFAssociates, and other material, and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Planning Board, in making its recommendation regarding Special
Approval to the Zoning Board of Appeals, determines the following:
a. there is a need for the proposed use in the proposed location, as
demonstrated by the applicant;
bm the existing and probable future character of the neighborhood will not be
adversely affected as a result. of the proposed project;
c. the specific proposed change in land use as a result of the proposed project
is in accordance with a comprehensive plan of development for the Town of
Ithaca.
42
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
2. That the Planning Board reports to the Zoning Board of Appeals its
recommendation that the aforementioned request for Special Approval be
approved.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary Subdivision Approval, as shown, on the Preliminary Subdivision
Checklist, having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will
result in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the
policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, totaling +/= 4.82 acres along
Danby Road, into two parcels of +/- 2.74 acres and +/- 2.08 acres, as shown on
the drawing entitled "Country Inn & Suites — Schematic Layout Plan," dated
09117104, prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, conditioned upon the following:
a. submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an
original or mylar copy of the final subdivision plat, and three dark -lined
prints, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and
submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning
Department;
bm submission of an easement and maintenance agreement for the shared
driveway from Danby Road (NYS Route 96B) for review and approval of
the Attorney for the Town, prior to the issuance of a building permit;
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for
Preliminary Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary Site Plan Checklist,
having determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in
neither a significant alteration of the purpose of site plan control nor the policies
enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the
proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel as shown on the plans included in the
packet titled "Country Inn and Suites Hotel" (Preliminary Site Plan Review),
dated September 17, 2004, prepared by Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP, Jagat P.
Sharma, Architect, T.G. Miller P.C., A.D Dixon and Company, and SRF
Associates, and other material, conditioned upon the following:
a. granting of Special Approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals, prior to Final
Site Plan Approval;
43
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
be 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 the driveway approval from NYSDOT;
cm revision of plans to include the name and seal of the registered land
surveyor or engineer who prepared the topographic and boundary survey,
and the date of the survey, prior to the issuance of a building permit;
d. submission of details (size, colors, lighting) of all proposed signs, prior to
Final Site Plan Approval;
e. completion of the approved stormwater drainage system (swales,
detention ponds, etc.) on the adjacent Holly Creek site, prior to any site
work or the issuance of any building permit for the Country Inn & Suites
Hotel;
f. construction of the two sidewalks which will connect to the Holly Creek
trail and to the Neighborhood Retail Development site shall be constructed
when those developments occur, and. that the Director of Planning is
granted the authority to permit minor modifications of the location of these
sidewalks to correspond with the adjacent developments;
gm submission of details of all building materials and colors, prior to Final Site
Plan Approval;
he revision of "Schematic Planting Plan" (L103) to include additional low
plantings (shrubs, perennials, etc.) between the front parking lot and
Danby Road, prior to Final Site Plan Approval;
i. submission of construction / engineering details of all improvements, prior
to Final Site Plan Approval;
jt revision of plans to move the access drive to West King Road west to the
extent possible, prior to Final Site Plan Approval.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: Conneman.
The motion was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: Consideration of a Sketch Plan review for the proposed 7 -lot
subdivision located on the northeast corner of Troy Road and East King Road,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49 =1 -26.2 (portion of), Low Density Residential
..
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Zone. The proposal includes subdividing the +/- 6.4 -acre parcel into 7 lots for
residential construction. Heritage Park Townhouses, Inc., Owner /Applicants
George R. Frantz; AICP, Agent
Chairperson Wilcox opened this segment of the meeting at 9:30 p.m.
George Frantz, 604 Cliff Street
Just briefly, we did provide you with an information packet. We have the 6.4 -acre lot at
the corner of East King Rd and Troy Rd. We would like to subdivide Jit into a total of
seven lots. The smallest of which is just over 34,000 square feet. The largest of which
is slightly more than 58,000 square feet. The lots.. five of the lots, lots 1, 20 41 6 and 7
comply with the minimum lots requirements for the low- density residential zoning
district. Lot 3 and lot 5 comply in terms of area and actually have the minimum required
lot width and lot depth, however, they were proposing approximately 25 feet of road
frontage for the lots. They would be flag lots.
The site has a number of environmental constraints that we've recognized. One
is the mature vegetation on the site. There are actually some very large trees on the
site, oaks, pine and hemlock actually. A lot of the very large trees happen to be located
in an area across lot two and between lot 5 and lot 4 and then along the stream that
runs through lot 6 and lot 7 and these actually happen to be the steeper areas of the
parcel where they couldn't really farm it and so the trees were allowed to grow up and
mature. They are trees that are indicative of being trees that grew up in open
meadows. They have the very broad canopies, arching limb pattern and the like. There
are some wet areas here at the back of lot 1 and also on the northwest portion of lot 3
that we took into consideration when we were drawing the lot lines. There is a stream
here starting out of a culvert on East King Road and cutting across the southeast corner
of lot 6 and then across the northern third or so of lot 7 before exiting to the east. There
is also a small, actually a drainage way that starts at the opposite end of Whitetail Drive
and then flows in a northeasterly direction across lot 1 and into the wet area in the
northeast corner of lot 1.
So our plan is, again, the low density residential zoning district allows single and
two family homes and we plan to either sell the lots to builders or possibly Heritage will
construct houses and sell them. I guess that's what we are proposing at this point and
we are really hereto get your feedback on the plat and whether or not this is something
that the Planning Board would be comfortable with us pursuing.
Chairperson Wilcox — Who wants to go first? I'll go first. Why not? George, even
before I read staff comments, which I'm sure you've also read, my first reaction was just
the number of curb cuts along Troy Road. You are proposing at least five, potentially
six,, probably six curb cuts along Troy Road in a distance of roughly 550 feet, I think is
about the frontage.
Mr. Frantz — The frontage on Troy Road is actually slightly more than 700 feet.
45
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Chairperson Wilcox — No. I got 2 -times the 250 plus a little bit, is what I got. So its
about 550 feet.
Mr. Frantz -1 have a number here and its not showing up under the lights.
Chairperson Wilcox — Well, it doesn't matte
dangerous issue with that many curb cuts CP
the number of curb cuts and suggested
Certainly individual curb cuts for lots 3 anc
close to each other let alone with 2 and 4,
think that the County, for what it was worth,
about lot 6. That's my initial reaction.
. Even if it is 600 feet, it is still a potentially
nd even staff in their remarks talked about
a potential way to alleviate the number.
lots 5 would be an issue having them so
That's my immediate problem and I also
mentioned curb cuts, but they were talking
Mr. Frantz — That is something that I considered and right now there is already one, two,
three, four, five curb cuts and an intersection off of these lots onto Troy Road. You now
have a house here on the corner with a driveway off Troy. A house next to it with a
driveway off Troy. House, house, Whitetail Drive, and then potential for at least one
more house here and all together there is actually either curb cuts or the potential for 15
curb cuts from King Road up to where we go off the map just below the Troy Road Park.
Its...
Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah, we saw that guy and we said no.
Mr. Frantz — No. I'm saying on the west side of.. this is the west side of Troy Road
alone. Okay? And the other thing, too, is Troy Road is a fairly low volume road.
You've got good sight distance. There at least hasn't been any, in my knowledge, any
issues as far as safety in this area in terms of curb cuts. One of the reasons why the
poles or pan handles for lot 3 and lot 5 are together here is as they come down, you
could actually merge them within the right -of -way and have just one curb cut. So that is
one way to at least mitigate part of that.
Chairperson Wilcox — And there are ways to mitigate the other ones, too, with shared
driveways.
Mr. Frantz — Yes. Even lot 6. That makes sense to have a curb cut as far from the
intersection as possible.
Chairperson Wilcox — But, again, have lots 4 and 6 share a curb cut and have lots 1 and
2 share a curb cut, for example, share a driveway if you will.
Mr. Frantz - I've seen it happen elsewhere.
Chairperson Wilcox — The alternative an internal cul -de -sac or something likes that or
some sort of an internal road and I suspect the developer does not want to go there.
Mr. Frantz — Well, I don't know if the Town wants to,
me
Chairperson Wilcox - You're right. Absolutely true.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Frantz - We only have about 400 feet and another issue, again, is putting a road
into the parcel would also cause a lot more disruption in terms of the number of trees
that would be sacrificed. The beauty of these two flag lots is that you can have a 12M
foot wide driveway that could wind around any potential large tree that might be in the
way.
Mr. Smith The one thing that was
combining a curb cut for lots 1, 2 and 3,
and 2 and combine those together and
that 4, 5, and 6 could all be on one.
mentioned in the memo was a possibility of
if you put.the flag lot part of 3 down between 1
do the same thing with lot 5, bring it down so
Chairperson Wilcox - Yeah...maybe reconfigure lot 5 a little bit so that you could have a
shared driveway that serves 4, 5 and 6 and reduce the number of curb cuts. What I'm
hoping, George, is if you took off your I'm representing the builder hat and put on your
planning hat you would say reducing the number curb cuts is a good thing and then you
can put your hat back on and represent the developer.
Mr. Frantz - Accept as a planner,
because right now we have a road
limit that is well in excess of what a
are ever going to get DOT to re,
development along the road. So, I
Road as being a bad thing.
can argue that curb cuts here are a good thing
that is evolving into a residential road with a speed
residential road should be and the only way that we
duce the speed limit is increasing the amount of
don't necessarily see curb cuts on a road like Troy
Board Member Mitrano - So it's a State road, George?
Mr. Frantz - It's a County Highway. The State still...
Board Member Mitrano - Is the one that makes that determination?
Mr. Frantz - Yeah. The State sets the speed limits and along King Road, at least from
Troy Road back towards 96B, it is down to 40 -45 mph speed limit. Again, we are also
not talking about a road that is going to have any really significant levels of traffic where
driveways would start causing congestion.
Board Member Mitrano - That road will get much busier than it is.. oh I think so.
Mr. Frantz - No.
Board Member Mitrano - You put all those houses in and the other developer that is
here and you put in the additional houses along there, I'm sorry, you're going to have a
busier road. .
47
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Frantz — Down hill perhaps.
Board Member Mitrano — Both ways.
Mr. Frantz — No. There is nothing happening south of King Road.
Board Member Mitrano - You've got the development further down King Road. There is
a lot going on up there. Who says there is not going to be more development up...?
Board Member Talty — You ought to sit here every Tuesday night.
Mr. Frantz — I sat here every Tuesday night for 12.
Board Member Talty — Not when this area has been developed. I'm sorry.
Mr. Frantz — Lets... trust me.
Board Member Talty — And I don't really think you want to get in a sparring joust right
now.
Mr. Frantz — Well, what I was trying to point out, I was asked as a planner for my
opinion. I'm giving my opinion. Okay? I have been working this County for 15 years. I
look at population trends. I do comprehensive planning. I'm just trying to address an
issue. Okay? In the Town of Danby, south of the Town of Ithaca off Troy Road, there is
relatively very little potential for future residential development. In the Town of Ithaca
along Troy Road, south of King Road that half to 3/4 of, a mile, there is practically no
potential for development because of the Jones Farm subdivision and the Eldridge
wilderness and the fact that all of the frontage is pretty well taken up. That is the point 1`
am trying to make. Okay? As a planner, my professional opinion is that Troy Road is
not going to experience substantial increases in traffic over the next ten to 20 years.
Chairperson Wilcox - But improperly positioned curb cuts can be dangerous.
Mr. Frantz — Oh, absolutely.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm done for now.
Board Member Howe — Christine in her memo suggested because of some of the
challenges with this site, cluster development. Was that considered at all? Clustering
the houses on the site?
Mr. Frantz — One of the issues that actually were addressed was a concern that it was
going to be clear -cut due to the fact of this particular lot layout. That is really not in the
cards because these seven lots are going to be the primary marketing tool for these
seven lots is that they are wooded. The people that are going to be purchasing these
lots or purchasing homes on these lots are going to be purchasing wooded lots. So
I
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved. December 7, 2004
they are not going to clear -cut to plant grass. They are going to build a house and limit
the amount of trees that they have to take out when the build a house. Even if you were
to have a 20 -25 foot strip of lawn around a house on any of these parcels, if you take an
average footprint of a 2000 square foot house for a very high -end house in Ithaca, you
take that 20 feet around it or so and all together on each of these lots you might have 8,
91 10,000 square feet of house and clear area around it. So really in these seven lots,
we are talking the potential for clearing upwards an acre and a half out of the six and a
half acres. And yes, there are very large trees here, but again they are being viewed by
us as amenities and assets and I'm pretty certain that any lot owner is going to view
those same trees as amenities and assets.
Chairperson Wilcox — Anyone else?
Board Member Thayer — Lot 3 and 5 are going to be a little claustrophobic maybe in the
back, sort of hidden. Do they want to be in the woods? Or maybe that is the idea.
Mr. Frantz — That's the idea. I mean these to us; these are going to be probably the
more valued lots because yes you can hide your house back in the woods.
Board Member Thayer — There's enough buffer so you won't see the houses in front of
you?
Mr. Frantz — No. You'll see the houses in front primarily because again because of the
relative maturity of the woods in some areas they are actually fairly open, not a whole
lot of understory. So no, you are not going to be in isolation, but certainly you can have
a house that is setback from the road and at least perceptionally in the middle of the
woods of course until...
Board Member Thayer — When you have a side -by -side driveway to those two lots it's
almost like a shared drive. So why not have a shared drive? When you plow it, it is
going to be piled to one side or the other or whatever. It just seems silly to have two
driveways right next to each other.
Mr. Frantz — I think this is more an option because if you go with a shared driveway,
then you have to easements, maintenance agreements and like between the two
property owners and if that were to happen, I think all the better. And also, I just put
these on to show that a driveway would fit, but there is nothing that would preclude lot 3
and 5 having a shared driveway.
Board Member Mitrano — We would like to encourage that.
Chairperson Wilcox — Or even go farther. I mean staff pointed out the option of having
11 2 and 3 share a driveway. George?
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Frantz — I'm not sure if that is really practical. I'm not sure if what happens when
you start having more than two property owners share a driveway whether you get the
State involved or not.
Chairperson Wilcox— You can look into that.
Mr. Frantz — We can look into it. And even again, from the desirability standpoint, I think
again we have right -of -way space here where you can also have the option of bringing
the driveways together at the right -of -way line so that there is one curb cut, one culvert
serving two lots or again even. Jot 2, 31 4, and 5 might possibly happen where you have
two driveways side by side.
Mr. Walker — On that site, though, you are going to be back in 50 feet off the edge of the
pavement because of the slopes and everything with a shared driveway just to get a
good access to the road. So you are going to be off the right -of -way line for the shared
driveway. You are not going to do in that right -of -way with those slopes up there.
Mr. Frantz — It depends. There's areas where...
Mr. Walker — There maybe some areas, but as I remember it, it drops off 3 -5 feet within
10 feet.
Mr. Frantz — Down perhaps lower lot 1 and 2 1 know that there is a drop off. Lot 4 and 6
actually from even possibly 3, 51 4, and 6. Its actually fairly level with the road. There's
not that big drop off.
Board Member Conneman — George, talk to the boundary of lot 1 and 2, the big white
line. Those are all trees and they go across also lot 3?
Mr. Frantz — This area here is meadowland essentially. The red are actually conifers
and these are deciduous trees. The dark is probably shadows.
Board Member Conneman — There's not a gully there?
Mr. Frantz — No. There's no gully there
area right here.
There is a section of steeper slopes in this
Mr. Kanter — I think for the next version that we
board could really see what is going on.
Mr. Frantz - The big question in our mind was
configuration that you are comfortable with or
have lot 5 come out between lot 4 and 6.
problems with slope between lots 1 and 2. The
lot 3 or lot 2 and.the handle of lot 3 is I placed
mature trees within the setback areas of lot 2.
see the topo on there would help. The
the lot configuration and so if this is a
Dossibly I think one option would be to
I'm really hesitant, again, we do have
other thing, too, about the line between
it here because it puts a lot of the very
So the idea that this line was placed
really as a way of better protecting
are where the hemlocks are.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
some of the larger trees on the site. I believe these
Chairperson Wilcox - One of the things that we were missing was some of that thought
process and reasoning that went through your mind in terms of why you chose these
and I'm glad to see that that was part of the decision. We will need that in writing,
obviously, but I still think the board has a general wish to reduce the number of curb
cuts.
Board Member Mitrano - Yup.
Chairperson Wilcox - And you will address it in the. way you think. best.
Mr. Frantz - We can definitely do it. And I guess one thing, this comes... the original
approval, the Planning Board said there shall be no curb cuts on East King Road and
the rational for that was the concern regarding the impact on the stream. And I think
what we've configured this lot 7 here so again the stream, again both lot 6 and 7 were
configured to get as much of this stream corridor as possible within the setback areas,
again, preclude construction upon or close to it. So if...
Mr. Walker - That streams got a top width of around 40 feet, though, doesn't it? It's
pretty much the grand canyon of South Hill.
Mr. Frantz - Its Coy Glen of South Hill. I mapped it because the County's
hydrocoverage, the County archview coverage actually. has it starting over at the corner
and I did my own mapping of it. Its in a bit of a gulch, 8 =12 feet deep in places, but it is
only maybe 12, maybe 20 feet wide the gulch portion. It is running on rock. In fact in a
couple of places it's starting to cut its own little gorge.
Mr. Walker - Its still pretty unstable so you would want to stay back 50 feet from it any
how.
Mr. Frantz - Yeah. You want to stay back.
Mr. Walker - A long ways.
Mr. Kanter - I'm wondering what that does to lot 7 in terms of the actual buildable area.
Mr. Frantz - Well it still...
Mr. Walker - The
cutting constantly.
there, if we get a bi
Mr. Frantz - This
actually cutting into
other thing in that
So it may not be ui
g storm it could cut
actually, Dan, this
the bedrock so I'm
area is the stability of
ider a house today, but
right in the middle of lot
sharp meander here,
not really too concernec
the soil. That stream is
the way it is meandering
7 right now,
that's where I recall, its
I about it.
51
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Walker — Well, cutting down, but horizontally.
Mr. Frantz - And I'm talking horizontal movement, too.
Mr. Walker — Its pretty unstable.
Mr. Frantz — Yeah. We'll take a look. This is one of those areas of the Town of Ithaca
where if you stand in one place long enough you can watch the soil move.
Mr. Walker — Just make sure when you do the topo on this, you get real topo.
Mr. Frantz — We will.
Mr. Walker — And we really look at the hydrology and the hydraulics on this because
there was another subdivision that we approved a few years ago and we told the
subdivider they weren't going to be able to build a house there and they thought the
stream isn't a problem. And they just came in a resubbed it because they couldn't build
a house on that lot. I would hate to have that happen again.
Mr. Frantz — Me, too. The other issues, too, Dan, are water and sewer.
Mr. Walker — Its all up hill.
Mr. Frantz — The topo...we9re going to have to get real topo for this site. Its gotta be
surveyed. We know that it is going to be substantial engineering in terms of water and
sewer service to the site.
Mr. Walker — Lot 7 won't have direct access to water and sewer.
Mr. Frantz — Okay.
Mr. Walker — Because there is no water down King Road at that point and the
sewer.. Ahere is no sewer there either. The force main that is on King Road is nothing
that we are going to put more sewer into because it is a high -head high - pressure sewer
system. The only sewer available to this site is on Troy Road,
Mr. Frantz — And that is something that...
Mr. Walker — Unless you want to build a sewer line down to Coddington Road.
Mr. Frantz — No.
Chairperson Wilcox — And give it to the Town.
52
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
Mr. Walker — We have another subdivision proposal just to the north of this site and that
maybe a solution if that subdivision happens if they run roads near to this subdivision
and the sewer line that would allow the site to be served by gravity with the proper
easements and so on. We will be looking at this from the standpoint of all the planning
in the area.
Mr. Frantz — We know those issues are out there, but we also knew there were issues
as far as the vegetation and the potential number of lots. We wanted to get this tied
down and then we will go and see if it will work from and engineering standpoint.
Mr. Walker — Our policy has changed as far as building municipal pumping stations.
Southwoods, we just built a new municipal pumping station to serve the whole
subdivision, but that was only because it was preapproved 30 years ago. These houses
would all have to have individual pump -outs and ... (not audible) at this point unless the
Town Board doesn't listen to me. Those are issues.
Mr. Frantz — These are issues we are aware of and this is the next step for us to see if it
is possible from an engineering standpoint.
Chairperson Wilcox— Can we go an extra 5 or 10 minutes? 10 o'clock is our bedtime
around here.
Board Member Mitrano — Five minutes.
Mr. Frantz — Any other questions?
Chairperson Wilcox — I've got some issues to raise with you.
Mr. Frantz — Okay.
Chairperson Wilcox — You've been representing Ron Ronsvalle for a while?
Mr. Frantz — About two years, various projects.
Chairperson Wilcox — Of concern is the number of variances that have been requested
recently before the Zoning Board of Appeals in the Town, whether they be lot coverage
issues or whether they duplexes that were built that didn't meet the zoning. I'm getting
Wind of a lot of these sorts of things going on.
Mr. Frantz The issue with the duplexes occurred actually after the building permits
were issued.
Attorney Barney _ I think in fairness to Ron, that was an interpretation question, which
actually the Building Department was interpreting one way and then we sat down and
they asked me a question and I looked at it and I think turned them around a little bit on
their interpretation. I don't think at that point there were houses in the ground. I don't
53
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER-2,2004
Approved December 7, 2004
think we want to penalize Mr. Ronsvalle because we were changing the interpretation.
So that was those variances.
Chairperson Wilcox — I've also got some information about some height variances that
have had to been given and lot coverages and...
Attorney Barney — The height variances, quite frankly, we have probably at the Board of
Zoning Appeals 4 out of 5 cases are height variance cases. When the height limitation
was set, the idea of building homes did not include these very steeply pitched roofs,
which punch up through the top of our height limitation.
Mr. Smith — A lot.of those height variances were also created because they excavated
down and they didn't follow the natural terrain either.
Ms. Balestra — And the building plans that were given to the Building Department were
all in conformance for lot coverage, setbacks and height. Its .just when the buildings
actually went on the site and our inspectors went out to look at them, they found that
they had exceeded lot coverage, setbacks and heights so they needed to come to the
Zoning Board.
Chairperson Wilcox - George, the other thing you can enlighten me on is the lawsuit
between the Sanders Road residents and Mr. Ronsvalle. What was that about?
Mr. Frantz — Well, that was again a disagreement and also we think, frankly, an abuse
of power by design review committee. However, that has been resolved.
Chairperson Wilcox — Is it significant that a judge had to make a decision? What I'm
struggling with is there seems to be a pattern of issues here and what I'm wondering is
that when the Town considers the subdivision whether we will have to be extra special
careful in terms of what we say in the resolution, should we get to it, to make sure that
we state the obvious and things like that.
Mr. Frantz — No. I think, as John said, the issue with lot coverage, actually it was a
change in the way the staff interpreted the zoning ordinance which then forced us to go
get variances for four homes, three of which were built based on guidance from Town
staff. The fourth one, the Zoning Board of Appeals decided we are not going to grant
you this variance and what it is, is a question of does the basement count in that 50%
calculation when you determine the size of an accessory unit. For decades, the Town
of Ithaca has counted the square footage in the basement. Suddenly...
Attorney Barney — Wasn't it the garage rather than the basement?
Mr. Frantz — No. It was the basement area. Suddenly it was determined that the
basement could not be factored into floor area calculations and we were left with
accessory apartments that under the zoning were too large. Saunders Road, again that
is a long story, maybe we could have a few beers and I'll tell you about it. There were
54
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
legal issues there. They have been resolved. We have sat down with the
neighborhood. We've come to a resolution that they can live and that we can live with
and there was no need for any judge to make any decisions.
Chairperson Wilcox — Though the judge did appoint the mediator, right?
Mr. Frantz — That was part of the discussions that happened. It was agreed to try
mediation. All parties felt mediation was the best way to go and it worked.
Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. We're past our bedtime. Go ahead.
Mr. Frantz — Yes. We do have our problems with that 38 -foot, 36 foot height variance is
that we like to have walkout basements. We like to have basements in homes that can
be used as living area and so what happens is that because we go down to exterior
grade, our houses happen to be 42 feet high, but they also happen to be 42 feet high in
the back where nobody can see them.
Board Member Conneman It seems that there are so many difficulties with lot 7. Why
would you build on it at all? Why don't you leave it natural?
Mr. Frantz —
I don't see the
difficulties with lot
7 that Dan does for one. And
I think
also, .Jet me
put it this way.
Tentatively, I don't
see the same difficulties with
lot
7 that
Dan does.
Board Member Conneman — Are you wearing your developer's hat or your planner's
hat?
Mr. Frantz — Both. As a landscape architect, now the topo survey may tell me
different...so.
Board Member Conneman — We would love to see a topo map.
Mr. Frantz — That's the next step. Thank you.
Chairperson Wilcox — George, do you need
for now?
anything else other than abuse? We all set
Mr. Kanter — Could I just mention for, the record that Chris's memo does talk about the
parkland issue and the possibility of in lieu of parkland and that is something that should
be considered.
Chairperson Wilcox — And George knows those regulations inside out, I think. Good to
see you again. Thank you, George.
Chairperson Wilcox closed this segment of the meeting at 10:08 p.m.
55
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
NOVEMBER 2, 2004
Approved December 7, 2004
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - October 5 and October 19, 2004
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2004 =112: Approval of Minutes - October 5. 2004 and
October 19.2004
MOTION by Fred Wilcox, seconded by Kevin Talty.
RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the October 5,
2004 and October 19, 2004 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board for the said meetings as presented.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NAYS: None.
The motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
OTHER BUSINESS.
Mr. Kanter gave a brief overview of items for the November 16, 2004 agenda.
AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT:
Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the November 2, 2004 meeting of the
Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10:10 p.m.
Respectfully Submitted,
;V
Carrie Coates hitm
Deputy Town Clerk
56
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Tuesday, November 2, 2004
AGENDA
7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes).
7:04 P.M. SEQR Determination: Ruoff / Todd 2 -Lot Subdivision, 216 & 217 Texas Lane,
7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot
subdivision located at 216 and 217 Texas Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 71 -1 -3 and 71-1-4, Medium
Density Residential Zone. The proposal is to subdivide off a 0.04 +/- acre parcel from 217 Texas Lane to be
consolidated with 216 Texas Lane. Michael J. and Marina B. Todd, Owner; Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff,
Applicant,
7:10 P.M. SEQR Determination: La Tourelle Country Inn Addition, 1152 Danby Road,
7:25 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of.Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Town
Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the proposed addition to the La Tourelle Country Inn located at
1152 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 1-4.2, Planned Development Zone
No. 1. The proposal involves construction of a three level addition on the west side of the existing Inn which
would include 19 new rooms, a spa, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional
parking and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development Zone No. 1 is required to allow
the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant.
7:40 P.M. SEQR Determination (continuation): Country Inn & Suites Hotel, Danby Road and West King Road,
7:45 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval, Preliminary Site Plan Approval,
and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country
Inn & Suites Hotel located at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B),
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business District "C ". The proposal involves subdividing off a +/-
2.74 -acre parcel from the +/- 4.82 -acre parcel for the construction of a 58 -room hotel at the intersection. The
proposal also includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David Auble,
Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J. Trowbridge, Agent.
8:15 P.M. Consideration of a Sketch Plan review for the proposed 7 -lot subdivision located on the northeast corner of
Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49 -1 -26.2 (portion of), Low Density
Residential Zone. The proposal includes subdividing the +/- 6.4 -acre parcel into 7 lots for residential
construction. Heritage Park Townhouses, Inc., Owner /Applicant; George R. Frantz, AICP, Agent.
9. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary).
10. Approval of Minutes: October 5, 2004 and October 19, 2004,
11, Other Business:
12, Adjournment,
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY
SANDY POLCE AT 2734747.
(A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.)
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, November 2, 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, November 2, 2004, at 215 North Tioga
Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters:
7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 -lot
subdivision located at 216 and 217 Texas Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 71 -1 -3
and 71 -1 -4, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal is to subdivide off a 0.04
+/- acre parcel from 217 Texas Lane to be consolidated with 216 Texas Lane. Michael J.
and Marina B. Todd, Owner; Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff, Applicant.
7:25 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approval and a recommendation to the Town
Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the .proposed addition to the La Tourelle
Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 36- 14.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1. The proposal involves construction of a
three level addition on the west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new
rooms, a spa, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional
parking and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development Zone No. 1 is
required to allow the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant.
7:45 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval, Preliminary Site Plan Approval, and
a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the
proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel located at the southwest corner of West King Road
and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37 -1 -17.1, Business
District "C ". The proposal involves subdividing off a +/- 2.74 -acre parcel from the +/-
4.82 -acre parcel for the construction of a 58 -room hotel at the intersection. The proposal
also includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David
Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J.
Trowbridge, Agent,
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, October 25, 2004
Publish: Wednesday, October 27, 2004
ThO tthada Joarnal
�WednesdaX October�27 }2004
TOWN OF ITHACA
PLANNING BOARD
SIGN -IN SHEET
DATE: November 2, 2004
(PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME
PLEASE PRINT ADDRESS /AFFILIATION
/ 7 �lL G
41z'A /
_ \C (�
c0
G ��
_ ' IS
��
0L4 I
CSCC
C'v& '
OL
Ll
l Jep e
e£ S
09
UNC
d
—eR j �
/� C(?
d d(lu<(fco
fy::�fl
I h��2�
% U
W- '4
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, November 2, 2004
commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached.
Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio ag_ Street.
Date of Posting:
Date of Publication:
October 25, 2004
October 27, 2004
6b�.�ct,�. (3ve�
Sandra Polce, Senior Typist
Town of Ithaca.
STATE OF NEW YORK) SS:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 27th day of October 2004.
ze + . ML4L
Notary Public
CONNIE F. CLARK
Notary Public, State of New York
No, 01 CL6052878
Qualified in Tompkins County
Commission Expires December 26, 20 06