Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2005-06-07FILE DATE lzS� TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY, JUNE 712005 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, June 7, 2005, in Town Hall, 215 Nort h Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m. PRESENT Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann, Board Member; George Conneman, Board Member; Tracy Mitrano, Board Member; Larry Thayer, Board Member; Rod Howe, Board Member; Kevin Talty, Board Member; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering; John Barney, Attorney for the Town; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner. EXCUSED Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Christine Balestra, Planner. OTHERS Paul Levesque, HOLT Architect; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf; Kim Michaels, Trowbridge & Wolf; Joe Fitzgerald, Cayuga Medical Center; George May, THERM; Tammy Aiken, Cornell University; Ron White, Cornell University; Wally Wiggins, 961 Taughannock Blvd; Leonard Dalhert, Primet Precision Materials; Liz Smith, 163 Pearsall Place. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Wilcox declares the meeting duly opened at 7:05 p.m., and accepts for the record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on May 27, 2005 and June 1, 2005, 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 June 1, 2005, Chairperson Wilcox states the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control. PERSONS TO BE HEARD Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 7:07 p.m., and asks if any members of the public wished to speak. With no one wishing to speak, Chairperson Wilcox closes this segment of the meeting at 7:08 p.m. SEQR DETERMINATION Primet Precision MaterialsTM Bldg. Rental, 1005 Hudson Street Extension Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 7:08 p.m. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved George May, THERM Inc I'm here representing THERM in this matter of renting our old ceramics R &D facility to the Primet Precision, Chairperson Wilcox — Do you know how that space is being used by Primet? Mr. May — In part. Leonard from Primet could probably explain it better than, I can. Chairperson Wilcox — Can you briefly describe the use of the building? Leonard Dalhert, Primet Precision Materials We use it for office space and research space. Chairperson Wilcox — Any materials being stored there that are hazardous or flammable? Mr. Dalhert — We alcohol that is a flammable material. Chairperson Wilcox — Which is used for? Mr. Dalhert — We use it to mix powdered ceramics and metals into that material to form what we call a slur, a mixture of alcohol and powder. Chairperson Wilcox — Waste materials. Mr. Dalhert — Minimal. There are some materials that will be disposed of, but it is very minimal. Chairperson Wilcox — What kind of materials? Mr. Dalhert — The typical materials that we use are titanium dioxide and calcium carbonate. One of the things we try to do is work with the least toxic materials as possible. Chairperson Wilcox — How do you dispose of them? Mr. Dalhert — Properly. We follow all Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Regulations for proper disposal of materials. Some materials are regarded as safe and are disposed of in a normal disposal. We haven't disposed of anything yet that is hazardous waste. Mr. May — I think the key is the quantity and the type of work that they do is .such a minute, kind of small development. It's not for high production or anything. Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody else with regard to the environmental review? 2 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Board Member Hoffmann — You said that this place is used for office space and research. So there is no manufacturing down there, then? Mr. Dalhert - Not yet. Board Member Hoffmann — But there will be. Mr. Dalhert — There may be at some point in the future. Board Member Hoffmann — And how will the situation be different if and when that happens as far as materials used and wastes produced and handling of that waste. Mr. Dalhert — In terms of waste produced, one of the benefits during this process is that it does not produce waste. The only, waste that we have at this point is research material that we no longer need. The production in our plan is that all the material that comes in will go out in final product. There are no waste products. Board Member Hoffmann — And the paper we got said that there are no air emissions. Are there any other kinds of emissions into the soil, into water by swales or creeks or anything like that? Mr. Dalhert - No. Board Member Hoffmann — So the waste materials that are taken away... but that might change if you go into manufacturing. Mr. Dalhert — In terms of waste, I hope not. I would hope that all of the materials that come in go out as part of the product. Board Member Hoffmann — Do you anticipate that if you do begin manufacturing that you use different materials and possibly materials that are more toxic? Mr. Dalhert — No. The materials that we are doing research on now are the same kind of materials that we can use probably... (not audible). Board Member Hoffmann — We are kind of sensitive in Ithaca, I am anyway right now after everything that has been happening on the western parts of South Hill with the solvents that they have found in the ground and so on, but you don't use such materials. Mr. Dalhert — Well, alcohol is technically a solvent. We don't pour it on the ground and we handle it very safely. I, myself, moved to Ithaca because of the beautiful environment. Board Member Hoffmann — The reason that I am asking the questions is that I know that there is a residential area downhill from the building you are working in and from all 3 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved of the THERM property and beyond that there is Six Mile Creek, which is a conservation zone that we are trying very hard to protect. Part of the reason for doing that is so that we protect the water that goes through the creek and ends up in the lake where we get our drinking water. So I think it is very important to make.sure that there isn't any new, there maybe old problems on that site. I don't know anything about that. I hope not. Thank you. That's my questions for now. Chairperson_ Wilcox_ -. .._Anyone__.else_with__regard__ to_ the __environmental review only? Would someone like to move the SEQR motion? Board Member Conneman moves the motion and Board Member Thayer seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -057: SEQR, Preliminary & Final. Site Plan Approval, Primet Precision Materials Rental (THERM), 1005 Hudson Street Ext., Tax Parcel No. 54 -2-1 MOTION made by Board Member Conneman, seconded by Board Member Thayer, WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of an existing building by Primet Precision Materials, Inc., which is located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, Light Industrial Zone. Primet Precision Materials, Inc., is an advanced materials development company that would rent the existing building that was most recently used by Therm for storage. No modifications or additions are planned for the site. Therm Inc., Owner / Applicant; George May, Agent, 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 Site Plan Approval, and 3. The Planning Board, on June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by Town Planning staff, a plat, entitled "Primet Precision Materials Rental of Therm Ceramics Building," date stamped May 3, 2005, and other application 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: n PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved 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. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously, Chairperson Wilcox closes this segment of the meeting at 7:14 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of an existing building by Primet Precision Materials TM , Inc., which is located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, Light Industrial Zone.. Primet Precision MaterialsT"", Inc. is an. advanced materials development company that would rent the existing building that was most recently used by Therm for storage. No modifications or additions are planned for the site. Therm Incorporated, Owner /Applicant; George May, Agent. A woman in the audience asks about process of public hearing. Chairperson Wilcox — The application is not considered complete until the environmental review is done. Once we have completed the environmental review, the application is now considered complete and now we can open the public hearing. We will give you a chance to speak, obviously, and the public hearing will stay open until everyone has spoken, but all that this board has done so far is indicate that there is no significant environmental impact. We have not yet addressed the actual application and approved that. Chairperson Wilcox opens the public hearing at 7:15 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox — Questions with regard to site plan? There being none, would either one of you like to say anything else at this time? Ask you to have a seat. Chairperson Wilcox invites members of the public to address the board. Liz Smith, 163 Pearsall Place Thank you very much. There are a lot of processes and it can get very confusing. THERM is literally in my back yard. I have been a homeowner in the Town of Ithaca for 10 years so obviously I bought a home knowing that l had a light industrial zone there. I 9 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved am not complaining, in general they are good neighbors. There is a lot of vehicular traffic. There is a lot of light pollution that spills over from that site. So I am very concerned, and it seems to be something that hasn't really been addressed is,' is there a change of status of THERM as sole- manufacturer for that site since 1935 to business developer? I don't think that this has been given enough weight and it has potential for very great impact because, as you noted, the neighbors, as you can see, the conservation zone, Six Mile Creek, the trail, the watershed and its also boarded by high ______ density- feside_ntial- areas =_So= any_changes_to t-_his parcel can _have= very,_ve.ry big impact on it. I also think that we need to address, again, is THERM a developer. Now they are a landlord. It almost seems like the relationship has changed from a manufacturer to that landlord and do they have different responsibilities to the neighborhood, to the Town of Ithaca, to the global community? I think they do and one of the things that have noticed is that there are no sidewalks on their property. Yes, there is a sidewalk that goes up there. So I think what THERM basically is saying to you and admitting by signing saying they are not permitting any changes is this is a place where you will drive to. You may be able to walk up there, but then there are no sidewalks. On the map, they were supposed to note a couple of things. They were supposed to note lighting and that is not on there and I know that because the light spills over in my back yard. So lighting is not noted and this is on preliminary site plan checklist item k which is "x" off and as you noticed there is no pedestrian or bicycle facilities shown on the map because I don't believe there are. I looked today, I'll double check. There are no sidewalks leading there. So basically people are encouraged to drive and you are turning South Hill into more of a drive through neighborhood. Drive there to get to your business and I don't think that as a landlord or perhaps a business developer, we don't know what is in the future, that they do have obligations and responsibilities to the community and the Town. I think it is also very important to keep in mind the conservation district and on item j of this preliminary site plan checklist, which I think you just improved the environmental thing, I am disappointed because it does say that they are supposed to note on this map the location of any natural and cultural features within an immediately adjacent to the site including significant natural habitats, view sheds, unique natural areas. I really don't see a lot of the components that they were supposed to identify identified on this. I think it is also very important to examine the change of status from sole manufacturer to again business developer, landlord because one of your goals coming up Thursday is you do have a transportation plan and it talks about how in the great world you have a good vision to make sure that jobs, cultural events, shopping are within walking distance. When you have a large business in high density residential and a conservation zone, I think you really have to make them be responsible for the . vehicular traffic. They may say its only 8 people are employed there, if everyone drives that is at least 16 vehicular trips per day. They have suppliers, they have business. Please, I am not against development. I think it is great. I would rather have them in on PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved my back yard than Wal -Mart. I want to keep the businesses local, but it has to be done in a responsible way and I think now is the time that should really address that, take into account the goals that you have identified in the transportation plan. There are also things talked about in the Open Space plan. I want you to know that I took the bus down here to this meeting and I'm going to come back. I'm trying to be a good neighbor. I want THERM to be a good neighbor and start being responsible for things like the traffic that they do create without any sort of mitigation. There are areas where -_- - therre is- no- vegetative landscape -or buffering for- noise -and- that -is -a popular recreation trail, sensitive area. Of course more parking, more runoff. You know all the implications. So in closing, I ask that if you only... if you cannot just... I don't want to deny these people their business. They've only been in business year. Rather than rubber - stamping, please just grant temporary status pending a complete examination of the issues of is THERM now a landlord. Is this a business development? They've got a lot of land. Is it going to become a high tech little park? It could be great, but it's got to be handled. Now is perhaps the time to send the message.that it can be done responsibly. Thank you very much. Board Member Hoffmann — What she said actually just reminded me that I had meant to have a couple of things check marked on the EAF and I forgot to do it before we voted. Chairperson Wilcox — Is there anyone else who wishes to speak at this time? Chairperson Wilcox closes the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Board Member Hoffmann — Under point 10, what is the present land use in the vicinity of the proposed project and the only one marked is industrial, but there is residential and park, forest, open space in the vicinity, too. So that needs to be check marked. Chairperson Wilcox — Lets start addressing the woman's various issues. I'll start with the checklist that you looked at. The checklist is a tool used by the Planning staff and the Planning Board to ensure that all materials necessary to make a reasonable decision are available. That site plan checklist has to serve the Town from anything from a new building being built all the way to something in this case, which is simply the change in the use of a building from one tenant to another. That is the purpose of that checklist. We, as the Planning Board, can disagree with the determination that staff has made and request more information and that is our prerogative and we may decide to do that, we may not. I agree with you that many of those things are necessary and in fact are supplied when new buildings are being built or new driveways are being put in or parking lots are being built or drainage is involved, but it may not be necessary here, because again we are talking about is a change in use of one particular building on the site. That was one point Let me look at my notes here. Other comments you made had to deal with the issue of landowner and developer versus landlord, sidewalks, and lighting. I'll speak for 7 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved myself now, not the Town Planning Board. Those are all, again, relevant issues and maybe relevant here and that is up to each of us individually now can make that determination. In my opinion, while those are often relevant in a site plan discussion and this is technically a site plan discussion, it is again a change in use of one small building, is the way I look at it. The fact that the use already changed a while ago is a reason to maybe slap THERMs wrist for not having gotten the appropriate approvals previously. Board Member Conneman — I think that her point is that if THERM decides to build a building that they have to come back to us. Chairperson Wilcox — If they build a building, everything changes. Absolutely. Board Member Conneman — That's one of the things. If they build a building or they make some other changes that go outside of what we approve tonight, they have to come back to us. Otherwise, they are violating the law. Chairperson Wilcox Does that include manufacturing? It includes any change in use. Attorney Barney — Or increased use, if they build a bigger building or adds onto the building they have to come back for site plan. Mr. Kanter — And this is a light industrial zone, so it doesn't allow heavier manufacturing uses, but there is a whole list of permitted uses in the light industrial zone. Chairperson Wilcox — But you're right, if they want to put up a building, then lighting, sidewalks, access, circulation, traffic, drainage, all of those come into play and we would normally look at all of those as part of the site plan review. Any other comments? Board Member Mitrano — I just wanted to say I thought Ms. Smith's remarks were very eloquent and nicely stated and brings up things for us to look at should there be a different kind of proposal brought forward and if she wants a ride home, I live up that way. Mr. Kanter — Carpooling is good, too Board Member Hoffmann — I have a couple of things, I think. But one is in looking at this aerial photograph that we were provided with, I see that there is a, comparing it to the map, I see that there is a path leading from this building downhill to the north to another small building, but right along side it and then coming off it, there is something else, which I don't know if it is a swale or. This here I can see is a walkway, what about this here? Is that a ditch or a swale or...? Mr. May — No. That is a side hill. From here out it is flat. This is about 30 to 40 feet higher. It's aside hill that we cannot mow. This is all brush. PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Board Member Hoffmann — So there is a drop from here to here is what you are saying. Okay. The other question that I had was, if you wouldn't mind coming back to the microphone, because it is not clear to me whether THERM is still manufacturing or are you ... what are you using your property for? Mr: May — We are manufacturing, the same as we have always been. There hasn't been any change in our use. The facility that we had there was an offshoot of us. _ _ - -T -here- was- a- Geramiss _research -and development for - developing- for - _ceramic- blades, which are what we make. They were two grandsons of the founder of our company that were running that and they bought that off from THERM and moved it and last I knew they were in the industrial park up by the airport.. They vacated that building because they needed more space. Board Member Hoffmann — As for what is going on in the rest of the buildings on this site, that is the same as it's been since 1935 essentially then? Mr. May — Well, yeah. We got into the particular part of the business that we are in during the mid 1940s. Chairperson Wilcox — Interesting question, I'm not sure if its relevant. Does the THERM property within the Town actually extend. all the way to Hudson Street? I didn't think so. There is City of Ithaca property, presumably owned by THERM between Hudson Street, which is the entrance to their facilities and the Town line, which forms one of the boundaries of their property line. Interesting. Board Member Mitrano — What do you use the blades for? Mr. May — Jet engines and power generation mostly. Board Member Mitrano — So not my lawnmower, huh? Mr. May — No. We make blades for all the OEMs like General Electric, Rolls Royce, Allison... everybody that builds who builds turbines. Board Member Mitrano — So on most jet engines it's a ceramic blade that on it? Mr. May — That hasn't gotten there yet. That is still under the development process for ceramic. They are stainless steel basically. So if you fly on a plane, there's a good chance that there is THERM parts on it. Board Member Mitrano — Cool. Thanks. Chairperson Wilcox — Did you supply part to Airbus? Mr. May — Well, we don't supply them to Airbus. We supply them to the engine manufacturer of Airbus. 9 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. -Board Member Hoffmann — One -more question. How many people are employed on this site besides the Primet people? Mr. May — Right now I think it is 143. We have been as high as 370. Mr. Kanter - Are there vacant spaces in other parts of the THERM buildings? Mr. May — No. We basically, the main building is full of equipment. We shift the people around to different machines, as we need them. Because of efficiencies and equipment, we can do the same number of parts and run the same machines with fewer people. Chairperson Wilcox — Do you have space available to rent to other people? Mr. May — Our old administration building, which on this map is, well in the top right section of our property that one building there, the long building. Board Member Hoffmann — The one that says administration on it? Mr. May — Yeah, on this one. That building is vacant right now. Business is growing again. We may actually end up moving back in there. After 9/11, we almost went out of business and we consolidated everything and took everything out of that lower building and consolidated it into one building. We were down to about 90 people at that point. So we kind of consolidated everything in that one building. If.we continue to grow and business comes back like it is then hopefully we will be able to expand. Board Member Mitrano — Is that because of the affect on the travel, airline industry? Mr. May — Yes. The airline industry started to take a down turn just before 9/11 and 9/11 came along and everybody knows what it did to the airline industry. At that point the power generation was taking off and it looked like they were going to fill the gap, but then Enron came along and the power generation industry took a dive and so it left us high and dry. Board Member Mitrano — You've been having a great couple of years there, huh? Mr. May — It's been tough. Board Member Mitrano — It sounds like you are bouncing back. Mr. May — We are. We are coming back. People are flying again. They are building power plants. 10 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Board Member Mitrano — Good. Its good for Ithaca. Board Member Hoffmann — What about the lighting? Since you are the owner of the property you control that. Are there, has there been any change in lighting in this building that Primet is renting from you? There is no more or less than that? Mr. May — No. Board Member Mitrano — That's good that you mentioned it, though, Eva. There have probably been economically challenged in the last few years given everything. But maybe if they get in a better position, recognizing what Ms. Smith has said and what you are mentioning might be incentive to look into that. Board Member Hoffmann — In general we try to encourage, when people are doing new construction we try to encourage them or in fact we insist that they have lighting, which is shielded so that you don't get the glare from bare bulbs, or fixtures that don't have side shields enough. We want the light to go down to the ground where the light is helpful instead of going out all around. Mr. May — Basically the lighting for the upper parking lot is on the back of our building and being that we are on a side hill, the building is actually the same level as the parking lot, it has to shine back to be effective. Board Member Thayer — Do you have a night shift? Mr. May —Yes. Board Member Hoffmann — So the lights are on all night then? Mr. May —Yes. Board Member Hoffmann — Because that otherwise would have been one way of easing the situation if you could turn the lights off. Mr. May — There is a line of trees in the above our property. In fact, the Town had us put those trees in years ago as a buffer.. Board Member Hoffmann — When you say above, you mean the uphill side? Mr. May — On the uphill side between THERM and Pennsylvania Avenue. They are grown through quite thick right now. That was a Town requested buffer that we put in. Board Member Hoffmann — What about on the downhill boundary? Mr. May — That is fairly overgrown, also. We do have a fence there and the fence is grown over with ivy and vegetation. 11 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Board Member Hoffmann — But it's not high enough to block any light that comes from the parking lot that is along the northern boundary there. Mr. May — No. I'm not sure what we have for lighting on that northern, I think there is only one light on the pole out there. I don't think there is a lot of ... there are two lights on that upper parking lot on poles up there. Board Member Hoffmann — That parking goes right along the boundary between your land and the residential area downhill from you on Pearsall Place. In fact... Mr. May — The lighting for that section is right at the corner of the building so it is not along the property line. Board Member Hoffmann — But is it a floodlight that points out towards the parking lot then? Mr. May — No. Actually it was originally owned by NYSEG. Its one of the NYSEG lights on their electric pole. In fact it may still be owned by them. It's on their pole. Mr. Kanter — We are working on this outdoor lighting ordinance at the Codes and Ordinances Committee and that could require retrofitting some of these types of lights situations, especially at large facilities like this. Board Member Thayer — Great. Chairperson Wilcox — At the last meeting of Codes and Ordinances, one of the things that we kind of finalized was the issue of forcing businesses that are already in existence and already have approved site plans to make necessary changes to be consistent, giving them a period of time in which to do it. There was one particular business on South Hill that we thought of, not THERM. It is a way to eventually deal with that situation up on 96B. We all set? Any questions, discussion, comments? Would someone like to move the resolution as drafted? Board Member Howe moves the resolution and Board Member Talty seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 =058: Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval, Primet Precision Materials Rental (THERM), 1005 Hudson Street Ext., Tax Parcel No. 54- 2 =1 MOTION made by Board Member Howe, Board Member Talty. WHEREAS: 12 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of an existing building by Primet Precision Materials, Inc., which is located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, Light Industrial Zone. Primet Precision Materials, Inc., is an advanced materials development company that would rent the existing building that was most recently used by Therm for storage. No modifications or additions are planned for the site. Therm Inc., Owner / Applicant; George May, Agent, 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 June 7, 2005, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short 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 June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a plat entitled " Primet Precision Materials Rental of Therm Ceramics Building," date stamped May 3, 2005, 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 Site Plan Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Site Plan Checklists, 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 and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of the existing building, located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 .Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, which is shown on the plat entitled " Primet Precision Materials Rental of Therm Ceramics Building, " date stamped May 3, 20054 A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. SEQR Determination Cornell University Nursery Greenhouse & Pond, Bluegrass Lane IM PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 7:39 p.m Tammy Aiken, Cornell University I'm here with Ron White, representing the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and the department of Horticulture. We are here for preliminary and final site plan approval for the turf and landscape research center, plant nursery and pond project. The project is located at the department of Horticultures research center. A 28 -acre facility situated within a 109 -acre parcel on Bluegrass Lane, So Bluegrass Lane is east of Warren Road. The facility is north of Bluegrass Lane. Everything is north of Fall Creek and Forest Home Drive. The project involves construction of a 410,000 - gallon irrigation pond and two identical plant container nursery frames, an existing 211 by 86 foot stone pad. The pad was installed last summer in anticipation of the proposed construction of the hoop house frame structures. The project was reviewed and approved by the NYS DEC in 2002. The proposed pond and greenhouse structures are necessary because of the need for an improved containerized plant nursery and over - wintering facilities. Additionally, a former plant nursery at the Tusk Gardens was too small for growing research needs. By seasonally applying and removing white plastic film, the frame structures integrate cold storage with container beds. This economizes land use and irrigation systems and reduces the labor and vehicular traffic needs associated with the transport of containers from nurseries to cold storage and vice versa. The pad constructed last summer consists of four inches of crushed stone over a continuous layer of filter fabric. Storm and service water are directed around the pad to where the proposed irrigation pond. I . So I think you guys have in your packet a project overview, but basically surface water will be directed around the pad and into the proposed irrigation pond. The project will reduce the peak discharge rate for the 10 -year storm from 1.99 to 1.88 CFS. Following construction, most of the runoff from the nursery pad will be directed to the irrigation pond and used for irrigation. Two identical cold frame structures are galvanized freestanding ground -to- ground greenhouses. I think you have the illustration of some of the greenhouses, example of greenhouses in your packet. For dormant plant storage, the houses will be covered with two layers of plastic film. Again this is illustrated in illustration number 4 and the plastic film will be secured using a wire -lock system. A layer of polypropylene landscape fabric will be pinned to the floor to facilitate and improve maintenance and housekeeping operations. During the summer months the plastic over the hoop houses will be removed and stored for reuse-in the following season. During the growing season, water will be drawn from Fall Creek and supplied to the irrigation pond. The pumping rate from Fall Creek will not increase as a result of this project. They system does not, nor will it require a NYS DEC permit for water withdrawal. During the winter months, a small municipal line will supplement the irrigation system. This will help guard against winter plant desiccation. 14 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved At its highest water elevation, the proposed irrigation pond it approximately 7 feet deep and 130 to 140 feet in diameter, for a total of 14,800 square feet. A 20- gallon per minute skid mounted pump system will supply irrigation water from the pond to the proposed container nursery. Ron White-is now going to talk about some of the operational aspects of the facility. Ron White, Cornell University Operationally speaking,_these hoop houses in the container nursery are a simple affair where we simply hold plant material within the confines of the houses. The plant material could typically be an herbaceous perennial, annual in smallish one - gallon pots, upward to 25- gallon pots with small a tree planted in it. We tend on using drip irrigation because it is more efficient. We are concerned with potential water runoff from the site. Drip irrigation is also easier for us to use. We can irrigate during the daytime when the wind is up and the water will stay where it is directed. So these plants will reside within the footprint of each of the houses. Our drip irrigation will be attached and will remain attached year round until the plant is removed or a new plant is put into the study. Now in the fall around Thanksgiving we take our polypropylene plastic out of storage and we wrap the houses, two layers, and we inflate the layers. This adds insulation and structural integrity to the houses so winter snow loads are less likely to collapse the houses. In the spring when the weather starts to fluxuate, typically about the end of March, we have little rollup sides, sort of side wall curtains if you will that we can roll up and down to help ventilate the house to keep the humidity down, keep the temperatures more stable. Eventually when there is no chance of freeze damage, we remove the skin of the house and expose the plants to full sun conditions throughout the growing season. That is pretty much it. Ms. Aiken — So if you have any questions? Board Member Hoffmann — I wanted to ask you about the water withdrawn from Fall Creek. You said that the rate will not change, but the volume will. So that means that you will be removing water over a longer period of time every day that you do it. Can you tell us more about that? Ms. Aiken — The pumping system will not change. There are no modifications to the existing 5 horsepower submersible pump located in Fall Creek, so yes, the pump system will operate a little bit longer. Board Member Hoffmann — Can you tell us how much? Ms. Aiken — I'm not sure exactly how much. I believe in the narrative we indicated some estimates in the. changes in the overall volume. Board Member Hoffmann — Could you tell us where that is because I wouldn't have asked the question... 15 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Ms. Aiken — We are actually going to be adding 157,000 gallons to the annual usage. Okay, actually, that number is not indicated in the narrative. Board Member Hoffmann Alright. Could you tell it to us again slowly? Ms. Aiken — Right now the annual usage averages about 2.2 million gallons per year. The increase will be 157,000 gallons per year. Board Member Hoffmann — So that is not a huge increase. Ms. Aiken — No. It's quite small. I'm not sure what it amounts to. Board Member Talty — It's less than 5 percent. Board Member Hoffmann — Well, since the pond is more than 10 times as large as the existing pond I was just wondering how much more water do you have to pump every day and how that would affect the creek. Ms. Aiken — We won't be pumping that much more water. I think one of the problems with the existing pond is that it leaks. A lot of water filtrates out of the pond so that has been an ongoing problem with the existing pond. Board Member Hoffmann — But you are still going to use the existing one, aren't you? Ms. Aiken — The existing pond maybe used for other things. But the proposed pond will. form the bulk of the irrigation water. It will be keeping the existing pond in service for at least one year, as a back up system. Board Member Hoffmann — And both of these ponds would be used both for holding runoff you said and for irrigation, is that right? Ms. Aiken — The proposed pond will be used primarily for irrigation and a lot of runoff from the site and a gradient to the site will be directed into the pond, which is why some of the numbers decreased for the peak discharge because the pond acts as a detention area for a lot of areas not just the research center area. Board Member Hoffmann — What about the existing pond? Will that be used for retention, too? Ms. Aiken — We are not going to be directing any water into that pond so there is some water that does go into it now, but no additional waters will be directed into that pond. Board Member Hoffmann — Good. Since it's leaking that wouldn't be a good idea. You talk about having the base of this facility being crushed stone and then having a layer of plastic on top of that to contain soil and other irrigation water and so on. You will be adding some things to the irrigation water like fertilizer. How are you going to make 16 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved sure that there won't be holes in this plastic from walking on it on top of the crushed stone, which. would easily make holes in it, letting whatever comes on top of the plastic through into the gravel and leaching out then. Ms. Aiken - I believe that the plastic... some of the research plots have their own areas of plastic. So there will be smaller areas of plastic. Mr. White _- The_ polypropylene_ laver,_ that _we_are cal ling_ plastic -in this case, that covers the surface of the pad isn't actually intended to hold water. It is a woven landscape fabric where water can infiltrate. It does us really no good to have water sitting on the surface on the plastic. The woven polypropylene landscape fabric, if soil is spilled on it, it can very easily be swept up. So it is a sanitation issue for us, housekeeping issue as well. It also helps prevent pots from rooting into the ground, although it would be very difficult to root into crush stone, we hope. Does that help answer it? Board Member Hoffmann — It answers the question that already was answered in the papers. I was concerned about the liquids that might go through this polypropylene layer into the gravel and then who knows where it would go. Mr. White — Well, pretty much the only thing that is going to go through this layer is irrigation water and anything that might potentially naturally leach out of a potted plant. We don't really have any plans to inject fertilizers into the irrigation water, although that certainly can happen. We certainly would not do it with overhead irrigation, which is also an option if a research project requires it. There are a lot of fertilizers that can be lost in the ground and we don't want to have that happen so that is another reason why drip irrigation is preferred. Normally we would apply fertilizer to the pot, a granule fertilizer, mixture like, all season long. Board Member Hoffmann — Right. You did say that, but you did also say that it could be incorporated into irrigation water, That is the reason for my question. Mr. White — That is because it could happen. A researcher would want to have that as an option for a project. Adding fertilizer to irrigation water is a very popular practice.It is a labor saving practice. It is an efficiency that many growers use so we have to duplicate that often in our research projects. Board Member Hoffmann - But what happens then to that water that goes through the polypropylene and into the gravel? Where does it go then? Mr. White — Well, as with any fertilizer, hopefully it is taken up or metabolized before it goes too far. It's impossible to predict with 100% degree of certainty where that fertilizer will end up. Board Member Hoffmann — But you have some drainage pattern developed for drainage generally on this? 17 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Mr. White — The water will infiltrate the pad and naturally runoff laterally to a certain degree and unless there is a large irrigation event like a downpour rain event, it is probably going to stay pretty close to the surface. If it does get moved with a heavy rain, most of it will probably be trapped by our pond and pumped out through our irrigation system and nutrition our other plants. Ms. Aiken — Just wanted to reiterate that the New York State DEC has reviewed this project and approved of it in 2002. They reviewed the fertilizer and pesticide use out at the site and had no issues with any of the use that was going on. The quantities were determined to be extremely small and were not considered to pose any environmental hazard. Board Member Thayer — Dan, do you have any drainage problems with this? Mr. Walker — No. Actually the grading plan has been laid out well. They are trying to capture as much water in the pond as possible so they are actually going to reduce the surface runoff from the site. The covered hoop structures will have a little bit more runoff when the covering is on it, but that will flow into the pond area based on the drainage that they have proposed there. The soils are pretty well drained. It is a relatively flat site in Ithaca so we are in good shape there. Chairperson Wilcox — Eva, are you all set for now? Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. Board Member Thayer moves the motion, and Board Member Mitrano seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -059: SEAR, Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval & Special Permit, Cornell Plant Nursery & Pond Addition, Bluegrass Lane, Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1 MOTION made by Board Member Thayer, seconded by Board Member Mitrano. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant nursery and pond addition at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center located on Bluegrass Lane, Town. of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of two 5,760+1- square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new 410,000+1- gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant; Ron White, Agent, and IN PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved 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 Site Plan Approval and Special Permit, and 3. The Planning Board, on June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and a Part 11 prepared by Town Planning staff, plans entitled "Plant Nursery & Pond - .__- Project- Tur- f- &- L- an_dscape- Researc -h- Center, — _Bluegrass - Lane, Ithaca; NY 1 4853," including Sheets 1 and 2, and other application materials, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site. Plan Approval and Special Permit; NOW THEREFORE BE /T 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. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox closes this segment of the meeting at 8:00 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant nursery and pond addition located at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center on Bluegrass Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 =1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. This proposal involves the construction of two +/- 5,760 square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new +/= 410,000 - gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant; Ron White; Agent. Board Member Hoffmann - I am wondering how this got built without coming to the Town. Ms. Aiken — I will try to address that. Ron White has been sort of the farm manager. His actual title is Research Support Specialist and he does a lot of different things out 19 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 77 2005 Approved there and when they asked him to do this project he moved forward in a very money - wise conservative way, moved forward with doing a lot of the work himself. He was not aware that there were any regulations with regard to putting up hoop houses because they are, he believes, to be temporary structures and just didn't really think they required review. He came forward to our office at some point and asked for engineering oversight. During this oversight it was noted that he should probably come to the Town and review the pond project with Dan Walker. After that meeting, some other things ---= =eame_up =and there- was - issue- also_froin our- office- as -to- whether- - other - approvals were needed. So that is when the whole thing sort of got started, but it was unfortunately, after the 4 -inch pad was put in. Board Member Hoffmann — But the DEC and other agencies had been involved? Ms. Aiken — The DEC had been involved in it so that was another reason why he didn't really feel any other approvals were necessary just because the project had quite a bit of scrutiny from the DEC and there was a fair amount of oversight. Board Member Hoffmann — Thank you. Board Member Mitrano — Does Cornell have any policy with...I don't know what volume it would cover. Facilities, I guess, in which they make clear to some of these folks about certain procedures or any activities that they undergo that would require certain procedures of approval on up through, the chain of architecture or review or PDC or Town Planning? Ms. Aiken — Unfortunately, I can't answer that question. I just don't know. Board Member Mitrano — It might be helpful for people who inadvertently do something and just aren't aware of all the implications. Ms. Aiken — I believe that as much as possible there are people who try to get the word out, but you know that Cornell is very decentralized and it's a constant challenge with people moving through the University. Board Member Mitrano — Right. That's why, Tammy, I suggest the University policy office might be a good place since it addresses administrative functions to begin with. That might be a way to get the word out. Board Member Hoffmann — That is a good idea. Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else? Chairperson Wilcox opens the public hearing at 8:04 p.m. and invites the public to address the board. No one is present to speak and Chairperson Wilcox closes the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. 20 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 77 2005 Approved Chairperson Wilcox — I wanted to make sure everybody has noticed that besides granting preliminary and final site plan approval, we also have.the issue of some special permit and everybody notes the 12 conditions that make up granting a special permit. Board Member Hoffmann — We also got something tonight from them. Chairperson Wilcox — We had something from Dan Walker, which essentially is what he Mr. Walker — They submitted a very detailed stormwater prevention plan and its great. Board Member Howe moves the motion and Board Member Talty seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -060: Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval & Special Permit, Cornell Plant Nursery & Pond Addition, Bluegrass Lane, Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1 MOTION made by Board Member Howe, seconded by Board Member Talty. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant nursery and pond addition at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center located on Bluegrass Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of two 5,760+1- square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new 410,000+1- gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant, Ron White, Agent, 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 and Special Permit has, on June 7, 2005, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short 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 June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted plans entitled "Plant Nursery & Pond Project, Tun` & Landscape Research Center, Bluegrass Lane, Ithaca, NY 14853," including Sheets 1 and 2, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the construction of a plant nursery and pond at the Cornell University Turf 21 just stated. — - - -- - -- -- - -- -- - - Mr. Walker — They submitted a very detailed stormwater prevention plan and its great. Board Member Howe moves the motion and Board Member Talty seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -060: Preliminary & Final Site Plan Approval & Special Permit, Cornell Plant Nursery & Pond Addition, Bluegrass Lane, Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1 MOTION made by Board Member Howe, seconded by Board Member Talty. WHEREAS. 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant nursery and pond addition at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center located on Bluegrass Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes the construction of two 5,760+1- square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new 410,000+1- gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant, Ron White, Agent, 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 and Special Permit has, on June 7, 2005, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short 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 June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted plans entitled "Plant Nursery & Pond Project, Tun` & Landscape Research Center, Bluegrass Lane, Ithaca, NY 14853," including Sheets 1 and 2, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the construction of a plant nursery and pond at the Cornell University Turf 21 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved & Landscape Research Center on Bluegrass Lane, as shown on the submitted plans entitled "Plant Nursery & Pond Project, Turf & Landscape Research Center," subject to the following conditions, to be met prior to issuance of a building permit: a. Revision of the plans to include the Town, County, and State in which the project is located and further revision of Sheet 2, Project Overview area, to include the location and details of the proposed wildlife fence noted in the -- - - - - -- - ------ -- -- Project-- description, _ ---- - -. -.. - -- - - - - b. Submission of an original final site plan, revised as above, on mylar, vellum or paper, bearing the name and seal of each registered land surveyor, engineer, architect, or landscape architect who prepared the plan(s), to be retained by the Town of Ithaca, and C. 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 Pollution Prevention Plan and Notice of Intent. AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED: That the Planning Board hereby grants Special Permit for the project, determining that: a. the health, safety, morals and general welfare of the community, in harmony with the general purpose of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code and the specific purposes, are being promoted, and b, the premises are reasonably adapted to the proposed use, and such use will fill a neighborhood or community need, and C. the proposed use and the location and design of proposed structures are consistent with the character of the district in which they are located, and d. the proposed use will not be detrimental to the general amenity or neighborhood character in amounts sufficient to devaluate neighboring property or seriously inconvenience neighboring inhabitants, and e. operations in connection with the proposed use will not be more objectionable to nearby properties by reason of noise, fumes, vibrations, illumination, or other public nuisance, than the operation of any permitted use in the zone in which the use is located, and f. community infrastructure and services are of adequate capacity to accommodate the proposed use, and 22 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved g1 the proposed use, facility design, and site layout comply with all of the provisions of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code, and to the extent considered by the Planning Board, with other regulations of the Town, and with the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan, and .. . h. the proposed access and egress for all structures and uses is safely designed and the site layout provides adequate access for emergency — - vehicles, and i. the general effect of the proposed use upon the community as a whole is not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community, and j. the lot area and access are sufficient for the proposed use, and k. natural surface water drainage is adequately managed in accordance with good engineering practices, and existing drainageways are not altered in a manner that adversely affects other properties, .and I. to the extent reasonably deemed relevant by the Planning Board, the proposed use or structure. complies with all the criteria applicable to site plan review set forth in the Town of Ithaca Zoning Code. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. SEAR Determination Cayuga Medical Center Southwest Addition Modifications,. 101 Harris B. Dates Drive. Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 8:08 p.m. Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf Kim Michaels is here this evening who is project manager at Trowbridge & Wolf on this project. Paul Levesque is here this evening, who is project manager from HOLT Architects. Joe Fitzgerald, Vice President of Cayuga Medical Center, is also here this evening to answer questions. We were just here approximately a year ago, June 15th,. for final site plan approval on several phases of work. I would like to just spend a minute talking about 23 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 77 2005 Approved the work that has been complete to date and then go into the area that we are asking for a modified site plan approval. If we go back to the overall master plan that we presented a year ago, the Radiation Oncology Facility, as you know, has been recently complete. The parking lot to the west of the medical center is now complete. We also use some very innovative materials in that project. The new gardens, which a number of people have called the animal gardens, —the- commemorative gardens on the south side of what will be the new southwest addition are also complete. In that garden is a water quality basin that has been incorporated into the garden setting and that has also been finalized as well as some other work, as you know, in the cafeteria area. On the east side of the medical center, we are just now finalizing the planting for a major water quality basin as well and other site development. So the area we are coming back for a modified site plan approval for really is at the very entrance of the emergency department and the primary entrance to the medical center on the west side. We are providing blow -ups. This is the site plan for that entrance that you approved a year ago. This is the modified site plan for that entrance that we are coming in this evening to discuss. So the reason we are here this evening is that there have been some revisions to the building program over this past year and as you know from the staff report that the building will be one -story shorter, however, the structure for an additional floor is being built or has been built into a construction document that have gone out to bid for the project. The major modifications that you can see that affect site plan approval. There was a large canopy that came out the primary entrance on the west side that separated ambulance and emergency drop -off from out patient entry into the hospital. We feel that the current modification to that entrance, which is a new raised canopy at the primary entrance really where you walk in the hospital currently, is a better solution. What that allows for are patients to come in. There is drop -off at the emergency patient entrance. There is all the handicap parking immediately at the front door. There is some emergency physician and security parking at the front door. There is a separate ambulance entry only with emergency department canopy. So the difference really is change of program, revision to the canopy, we think improved circulation from what we brought you a year ago. That both ambulances and people that really are in a... often times dire - straights need to get to the ED or the outpatient entry quickly are able to drop -off move through and either search for parking or stay in that area if there is critical emergency. Also the site design, as you know from Sue Ritter's notes, there have been some minor modifications to the front of the building in terms of things like garden development, but from a landscape perspective, as you can see, that primary structure of trees and shrubs and landscape pretty much stay the same. So it's an architectural . change and there is a circulation change at the front of the building. From an environmental review perspective, we do have less impervious area than we had a year ago. So there is more landscape, less paving, less roof than we had June 15th of last year. So we think environmentally, we think from a vehicular, from a pedestrian friendly perspective, this is a better plan. 24 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Also we have been very pleased, I'm not sure what the community response is, but we have been very pleased with the quality of work to date. The attention to visitor and patient services and creating the hospital's accommodation of valet parking. So things have gone very, very smoothly at the hospital and we are really down to this last, but critical portion of the site redevelopment, which is the southwest addition and the emergency department and the primary entrance at this level of the hospital. Chairperson Wilcox — Referencing Sue Ritter's comments as of June 1St, the applicant has proposed modifications to the landscaping plan. The plan proposed to reduce the number of perennial plants by approximately one -half, only retaining the same number of originally proposed trees and shrubs. She says one -half. I though that you just that the number would stay relatively the same. Mr. Trowbridge — No. That was the trees and shrubs. I was saying the garden areas have been reduced. Chairperson Wilcox — Would you address the perennials? Why the number of perennials would be reduced by approximately one -half? Kim Michaels, Trowbridge & Wolf All of the areas that are currently constructed, there was no plant reduction in perennials, shrubs or trees at all. We developed this site plan that you approved over a year ago and are finally now going into construction documents and mostly its an issue of you get to know the site better and changes are made and some circulation patterns change and things were more successful. There's a lot of plants that were more successful in the earlier gardens and are filling in places that we don't necessarily need as many perennials now. I think that keeping the same number of trees and shrubs and maintaining the structure of the garden as you originally approved is really the main issue in terms of how the landscape overall is going to pull together. Board Member Hoffmann — Can you show on the map where the areas are where there I ill be fewer perennials? Ms. Michaels — Originally there were perennials along the stream edge and proposed during this phase, but we put a few in during the garden phase, which are becoming very successful and we also realized because of the retaining wall we need to put in to hold back this oak, a lot of these perennials aren't going to be seen. Also this area along this side of the southwest addition, turns out there needed to be some area ways, which are places on the ground with a grate over them for air intake and so some of the planting there needed to be reduced to make room for that. This MMU plaza here originally plated to have several hundred perennials in it and this whole area may or may not be an area that is heavily used by the public so we are just reducing the perennials and just putting a more dense tree cover in that area. Chairperson Wilcox — The shrubbery not only serves to beautify the grounds from the public point of view, but also to potentially hide mass of the building as well. 25 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Board Member Hoffmann - I was going to say that I think this circulation plan is a great improvement over the other one. I had a chance to test the other one this winter and I found it both a little confusing, both as a visitor and as a patient. One of the things that really puzzled me and I hope I am wrong in what I am assuming with what is going on. At the ambulance entrance, the way it was then which I assume is still is how it is now, that the ambulance is pulled in at a different angle than what you show on the new plan.. - -- When_1_came -to visit -a- patient -in- November when -it- was - -very- cold__- and_.snowy, there would be an ambulance standing outside that emergency entrance pointing out with the motor on so that the fumes came up against the door to the emergency room. I can't know of course if the same ambulance was the one that was standing there when I left a couple of hours later, but there was always an ambulance there with the motor on and it seemed to me from an environmental point of view from inside the hospital that this is a very bad situation and I was wondering when you redirect them if that is going to make a difference. But if its not and they have to stay with their motors on and understand from a friend who used to be an EMT that there are reasons to have the motor on in the winter, but could you at least arrange it so that once they have dropped the patient off and they just stand there waiting that they turn around so that the exhaust goes away from the door and the wall of the building and the window? Mr. Trowbridge - Well a few things, Eva. What you were experiencing this year was a whole series of temporary facilities in front of the hospital. The new addition will be added onto the front of the hospital and the ambulance canopy will allow ambulances to stop parallel to the face of the building. They will no longer be backing up to the emergency department. So they will be freestanding under the second canopy in front of the building. Board Member Mitrano - Why is that considered to be an improvement? Mr. Trowbridge - It will keep them from having to back up and they can sit side by side under the canopy and its safer just to sort of pull up and stop rather than pull up, stop and back up. Board Member Mitrano - That's true. Chairperson Wilcox - They also can't realistically turn around and wait because should a call come in then they have to turn around again. Board Member Hoffmann - I understand that, but there is something wrong. Even if the doors are shut, exhaust will get through in cracks and it can't be . very good for the people working inside to get that exhaust. Paul Levesque, HOLT Architect You are right, Eva. That is something that we deal a lot with in emergency department design is exhaust from the ambulances because you are right, they do run and they need to run all the time. Fortunately, at Cayuga Medical Center, one of the things with 26 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved the old canopy is that the winds up there are so strong that we actually had to build a windbreak at one time. With this new design the way the ambulances will pull in, the wind will be blowing this way. It's all open underneath and we were taking that into account when we were designing that so that will help out a lot with the exhaust fumes. Board Member Mitrano – Looks good. - _Boa rd - Member- _T- alty_- I- ha_ve_a- question. — With- regards_to- the -drop -off area, – the - canopy, is that going to be similar to how hotels are devised? So just like a hotel when people are checking in, people have a tendency to leave their cars there. So my question is, if somebody is side by side, will you be able to get through with that circulation pattern that you just outlined? Mr. Trowbridge – There are two lanes under the canopy so if someone stopped at the front door; a second car will be able to pass them. It has a double lane the width of something that you would experience at Wegman's. So its not as if one car stopped and it stops traffic. Chairperson Wilcox — Would someone like to move the SEQR motion? Board Member Conneman moves the motion and Chairperson Wilcox seconds the motion.- PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -061: SEAR, Approval for Site Plan Modification, Cayuga Medical Center — Southwest Addition, 101 Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3 -2.21, 24 -3- 2:411, and 24 -3 -2.412 MOTION made by Board Member Conneman, seconded by Chairperson Wilcox. WHEREAS: 1. Consideration of Approval for Site Plan Modification for the proposed Southwest Addition to the Cayuga Medical Center located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3 -2.21, 24 -3- 2.411, and 24 -3- 2.412 Office Park Commercial Zone. The modifications include eliminating the fourth floor and mechanical penthouse from the building addition resulting in a reduction of total height from +/- 89 feet to +/- 67 feet, and reorganizing the outpatient and emergency department entrance area and driveway. The Planning Board previously granted approval for the Southwest Addition on June 15, 2004. Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, Owner, Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Landscape Architects, Applicant, 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 Approval for Site Plan Modification, and 27 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 77 2005 Approved 3. The Planning Board, on June 7, 2005, has 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, a packet of drawings and details titled "Modification To Submission for Town of Ithaca Final Site Plan Review" (Southwest Addition to Cayuga Medical Center), dated May 9, 2005, prepared by HOLT Architects, P.C., T.G. Miller, Ryan - Briggs Associates, P.C., Trowbridge & Wolf, and Sack & Associates, and other application material, and 4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination. of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Site Plan Modification; 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. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Chairperson Wilcox closes this segment of the meeting at 8:25 p.m PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Site Plan Modifications for the previously approved southwest addition and site improvement project at the Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24- 3- 2.411, 24 -3- 14129 24 -3 -2.21, and 24- 3 -2.3, Office Park Commercial Zone. The modifications include eliminating the fourth floor and mechanical penthouse from the addition which reduces the total height from +l- 89 feet to +l- 67 feet along with reorganizing the outpatient and emergency department entrance area. we PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, Owner; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Agent Chairperson Wilcox opens the public hearing at 8:25 p.m. and invites members of the public to address the board. With no one present to speak, Chairperson Wilcox closes the public hearing at 8:26 p.m. _C— h_arrperson- Wilcox - - _Petyou do good- =work - __It's- appreciated .- Joe, —1 -- know -- he doesn't come cheap, but I know he's worth it. Would someone like to move the motion as drafted? Board Member Mitrano moves the motion and Board Member Howe seconds the motion. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -062: Approval for Site Plan Modification, Cayuga Medical Center — Southwest Addition, 101 Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3 4.21, 24 -3- 2.411, and 24 -3 -2.412 MOTION made by Board Member Mitrano, seconded by Board Member Howe. WHEREAS. 1. Consideration of Approval for Site Plan Modification for the proposed Southwest Addition to the Cayuga Medical Center located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3 -2.21, 24 -3- 2.411, and 24 -3 -2.412 Office Park Commercial Zone. The modifications include elimination of the fourth floor and mechanical penthouse from the building addition, resulting in a reduction of total height from +/- 89 feet to +/- 67 feet, and reorganization of the outpatient and emergency department entrance area and driveway. The Planning Board previously granted approval for the Southwest Addition on June 15, 2004. Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, Owner, Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Landscape Architects, 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 Modification, did, on June 7, 2005, make a negative determination of environmental significance, and 3. The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted as adequate, a packet of drawings and details titled "Modification To: Submission for Town of Ithaca Final Site Plan Review" (Southwest Addition to Cayuga Medical Center), dated May 9, 2005, prepared by HOLT Architects, P. C., T.G. Miller, Ryan - Briggs Associates, P.C., Trowbridge & Wolf, and Sack & Associates, and other application materials, and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED. 29 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved 1. That the Town of Ithaca, Planning Board hereby grants Approval for Site Plan Modification for the Cayuga Medical Center Southwest Addition located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3- 2.411, 24 -3- 2.412, and 24 -3 -2.21, as shown in the packet of drawings and details titled " "Modification To: Submission for Town of Ithaca Final Site Plan Review" (Southwest Addition to Cayuga Medical Center), dated May 9, 2005, prepared by HOLT Architects, P.C., T.G. Miller, Ryan - Briggs Associates, P.C., Trowbridge & Wolf, and Sack & Associates, and other application material subject to the following condition: a. submission of an original of the final site plan on mylar, vellum or paper, to be retained by the Town of Ithaca, prior to the issuance of a building permit. A vote on the motion resulted as follows, AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. SEAR Determination Wiggins 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1150 -1154 Danby Road Chairperson Wilcox opens this segment of the meeting at 8:28 p.m. Wally Wiggins, 961 Taughannock Boulevard This concerns the LaTourelle area consisting of 70 acres, 20 of which has been modified by prior zoning approvals for a hotel, spa, and restaurant. The surrounding 65 acres, I think it is, being transferred to my daughter and grandchildren and withdrawing my previously approved subdivision of some 70 lots. Ultimately we decided to do something better than that so we're withdrawing that and leaving it as a single lot to be used as a residential area. Mr. Wilcox — When I came on this board that was about the time that you subdivided that parcel next door. As I remember you spent a considerable amount of money with a full environmental impact statement, etc, etc. in order to get the approval. What you're saying at this point is that you wish to rescind that entire subdivision? Mr. Wiggins — That's correct. Mr. Wilcox — Do I hear a motion for the SEQR? Mr. Talty — By rescinding that, does that mean that it's as though it never transpired? So you would have to go through and redo everything all over again? 30 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Mr. Kanter — Absolutely. Mr. Talty — Okay. Mr. Wilcox - It was a time when I think we'd been sued over Ithaca Care and the courts forced the Planning Board and the developer to provide a full environmental statement. and then- sometime - -near —the- _end -0f that_I_ came on- the - Board. We -may- .have, I'm not sure, how we were reacting at that point, but Wally was required to do a .full environmental impact statement for this project. Mr. Talty — So any future endeavors they could never utilize.that report? Or they could? Mr. Barney — I think it's probably pretty dated at this point. That was done, what? Mr. Wilcox — 1996, Wally do you remember? Mr. Kanter — Something like that. Mr. Barney — To the extent it had information that was still relevant today it could be used, but I suspect it would require a pretty extensive look and updating if someone was going to try and subdivide. Mr. Thayer — Doesn't it just die anyway, a natural death by time? Ms. Hoffmann — Unless something has been started. Mr. Walker — They started a little construction. They never finished it, but there's still three manholes sitting on the ground out there and the roads dropped in so technically they started construction. Mr. Kanter — Technically this could be a debatable issue and it's moot now, but much or all of the subdivision automatically expired by virtue of several things. There were some conditions in the subdivision approval which actually called for expiration if certain things did happen. And also in the State law, Town law there are sections that deal with expiration of subdivisions. In a way this is really good that it's kind of cleaning up any remaining legal questions that there may have been. Mr. Wilcox — I have a motion from Tracy, I believe l got a second from Larry with regard to the environmental. Any further discussion? There being none those in favor please signal by saying aye. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005-063: SEQR, Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Wiggins 2 -Lot Subdivision and Rescinding Previous Approvals of Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision, 11504154 Danby Road, Tax Parcel No.'s: 364-4.2, 364-6.1 thru 6.15, and 36 -1 -6.70 and 6.71 31 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved MOTION made by Board Member Mitrano, seconded by Board Member Thayer. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed consolidation of existing lots and subsequent 2 4ot subdivision located at 11.50- .1.154 Danby Road _(NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 1-4.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1, Low Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +A 54.61 acre parcel into one +/- 14.74 acre parcel containing the existing John Thomas Steakhouse and La Tourelle Country Inn development and one +/- 39.87 acre parcel which is currently vacant and will be consolidated with adjacent properties to the south and east (Buttermilk Valley Estates Phase I Subdivision) creating a single parcel fronting on Danby Road. The Planning Board as part of this proposal will consider rescinding all previous approvals granted for the "Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision ". Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant. 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 3. The Planning Board on June 7, 2005, 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 Walter J. Wiggins" dated 312005, revised May 2, 2005, prepared by Reagan Land Surveying, and other application materials, and 4. The Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision actions. 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.. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NA YS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. 32 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved Chairperson Wilcox closes this segment of the meeting at 8:32 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed consolidation of previously approved lots and a new 2 -lot subdivision of the entire lands located at 1150 -1154 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 14.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1, Low Density. __--= Residential- Zone, - and - Conservation - Zone.- -T-he- proposal- involves_subdividing the +l- 54.61 acre parcel into one +l- 14.74 acre parcel (Parcel "B ") containing the existing John Thomas Steakhouse and La Tourelle Country Inn development and one +/- 39.87 acre parcel which is currently vacant to. be consolidated with adjacent properties to the south and east (Parcel "A "). This will also result in the rescinding of all previous approvals for the "Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision" granted by the Planning Board in 1996. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant. Chairperson Wilcox opens the public hearing at 8:32 p.m. and invites members of the public to address the board. With no one present to be heard, Chairperson Wilcox closes the public hearing at 8:34 p.m. Chairperson Wilcox - Questions of Mr. Wiggins with regard to this project.? There being none, John Barney any questions with regard to the resolution as drafted? Mr. Barney No. Ms. Hoffmann — You said that this would all be residential which is what it is zoned as now, I think, except for the LaTourelle parcel. Mr. Barney —Yes. Ms. Mitrano — How's construction going Wally? Mr. Wiggins — It's going very well. The roof trusses on today. We will be opening it looks like October 15tH Ms. Mitrano — Good luck. Mr. Wilcox — I need a motion and a second. Moved by Kevin Talty, seconded by Tracy Mitrano. There being no further discussion all those in favor please signal by saying aye. PB RESOLUTION NO. 2005 -064: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval, Wi_g_gins 2 -Lot Subdivision and Rescinding Previous Approvals of Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision, 1150 -1154 Danby Road, Tax Parcel No.'s: 3644.2, 36- 1 -6.1 thru 6.15, and 36 -1 -6.70 and 6.71 33 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 77 2005 Approved MOTION made by Board Member Talty, seconded by Board Member Mitrano. WHEREAS: 1. This action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed consolidation of existing lots and subsequent 2 -lot subdivision located at 1150 -1154 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- ___1 -4 -2, P- lanned- Development - Zone- No -1 -,- Low- Density- Residential-Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 54.61 acre parcel into one +/- 14.74 acre parcel containing the existing John Thomas Steakhouse and La Tourelle Country Inn development and one +/- 39.87 acre parcel which is currently vacant and will be consolidated with adjacent properties to the south and east (Buttermilk Valley Estates Phase I Subdivision) creating a single parcel fronting on Danby Road. The Planning Board as part of this proposal will consider rescinding all previous approvals granted for the `Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision ". 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 Subdivision Approval, has on June 7, 2005, made a negative determination of environmental significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 11 prepared by the Town Planning staff, and 3. The overall Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision received Preliminary Subdivision Approval on June 4, 1996, and Phase I of the Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision received Final Subdivision Approval from the Town Planning Board on June 18, 1996, and this applicant acknowledges that this current subdivision and consolidation will remove all previous subdivision approvals and requirements relating to the Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision located on Danby Road, and 4. Several of the conditions of the Planning Board approval of the Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision were never met, and 5. Town Law Section 276 (7)(c) states that ... "conditional approval of the final plat shall expire within one hundred eighty days after the resolution granting such approval unless all requirements stated in such resolution have been certified as completed...'; and 6. The Planning Board on June 7, 2005, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short Environmental Assessment. Form Part 1, submitted by the applicant, and Part 11 prepared by the Town Planning staff, a survey entitled "Survey . Map - Lands of Walter J. Wiggins" dated 312005, revised May 2, 2005, prepared by Reagan Land Surveying, and other application materials. M PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 71 2005 Approved NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: 11 The -Town of - Ithaca - Planning- Board - hereby - rescinds all previous approvals granted for the "Buttermilk Valley Estates" Subdivision, and all previously approved lots in said subdivision are hereby consolidated into Parcel "A" shown on the survey entitled "Survey Map — Lands of Walter J. Wiggins" dated 312005,. revised - -Maw 2a 2005, and — 2. 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 3. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2 —lot subdivision and consolidation of Tax. Parcel No. 36- 1 -4.2, located at 1150 -1154 Danby Road, as shown on the survey map entitled "Survey Map — Lands of Walter J. Wiggins" dated 312005, revised May 2, 2005, prepared by Reagan Land Surveying, subject to the following conditions: a. revision of the Survey Map to show that Tax Parcel No.'s 36 -1 -6.1 through 6.15, 36 -1 -6.70 and 6.71, which are comparable to the lots that were approved in the Phase I Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision, are consolidated into the new Parcel "A" approved in this action, with the acreage of Parcel "A" to be re- labeled to include the area of the consolidated Phase I lots, and b. 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, all revised as above, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerk's Office, and submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning Department. A vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Mitrano, Thayer, Howe, Talty NAYS: None. The motion was declared to be carried unanimously. Persons to be Heard There was no on present to address the Board 35 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JUNE 712005 Approved Approval of the Minutes Wilcox moved approval of the minutes as corrected. Eva abstains. Tracy not present for vote. PB RESOLU- T-ION -NO: 2005- 065: - Approval -of Minutes:- Ma_y -17, -2005- -- MOTION by Chairperson Wilcox, seconded by Board Member Thayer. RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopt the May 17, 2005 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said meetings as presented with corrections. The vote on the motion resulted as follows: AYES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Hoffmann. ABSENT. Mitrano. The vote on the motion was carried. Other Business The board discusses the upcoming Transportation Plan meeting on Thursday, June 9, 2005. Mr. Kanter gives the board an overview of what is on upcoming agendas and the board discusses the possibility of canceling the July 5th meeting. The board discusses the letter Chairperson Wilcox received from George Winner, Jr. regarding the Evan Monkemeyer parkland donation. Adjournment Upon motion by Board Member Thayer, Chairperson Wilcox adjourns the June 7, 2005 Planning Board meeting at 9:08 p.m. pectfL rrie Co Deputy Town Clerk 36 7:00 P.M. 7:05 P.M. TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday, June 7, 2005 AGENDA Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes). SEQR Determination: Primet Precision MaterialsTM, Bldg. Rental, 1005 Hudson Street Extension. 7:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of an existing building by Primet Precision MaterialsTM, Inc., which is located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, Light Industrial Zone. Primet Precision MaterialsTM, Inc. is an advanced materials development company that would rent the existing building that was most recently used by Therm for storage. No modifications or additions are planned for the site. Therm Incorporated, Owner /Applicant; George May, Agent. 7:15 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cornell University Nursery Greenhouse & Pond, Bluegrass Lane, 7:20 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant nursery and pond addition located at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center on Bluegrass Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. This proposal involves the construction of two +/- 5,760 square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new +/- 410,000- gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant; Ron White, Agent. 7:25 P.M. SEQR Determination: Cayuga Medical Center Southwest Addition Modifications, 101 Harris B. Dates Drive. 7:30 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Site Plan Modifications for the previously approved southwest addition and site improvement project at the Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3- 2.411, 24 -3- 2.4125 24- 3 -2.21, and 24- 3 -2.3, Office Park Commercial Zone. The modifications include eliminating the fourth floor and mechanical penthouse from the addition which reduces the total height from +/- 89 feet to +/- 67 feet along with reorganizing the outpatient and emergency department entrance area. Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, Owner; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Agent. 7:35 P.M. SEQR Determination: Wiggins 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1150 -1154 Danby Road. 7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed consolidation of previously approved lots and a new 2 -lot subdivision of the entire lands located at 1150 -1154 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 1 -4.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1, Low Density Residential Zone, and Conservation.Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 54.61 acre parcel into one +/- 14.74 acre parcel (Parcel `B ") containing the existing John Thomas Steakhouse and La Tourelle Country Inn development and one +/- 39.87 acre parcel which is currently vacant to be consolidated with adjacent properties to the south and east (Parcel "A "). This will also result in the rescinding of all previous approvals for the "Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision" granted by the Planning Board in 1996. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant. TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday, June 7, 2005 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GWEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, June 7, 2005, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:10 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval for the proposed use of an existing building by Primet Precision Material sTM, Inc., which is located on the Therm Incorporated property at 1005 Hudson Street Extension, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 54 -2 -1, Light Industrial Zone. Primet. Precision Material sTM, Inc. is an advanced materials development company that would rent the existing building that was most recently used by Therm for storage. No modifications or additions are .planned for the site. Therm Incorporated, Owner /Applicant; George May, Agent. 7:20 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Site Plan Approval and Special Permit for the proposed plant . nursery and pond addition located at the Cornell University Turf & Landscape Research Center on Bluegrass Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 69 -1 -1, Low Density Residential Zone. This proposal involves the construction of two +/- 5,760 square foot greenhouse structures for the plant container nursery and a new +/- 410,000 - gallon irrigation pond. New York State, Owner; Cornell University Department of Horticulture, Applicant; Ron White, Agent. 7:30 P.M. Consideration of Site Plan Modifications for the previously approved southwest addition and site improvement project at the Cayuga Medical Center. at Ithaca located at 101 Harris B. Dates Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 24- 3 -2.1, 24 -3- 2.411, 24 -3- 2.4125 24 -3 -2.21, and 24- 3 -2.3, Office Park Commercial Zone. The modifications include eliminating the fourth floor and mechanical penthouse from the addition which reduces the total height from +/- 89 feet to +/- 67 feet along with reorganizing the outpatient and emergency department entrance area. Cayuga Medical Center at Ithaca, Owner; Peter Trowbridge, Trowbridge & Wolf LLP, Agent. 7:40 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed consolidation of previously approved lots and a new 2 -lot subdivision of the entire lands located at 1150 -1154 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36- 1 -4.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1, Low Density Residential Zone, and Conservation Zone. The proposal involves subdividing the +/- 54.61 acre parcel into one +/- 14.74 acre parcel (Parcel `B ") containing the existing John Thomas Steakhouse and La Tourelle Country Inn development and one +/- 39.87 acre parcel which is currently vacant to be consolidated with adjacent properties to the south and east (Parcel "A "). This will also result in the rescinding of all previous approvals for the `Buttermilk Valley Estates Subdivision" granted by the Planning Board in 1996. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner /Applicant. 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: Friday, May 27, 2005 Publish: Wednesday, June 1, 2005 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SI&W IN SHEET DATE: June 7, 2005 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME n PLEASE PRINT ADDRESS /AFFILIATION 7TeYLt 1V PCB r::' 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, June 7, 2005 commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached. Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tioga Street. Date of Posting: Date of Publication May 27, 2005 June 1, 2005 :5� (3Ac- — Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this 1 st day of June 2005. Notary Public CONNIE F. CLARK Notary Public, State of New York No. 01 CL6052878 Oualified in Tompkins County Commission Expires December 26, 20