Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2012-02-07TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Tuesday. February 7. 2012 AGENDA 7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than fiye minutes). 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign yariances for the LaTourelle Resort property located at 1150 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.5, Planned Deyelopment Zone No. 1. The proposal is to keep the three existing entrance signs near Danby Road and the three existing awnings with lettering. Walter Wiggins, Owner; Scott Wiggins, Applicant. 7:15 P.M. SEQR Determination: Conifer Senior Liying on West Hill, south of West Hill Driye. 7:15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approyal and Preliminary Subdiyision Approyal for the proposed Conifer Senior Liying on West Hill deyelopment located to the south of West Hill Driye near the Qyerlook Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-4-5.2, Medium Density Residential and Multiple Residence Zones. The proposal inyolyes deyeloping approximately 5 acres of the property for a new 3-story, 72 unit senior housing facility (21,000 +/- square foot footprint) on a new road off of West Hill Driye. The project will also include new sidewalks around the facility with a connection to the existing bus shelter on West Hill Driye, new stormwater facilities, parking, a community garden, signage, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. The Planning Board will also be considering a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding the rezoning of approximately 4.796 +/- acres from Medium Density Residential Zone to a new Multiple Residence Zone. Cornell Uniyersity, Property Owner; Conifer Realty, LLC, Applicant; John F. Caruso, PE, PMP, Passero Associates, Agent. 8:00 P.M. Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed Ithaca Biodiesel Cooperatiye project located at 614 Elmira Road (NYS Route 13), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33-3-2.42, Light Industrial Zone. The proposal inyolyes modifying the existing building and property to accommodate a new biodiesel business. As part of this conyersion, the project inyolyes adding outdoor storage tanks, concrete containment dikes, an open canopy on the west side of the building, and new signage. Ithaca Realty, LLC, Property Owner, Ithaca Biodiesel Cooperatiye, Inc., Applicant; James Jones-Rounds, Agent. 6. Approyal of Minutes: January 17, 2012. 7. Other Business: 8. Adjournment Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY SANDY POLCE AT 273-1747. (A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Tuesday. February 7.2012 By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, February 7, 2012, at 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters: 7:05 P.M. Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign yariances for the LaTourelle Resort property located at 1150 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.5, Planned Deyelopment Zone No. 1. The proposal is to keep the three existing entrance signs near Danby Road and the three existing awnings with lettering. Walter Wiggins, Owner; Scott Wiggins, Applicant. 7:15 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary Site Plan Approyal and Preliminary Subdiyision Approyal for the proposed Conifer Senior Liying on West Hill deyelopment located to the south of West Hill Driye near the Qyerlook Apartments, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-4-5.2, Medium Density Residential and Multiple Residence Zones. The proposal inyolyes deyeloping approximately 5 acres of the property for a new 3-story, 72 unit senior housing facility (21,000 +/- square foot footprint) on a new road off of West Hill Driye. The project will also include new sidewalks around the facility with a connection to the existing bus shelter on West Hill Driye, new stormwater facilities, parking, a community garden, signage, outdoor lighting, and landscaping. The Planning Board will also be considering a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding the rezoning of approximately 4.796 +/- acres from Medium Density Residential Zone to a new Multiple Residence Zone. Cornell Uniyersity, Property Owner; Conifer Realty, LLC, Applicant; John P. Caruso, PE, PMP, Passero Associates, Agent. Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Indiyiduals with yisual impairments, hearing impairments or other special needs, will be proyided 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 hearing. Susan Ritter Director of Planning 273-1747 Dated: Monday, January 30,2012 Publish: Wednesday, February 1,2012 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 bv the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall. 215 North Tioga Street. Ithaca. New York, on Tuesday. February 7. 2012 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: January 30, 2012 Date of Publication: February 1, 2012 Sandra Polce, Senior Typist Town of Ithaca STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF TOMPKINS) Sworn to and subscribed before me this day of February 2012. I n -' Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Nolary P.ibl'C, State of New York No. C1WH5052877 Tioga County A- J Commission Expir^sS December 26,_jxC_2 Wednesday. February 1,2012 j JTHE JTHACA JOURNAL TOWN OF tTHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBUC HEARINGS Tuesday, February 7, 2012 By direclio" of the Chair person of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Heanngg wlll be held by the Plannir^ Board of the Town of Ithaca on Toeaday. February % 20!2, SI 215 North TlO£» Street, Ithaca, N.Y.. at thi^ following times and on thp following matters: 7:05 P,M. Conaiderallon of a reconv mendation to the Zonlr^ Board of Appeals regarding sign variances For thg. LeTourelle Resort prq^er^ located at 1150 Dant^ Road tNYS Route 96B). Town of Ithaca Tax Pared No. 36-M.5, Piaruwd Da? vdopmeit Zone No. The proposal Is to keep the three existing entranc^ signs near Danby Road and the three existing awnlnge vdth lettering. Walter VYig> gins, Owrieit Scott Wig. gins. Applicant. 7:15 P.M. Consideration of Prellmina. ly Site Plan Approval and . Preliminary Sutidlvlsion Ap proval for the proposed Conifer Senior Living on I West Hill developmeni lo cated to the south of West I HI Drive near the Overtook ' Apartments. Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 24-4-5.2, Medium Density Residen tial and Multiple Residence Zones. The proposal Iri- volves developing BF^rroxi- mstely 5 acres of the prop erty (or a new 3-8tory, 72 unit senior houslr>g facility (21,000 */• square foot footprint) on a new road off of West HIB Drive. The pro^t will dso Include rrew sidewalks around the facility with a connection Id the existing bus dielter or)' West Hill Drive, new stormwaler facilities, park--' ing, a community garden.' signage. outdoor lighting, and landscaping. The Plan-' ning Board will also be con sidering a recommendation.. to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding the re2onlng of approximately 4.796 */■ acres from Medi um Density Residential Zone to a new Mullipie /Residence Zone. Cornell^Iverslty. Properly Own-'Be: Conifer Realty, LLC,^pDllcant; .John F. Caruso, PMP, Passero Associ ates, Agent._Said Planning Board will at 'feud limes and said placeIhear all persons in suf^rtfef such matters or ol^ec-ions thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in per- aon. Individuals with visual Impaimienls. hearir>g impairments or other special needs, will be prowi^ with assistance as neces- aaty, upon request. Per- yMns desiring assistanceWist make such a request not less than 46 hours prior.to the time of the public hearing. Susan Ritter Director of Plarviing 273-1747 Dated: Monday, January 30,2012 2/1/2012 Town of Ithaca Planning Board 215 North Tioga Street February 7,2012 7:00 p.ni. PLEASE SIGN-IN Please Print Clearly, Thank You Name Address -7" ^ t) K A/ SoIca r IZ^TTd T'ru f^hrJ^So<jr^ l^c) . TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MEETING Tuesday, February 7, 2012 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Board Members Present: Fred Wilcox (Chair), Linda Collins, George Conneman, John Beach, Jon Bosak, Ellen Baer, Hollis Erb Staff Present: Susan Ritter, Director of Planning;Bruce Bates, Director of Code Enforcement; Creig Hebdon, Engineer; Dan Thaete, Engineer; Chris Balestra, Planner; Mike Smith, Planner; Dan Tasman, Planner; Deb DeAugistine, Deputy Town Clerk; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town Call to Order Mr. Wilcox called the meeting to order at 7:03 p.m. and accepted the secretary’s posting of the pub- lic hearing notices. Mr. Wilcox announced that Mr. Slottje has resigned from the Board and withdrawn his application for appointment. Ms. Baer is still being considered for the alternate member position. AGENDA ITEM Persons to be heard Joel Harlan spoke in favor of the need to build more affordable housing in the Town. Anna Smith, Dubois Road, stated that she supports the Conifer project, but considering that pro- ject and the Holochuck project together, she has not heard of any suggested remedies for traffic congestion in the west end of downtown Ithaca. She’s wondering if the Board can and will do any- thing about this. Mr. Wilcox said the Planning Board probably won’t do much, and asked what the Town Board and Planning Committee are doing about it. Mr. Ritter said there is no action to remedy at this point, but there is concern and there is analysis being done in conjunction with proposals in the Comp Plan, which haven’t been approved yet. There have been conversations between the Town and the City to understand the issues and plan for them. Ms. Ritter said she thinks that’s what it’s going to take. Ms. Smith asked how far in the future these things will happen, saying that at the rate governments move, the developments are going to be up and inhabited. Ms. Ritter stated that there was a traffic analysis done for Holochuck, which showed some impact. Conifer is an apartment facility for seniors, so it probably won’t contribute to peak traffic. Ms. Smith stated that she understood and agreed, but wanted to remind the Board about the prob- lem. The members of some boards have just said that there’s a problem on East Hill also. She has done her own traffic study for the past month while sitting in the morning rush hour. She read a sampling of the rates at which her car moved through the west end between Jan. 3 and Feb. 6: one PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 2 of 13 mile every 31 minutes, one mile every 27 minutes, etc. This is at approximately 8 a.m. When she gets stuck in traffic, she notes the time, and then notes the time she reaches Joe’s Restaurant. Mr. Conneman agreed that there ought to be a traffic study that looks at real data in order to find out how slow traffic moves. Mr. Bosak said that during the Holochuck discussion of the traffic data, it became clear that the methodology used in the study gave results that bear no resemblance to reality. When Board mem- bers challenged this, they were told that this is the methodology used by the experts. Ms. Erb added that the Board has asked for some additional traffic training. Ms. Brock stated that the data were not all taken from a book: there was field data from people standing at intersections recording information, so it’s not right to say there is no relation to reality. Mr. Bosak said the problem is that they have a specific way of counting for each intersection and no way of totaling it up. They did not have someone standing half-way up the hill, which is where you stop, and timing how long it takes to get down to Route 13. That’s the reality – that’s what people actually encounter. Ms. Erb found it interesting that some mornings her delays were hideous and some were much lighter, so a single morning’s data is not sufficient because there’s considerable variability. Ms. Ritter said the Route 96 Corridor Study had County planning staff in their cars checking how long it took them to get from point A to point B in either the morning or afternoon rush hour. She herself travels through those intersection a little later in the morning, and agreed that it’s hit or miss as far as traffic congestion. AGENDA ITEM Public Hearing: Consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the LaTourelle Resort property located at 1150 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.5, Planned Development Zone No. 1. The proposal is to keep the three existing entrance signs near Danby Road and the three existing awnings with lettering. Walter Wiggins, Owner; Scott Wiggins, Applicant. Mr. Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:14 p.m. Scott Wiggins was present to answer questions. Mr. Bosak stated that there are two different things: signs and awnings. He thinks the awnings are a non issue, even though they’re technically signs. Mr. Bosak agreed that without the amount of sign- age they’ve already got, people couldn’t find it – he’s had a difficult time even with the signage. Ms. Erb agreed that the awnings are a non issue. She’s farsighted and can’t read the words on the awnings from the road. PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 3 of 13 To a question from Ms. Baer regarding the stone pillars, Mr. Wiggins answered that they have been there for a very long time, and used to have ball lights on them. Six to ten years ago (before Mr. Wiggins was there), the light balls were replaced by interior lit signs. So they were originally light posts and when they were converted to signs, permits weren’t sought. Mr. Wiggins was not aware until recently that this was not done. Mr. Conneman thinks one sign listing all the businesses instead of three signs would be better. Mr. Wilcox closed the public hearing at 7:20 p.m. PB Resolution No. 2012-005: Recommendation to Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals, Sign Variances – LaTourelle Resort & Spa, 1150 Danby Road, Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.5 Moved by Hollis Erb; seconded by John Beach WHEREAS: 1.This action is consideration of a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding sign variances for the LaTourelle Resort & Spa property located at 1150 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.5, Planned Development Zone No. 1. The proposal is to keep the three existing freestanding entrance signs near Danby Road and the three existing awnings with lettering. Walter Wiggins, Owner; Scott Wiggins, Applicant, and 2.The Planning Board, at a Public Hearing held on February 7, 2012, has reviewed and accepted as adequate 2 packets of materials (one packet for entrance signs, one packet for awning signs) date stamped January 5, 2012, along with other application materials; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as the Town of Ithaca Sign Review Board, hereby recommends that the Zoning Board of Appeals approve the request for sign variances for the exist- ing entrance and awning signs. The Planning Board further recommends that such approval be sub- ject to the following condition: a.any lighting for the signs shall comply with all applicable sections of the Town of Ithaca Outdoor Lighting Law (Chapter 173). Vote: Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Conneman, Beach, Baer, Bosak, Erb AGENDA ITEM SEQR Determination : Conifer Senior Living on West Hill, south of West Hill Drive PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 4 of 13 Andy Bodewes, Conifer, stated that they’ve spent time addressing comments they received at the last meeting and additional comments they received from the Planning Staff. John Caruso, Passero Associates, stated that the most important thing they heard from the Board was the need for connectivity throughout the complex, and continuing to the bus turnaround at Overlook. They added benches along the sidewalk; expanded the community garden, added bench- es, and fenced it; and introduced more landscaped islands into the parking area. They are still pro- posing to land bank some parking and to install parking lot lighting in and around the entire facili- ty. They were asked to step up the landscaping design, which they’ve done. They received technical comments from the engineer and will accommodate them. If the Board grants preliminary site plan approval and SEQR, the applicant will still have to go back to the Town Board for rezoning, then go to the ZBA for variances, before coming back with a plan for final approval. Ms. Erb asked about the location of contractor parking, spoils, topsoil, and delivered construction material during construction. Mr. Caruso responded that this activity will be located in the back area behind the building. Not all 75 people will be there at the same time; it will be closer to 40. The work day starts at 7 a.m., so workers will not be arriving at peak hours. Upon request, he agreed to indicate on the final site plan map that all construction activity will be contained on site and interior to the site. Ms. Erb pointed out that the SEQR indicates there is a wetland on the property. It was verified that there is no wetland and that the reference is a typo. Mr. Hebdon addressed stormwater inspections, saying that during construction, stormwater facilities have to be inspected every week. After completion, the applicant will sign an O&M agreement stat- ing that they will provide reports once per year. Mr. Caruso said that truck traffic during construction will be low and sporadic: three to four trucks per day. Regarding excavated material, 6000 extra yards of earth material (top soil) will leave the site, or 600 trucks over a period of six months to a year. It’s not a convoy. Mr. Hebdon added that they will need a fill permit if the material is moved to anywhere in the Town. Ms. Erb initiated a discussion on the proposed fence. She, Mr. Bosak, and Ms. Baer were in agree- ment that the fence should be changed to an eight-foot deer fence instead of a four-foot vinyl fence. Mr. Tasman said eight feet is very tall; they worked to address aesthetic issues. A typical fence in a back yard is six feet. He said that a high fence around a fairly small area, like a community garden, will make the area seem like it’s caged in, and the garden should be part of the larger facility. Ms. Baer countered that a deer fence is made of thin wires that can hardly be see; it’s not a heavy wooden fence. PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 5 of 13 Ms. Erb argued that this is a fresh-food-producing garden for the residents. It needn’t be anything that’s exceedingly visible – it just needs to keep the deer out. It’s invisible. Mr. Bosak added that on West Hill, an effective garden is a fence – that distinguishes the garden from everything else. A deer fence is just T posts with high-tension, 16-gauge galvanized wire – some- thing that can’t be seen from 100 feet away. Mr. Bates said that the definition of a deer fence in the code requires a large percentage to be open. Mr. Caruso said he will look into it and propose something that is more palatable. A six-foot white fence wouldn’t let light in. Mr. Wilcox pointed out that they see the fence as a decorative element; the Board sees the fence as something that serves a totally different purpose. Ms. Erb suggested that it would be very nice for some of the beds to be raised, because it makes it easier for older people, or people with other infirmities, to reach the beds. Mr. Bosak added that what’s typically recommended for older folks are beds that have two-foot high sides and are a couple feet wide and made of cedar or locust. He suggested they use the topsoil they have on site to create these. Ms. Erb stated that she loves how wide the tree islands are in the parking area. They will provide nice shade. There was discussion about trees, and it was explained that they can’t plant trees in the back area because of easements. The applicant said they’ve proposed a variety of 45 trees and 255 shrubs on the property. Mr. Thaete pointed out that there are new green infrastructure practices that must be followed, and based on the information he’s received, he doesn’t think the applicant is there yet. He said that meeting those requirements will jazz up the plantings. Mr. Bosak said that although he has a couple large-scale concerns, it is not his intention to get in the way of the project. There are much better public benefits to this project than some other West Hill projects that have come before the Board. He stated that he can’t read some of the text on the draw- ings even with a 10x magnifier. He would like this dealt with in the process. (Mr. Wilcox pointed out that the full-scale maps are available in the office.) Mr. Bosak stated that Mr. Tasman has identi- fied more than a dozen issues with the plan; for example, moving swales and moving the building. He asked if it was possible to get past the SEQR and past the recommendation, to have the Town Board pass the ordinance, and then have the applicant come up with fixes to the problems and come back before the Planning Board with something that corresponds to the ordinance. The rea- son he raised this as a problem is because the Board has been instructed that at final site plan ap- proval, all they can do is look at conditions they’ve already laid down. In the absence of that, the Board will have to come up with a multitude of conditions and then hope that they like the appli- PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 6 of 13 cant’s response well enough to approve it. For example, the memo cited the building pad as not conforming to the proposed local law. Discussion ensued between Mr. Wilcox and Mr. Bosak regarding whether a SEQR determination could be made based on the maps and drawings in front of the Board. Mr. Wilcox asked what would happen if the Board were to make a SEQR determination of no significant impact based on those materials, and they are later modified. Mr. Bosak said that would be a problem, and the other problem is that the Board’s recommenda- tion has specific acreages, down to the 1000ths of an acre (43 square feet). If the Town Board makes a change to that, they will have approved something that does not correspond to what’s in front of the Planning Board. His sense is that this is a large enough set of changes that the applicant had bet- ter change the drawings. Mr. Hebdon added that with the information engineering has been given, he can’t say what the SWPPP is going to look like. The applicant didn’t do any of the reductions, the pond might have to be moved, they need to add rain gardens, the drain swale may have to be reconfigured, etc. Normal- ly, there are just tweaks, but he didn’t even get a detail on the stormwater pond. Mr. Wilcox asked Mr. Hebdon if he could make a statement of fact that the stormwater detention facilities, as shown in the materials provided, are sufficient and meet the state code, in order for the Board to make a determination that there is no significant environmental impact. Mr. Hebdon replied that he could not. Mr. Caruso argued that not all the changes the memo recommends are right; for example, the con- cern about where the building is placed is not correct. Regarding the concern about grading, they’ve been talking about this with the Planning Committee for six months. They have plenty of room to do stormwater management. Mr. Wilcox responded that the argument is not whether they have the room; the argument is whether they have provided the Town with the materials necessary for the Planning Board to make a determination that there is no significant environmental impact. Mr. Caruso replied that they believe they have. The engineer might want things done differently or want more information, but his firm uses the same guidelines that everyone else does. Mr. Wilcox asked whether the Board had enough information to make a determination that the stormwater can be handled on site. Mr. Hebdon said they did not: there was no calculation showing how much green infrastructure was needed and it doesn’t show the 30-percent reduction. All that has to be submitted before he can de- termine what is going to work. Everyone who sends in a SWPPP has to include green infrastructure. PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 7 of 13 Mr. Thaete added that green infrastructure is a new requirement. The one big factor with green in- frastructure is that it has to be considered from the beginning of the development; it has to be engi- neered. There have to be overflow points for the rain gardens, runoff reduction volumes have to be identified, etc. Technically, there is some roadway and some impervious surface that is not treated: it does not meet the code. Engineering staff can work through all that with the applicant, but with on- ly the information provided, he can’t make a determination that the plan is going to work. All the impervious surfaces in the lower part of the development are not treated by a device – they’re simply piped to an existing drainage system. In their preliminary stormwater calculations, they grade a swale around the site and try to eliminate all the offsite drainage by putting it to a point discharge to Trumansburg Road. Engineering staff do not agree with that approach. Mr. Erb pointed out that Mr. Tasman would prefer to extend the road with the hope that it will connect with other developments later on; this would add to impervious surface that is not currently in the calculations. Mr. Bosak stated that without the kind of resolution the Board needs from engineering, he would not be able to vote for SEQR this time around. He lives on Trumansburg Road, not very far from the property, and intrusion of water down slope onto the road is a big enough problem that DOT has to come out in the winter and address ice issues. Mr. Wilcox stated that just because Mr. Tasman has commented doesn’t mean all comments will lead to changes, because the Board might not agree with all of them. Mr. Bosak would rather see the applicant’s comments in writing. Mr. Hebdon pointed out that the downhill slope is 3 on 1 right off the edge of the road, and if it was a bit flatter, it would be more transversable; he would rather see 4 on 1. To a question from Ms. Erb, Mr. Hebdon responded that Public Works does not want to take over the section of the road from West Hill Drive all the way out. They would inspect it and make sure it is built to Town standards. If the Town Board would like them to take the road at this point, it would need to be extended to the end of the line and a hammerhead turnaround installed at the end for the snowplow, because otherwise Public Works would not plow into their parking lot, but leave a huge pile in front of the driveway. Ms. Erb said this would need to be factored in for SEQR because of impervious surfaces. In refer- ence to Mr. Tasman’s comment regarding bringing the building and the road closer together, she stated that she’s happy with the garden/tree/lawn/flower bed area. This is a green area rather than a cement area. Mr. Tasman responded that the vision for that area is to have an environment that’s more pedestri- an oriented, meaning buildings oriented closer to the street and sidewalk. They asked for a 30-foot setback from the right of way, but now with the setback being a little beyond the sidewalk, the build- ing is really 37 feet from the sidewalk to the edge of the porch, probably closer to 45 or 50 feet from PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 8 of 13 the street. So if they move it closer, at least there will be the 30-foot separation between the sidewalk and the building. Ms. Baer wondered why all doors were not handicapped accessible. Mr. Caruso responded that they elected not to build a ramp on the side of the building facing the road, which is really the porch, because it would be unattractive. The exterior reaches of the building and the front door are all ac- cessible. The entrance closest to the bus is accessible. Ms. Baer pointed out that Mr. Tasman suggested terraced parking; she does not think this is appro- priate for the elderly. Mr. Caruso said they are trying to minimize disturbance to the site. He said one might want to ter- race a parking area that has 100 stalls, but this parking lot is only a five-acre piece. Behind the back parking lot, it runs out of room pretty quickly. A two-tier parking lot in such a small area would make the access ramps between the two parking lots rather steep. For people 60 and over, he did not want to do that, plus he doesn’t have the room. If he did do that, he would wind up pushing that parking lot into the area they are trying to preserve. Then the water line would get pushed up and they would disturb more. They did tier it, just differently, inside the area of disturbance, which he explained with a map. Mr. Tasman requested they prepare a side profile to help illustrate this for the next time. Mr. Bosak said that this demonstrates why he doesn’t think the issues can be resolved properly by discussing it at the meeting for two reasons. First, he’d like to see the explanation on paper, to see a diagram of what Mr. Caruso was talking about. Second, the applicant could have done things Mr. Tasman suggests, such as terrace the parking lot, but they chose not to, so alternative wording can be suggested to align the ordinance with what is being proposed. Ms. Brock noted that in a number of places, the law says “consider,” various things. She asked whether the Board would consider a condition met in terms of the law if the applicants were to come back and say they considered it and provide reasons they didn’t do it. Mr. Bosak said he probably would, especially with Ms. Brock’s guidance, since this is a purpose-built law, and if this law is going to be engineered to this project, it makes sense to match them up. Mr. Wilcox stated that if the Planning Board truly believes that the project should be done different- ly than the law proposes, they should proceed that way and recommend it. The Town Board would be willing to listen to the expertise of the Planning Board. Ms. Brock had several questions. She observed that the sanitary line connection looks like it’s north of the property boundary in the strip of land Overlook owns between the property and West Hill Drive. Although Mr. Caruso thought it went through the right of way, Mr. Hebdon said that there’s insufficient grade to make the right of way. Ms. Brock stated that the utility plan shows a tie-in for the water main on the applicant’s parcel, but the engineering memo said they want it straightened out, which would push things north. If this means it will be pushed off the Conifer parcel and onto PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 9 of 13 the Overlook right of way, they’ll need to talk to Overlook about an easement. She also requested that the parcel size be consistently noted in the drawings. To a question from Ms. Erb, Mr. Bodewes said that the majority of residents who moved into the Linderman Creek senior facility came from this community. Some people were moving back to the community to be closer to family. Ms. Erb pointed out that Mr. Tasman and the applicant use “front” of the building differently; she suggested they use terms like east and west instead. Ms. Collins suggested that the design elements of the structure itself should make it feel like a home. She realizes it’s affordable housing, but she doesn’t want to see costs cut in this area. They should want to make it as attractive as possible. Mr. Conneman stated public access to general transportation is very important to him, and he will want to have that discussion. Ms. Baer agreed. Mr. Caruso said he was disappointed after meeting with the Planning Committee for over a year to put together the law that pertains to the site. He doesn’t think Mr. Tasman’s comments reflect what the law reads. He will get that straightened out with staff before coming back. Mr. Bosak said that, personally, he is more concerned than most people that what’s in the plan cor- responds to the law. Some points in Mr. Tasman’s memo are direct conflicts with the law, so he wants them to come back with suggested changes to the language in the law so they don’t conflict. Mr. Caruso asked Ms. Brock to explain why some of the things they wrote into the law had to be retracted because of MR zoning, which requires that they go through the extra step to get variances. Ms. Brock responded that the underlying zoning is medium-density residential, so there are setback and height requirements that this law can’t change. If this had been a PDZ, anything could have been written in. AGENDA ITEM Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed Ithaca Biodiesel Cooperative project located at 614 Elmira Road (NYS Route 13), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33-3-2.42, Light Industrial Zone. The proposal involves modifying the existing building and property to accommodate a new biodiesel business. As part of this conversion, the project involves adding outdoor storage tanks, concrete containment dikes, an open canopy on the west side of the building, and new signage. Ithaca Real- ty, LLC, Property Owner, Ithaca Biodiesel Cooperative, Inc., Applicant; James Jones-Rounds, Agent. James and McKenzie Jones-Rounds were present. Mr. Jones-Rounds stated that some of the pre- pared images of the site are not consistent with the sketch 3D models on the last couple of pages of the packet. The 3D models are more accurate because they came about as a result of the ZBA meet- ings, where they were granted a use variance to operate a refinery on the site. The main concern people have with the biodiesel production process is safety. There’s a mixing of chemicals, some of PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 10 of 13 which are innocuous (except in large quantities, such as vegetable oil), and some that are not innoc- uous in any quantity, such as sodium methoxyde (sodium methylate). There are now decades of use of sodium methoxyde by several industries, which has established precedents for mitigating issues and preventing accidents. Mr. Wilcox outlined the review process for the applicants. He stated that during sketch plan review, the Board gets a basic introduction to the project and provides feedback on what they want changed and what they expect to see when the applicant comes back. He said that the Board takes the envi- ronmental review seriously and that this project is going to be very serious given the potential for impacts. He suggested they overprepare for the SEQR. He invited the Board to comment on issues they find important, reminding them that it is a light industrial, not a residential district. In response to Mr. Mitchell’s letter, Ms. Jones-Rounds stated that the trees between Mancini Way and Brewery Lane can remain and provide a reasonable sound and site barrier. She said they are happy to inform people about the biodiesel process, and stated that this is not going to be at the scale of production of, say, an oil rig. Most people know what diesel smells like, but biodiesel smells better because it’s not made with petroleum. Also, they are not burning fuel on site, but producing it, which doesn’t emit any smells. Only someone entering the building might smell vegetable oil. Mr. Bosak stated that he loves this idea. He’s impressed with the quality of the initial proposal doc- ument. He will be concerned about the access point off route 13, saying it’s an absolute nightmare getting out of Ithaca Beer and Briar Patch, especially going north. He asked about the local supply of vegetable oil. Ms. Jones-Rounds responded that in their facility in Enfield, they always had more than enough, mostly because it was a volunteer hobby. Looking to scale up the production, it’s hard to predict. They’re anticipating that Ithaca probably won’t be able to provide enough oil, but they’re contract- ing with an oil collection company in Upstate New York who would guarantee them a certain amount per week. She also explained that a few years ago, restaurants were happy to give the oil away because they had to pay to dispose of it; with greater demand, people are paying for it. This is a better alternative because restaurants now don’t have to pay to dispose of it and they can remove it from the waste stream. Mr. Bosak asked which model they’re proposing: batch or continuous processing. Mr. Jones Rounds said it will be borne out in the next stage of the design. Historically, like most small-scale (and many large-scale) facilities, they’ve used the batch processing model. They’re getting technical consultation from the largest biodiesel facility in the state, Northern Biodiesel, who has just transitioned their 25,000 gallon per day operation from batch to continuous. Batch is easier to pull off and easier for quality control, but if something goes wrong, a whole batch is ruined, as op- posed to being able to continually fine tune. They will most likely do batch because continuous pro- cessing may not be affordable just yet. Ms. Erb suggests they either make a decision before they come back, if possible, or if they can’t, they consider all the implications of both processes so the Board can anticipate worst cases for SEQR. PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 11 of 13 To Mr. Bosak’s concern about trucks per day, Mr. Jones-Rounds responded that deliveries of vegeta- ble oil feed stock and of sodium methylate will be scheduled and predictable, most likely once per week or every five days. The fill up of large-volume vehicles is not fixed and harder to predict. If Ehrhart becomes a main conduit for large-volume sales, they will want to do as few pickups as possi- ble to lower overhead. Ms. Jones-Rounds stated that they’ve also talked to other customers who have fleets of trucks who would not want all of those trucks to come in one at a time. The applicants might have a large truck (like a city dump truck) that could make deliveries, and that would cut out large trucks having to come to the facility to fill up. All large truck traffic would be scheduled outside peak traffic hours. Mr. Bosak suggested that if they haven’t figured it out by the time they come back for SEQR, they should be able to lay out the worst case. Mr. Wilcox asked if they would also have a pump for individuals wanting to fill up. Ms. Jones-Rounds said they plan to have retail for small customers. Mr. Wilcox said the Planning Board would probably be less concerned about the cars coming in to fill up their tanks than about larger vehicles. He will want to know how large trucks will enter and exit the site and maneuver around it. Ms. Erb requested that they show traffic flow, including the flow of small vehicles around the site when there’s a pickup or delivery involving a large truck. Mr. Jones-Rounds agreed that this is a big concern, and said that if they found they could not do it safely, they might have to forego either large-volume site pickups or retail. Mr. Bosak said that for him, the big issue is odor. He thought the Board might need to visit a bio- diesel site to sniff for themselves. Mr. Jones-Rounds said there’s a correlation between the quality of the production process and the odor the neighbors experience. With closed vessels that are properly plumbed and vented and prop- er spill counter-control measures, there’s nowhere for the residual odor to come from. A sloppier home-kit style will have odor. They aim for a level of quality that will produce minimal impacts – a person won’t know it’s a biodiesel facility until they walk inside. One of the advantages of storing the chemical onsite rather than mixing it onsite is that it doesn’t release the fumes that come from creating sodium methoxyde. Mr. Bates pointed out that the applicants produced a lot of information for the ZBA. Their opera- tion will be regulated by the DEC and the EPA – this is not a backyard operation. Mr. Beach stated that educating neighbors and developing a relationship is an important part of the process. PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 12 of 13 Ms. Collins said this should include not just the immediate neighbors, but Ithaca in general. When someone talks about a plant that makes fuel, the first thing that comes to mind is explosions. They should place a high priority on education in their business plan. Ms. Collins was struck with Ithaca Beer’s issue of promotion of agritourism in the area – Ithaca Biodiesel can bring that into their model; for example, inviting school children to tour the facility. Ms. Jones-Rounds said they do outreach and education. They’ve had lots of visitors and recently had a class from New Roots, and they’re happy to explain the process. A large part of their mission is educating the community about renewable fuels. They will be having a membership drive to educate the public about the process and invite them to become members of the cooperative. People in sus- tainability circles are excited about it, but she agrees they need to reach out to other demographics. Ms. Erb requested that they put themselves in the boots of someone who is uneducated about this project and worried about what the Planning Board will pass. She suggested they include in the next package facts that will quell people’s fears and address the issues that people might imagine: fuel, explosions, odor, the wetland, etc. Mr. Bosak added that some people might have the kinds of concerns they would have about a gas station: leaks, contamination of ground, etc. Ms Balestra said it would be a great idea to educate the neighbors. When a Planning Board packet goes out, the standard procedure is to notify neighbors within 500 feet of any action, but she can provide a list of people outside the 500-foot radius. Mr. Wilcox suggested not waiting until preliminary site plan approval to notify the neighbors, be- cause at that point, it’s too late. There’s notification of neighbors and there’s education of the pub- lic to avoid a groundswell of people showing up uninformed for preliminary approval. Ms. Balestra said that one of the conditions of ZBA approval is that the chemicals have to be pre- mixed. Mr. Tasman said that when he first became a planner, an applicant came before the board with a proposal for a microbrewery, but zoning code considered breweries as big industrial facilities. At that time, there were only a couple dozen craft breweries in the U.S.; now there are 1500 and zoning code has had to change to accommodated them. This is a microrefinery, in a sense, and like mi- crobreweries in their infancy, people will think of it as a big refinery. They’ve got a neighbor that is a craft brewery, not a big Budweiser plant. They should approach Mr. Mitchell and explain their busi- ness as making craft fuel. Ms. Collins pointed out that they have lots of technical people on their team, but they might con- sider adding a person with expertise in public relations. Mr. Hebdon said they would need to look at the New York State stormwater law if they’re going to add impervious areas and make changes to the drainage. Public Works will need to know if they’re PB Minutes 02-07-2012 Page 13 of 13 Mr. Hebdon said they would need to look at the New York State stormwater law if they're going to add impervious areas and make changes to the drainage. Public Works will need to know if they're going use the existing water and sewer hookups or if they will change them. They might have to get in touch with NYS about road frontage. Mr. Wilcox agreed with Mr. Bosak that moving the driveway off Route 13 would be best, but given that it's already there, he asked them to show what they could do to make it safer or to prove that it's already safe. Mr. Bosak pointed out that the Ithaca Beer entrance is off Route 13A. That would be the best op tion, but it's privately owned. They might try to get an easement from Mr. Mitchell. Ms. Erb stated that because it's visible from a state highway, it should be as attractive as possible for a light industrial use. AGENDA ITEM Approval of Minutes: January 17, 2012 PB Resolution No. 2012-006: Minutes of January 17, 2012, Planning Board Moved by Fred Wilcox; seconded by John Beach WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board has reviewed the draft minutes from the meeting on January 17, 2012; now therefore be it RESOLVED, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board approves the minutes, with corrections, to be the final minutes of the meeting on January 17. Vote: Ayes: Wilcox, Collins, Conneman, Beach, Baer, Bosak, Erb Adjournment Upon a motion by John Beach, the meeting adjourned at 10:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted. bebra DeAugis^'e, Deputy To^ Clerk