Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2023-10-17 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD Shirley A.Raffensperger Board Room, Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca,New York 14850 Tuesday, October 17, 2023 7:00 P.M. Members of the public are welcome to attend in-person at Town Hall or virtually via Zoom. The public will have an opportunity to see and hear the meeting live and provide comments in-person or through Zoom at httys://us06web.zoom.us/i/83643764382. If the public would like to attend the meeting for viewing purposes only,it is recommended to watch the livestream video on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCC9vycXkJ6klVIibihCy7NO/live). AGENDA 1. Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed self-storage facility project located at 602 Elmira Road(NYS Route 13). The project involves the construction of approximately 24,700 square feet of self-storage in seven buildings. The project will be constructed in two phases and consist of indoor climate controlled storage and standard mini-storage units. There are no decisions or approvals at this meeting. This is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review. Rudra Management, Owner/Applicant;Michael B. Lasell,P.E.,LEED AP,MBL Engineering, PLLC. 2. Persons to be heard. 3. Approval of Minutes. 4. Other Business. 5. Adjournment. C.J. Randall Director of Planning 607-273-1747 NOTE:IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND,PLEASE NOTIFY CHRIS BALESTRA AT 607-273-1747 or CBALESTRA(a,TOWN.ITHACA.NY.US. (A quorum of four(4)members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.) Accessing Meeting Materials Online Site Plan and Subdivision applications and associated project materials are accessible electronically on the Town's website at https://www.town.ithaca.ny.us/meeting-calendar-agendas/under the calendar meeting date. TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD October 17, 2023 MINUTES Present: Ariel Casper, Acting Chair; Members Caitlin Cameron, Bill Arms and Liz Bageant Absent: Cindy Kaufman, Kelda McGurk, and Fred Wilcox Chris Balestra, Planning; Susan Brock, Attorney for the Town; David O'Shea and Justin McNeal, Engineering; Marty Moseley, Director of Code Enforcement, and Paulette Rosa, Town Clerk Mr. Casper opened the meeting at 7:00p.m. 1. Consideration of a Sketch Plan for the proposed self-storage facility project located at 602 Elmira Road (NYS Route 13). The project involves the construction of approximately 24,700 square feet of self-storage in seven buildings. The project will be constructed in two phases and consist of indoor climate controlled storage and standard mini-storage units. There are no decisions or approvals at this meeting. This is an Unlisted Action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act and is subject to environmental review. Rudra Management, Owner/Applicant; Michael B. Lasell, P.E.,LEED AP, MBL Engineering,PLLC. Overview Michael Lasell and Joshua Best gave a presentation with conceptual pictures of the project. Request for approval for Phase 1 was submitted to the NYS DOT; and a use variance was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Access will be from Elmira Rd. and parking will be in the front yard and the building has been shifted to eliminate the variance the previous plan would have needed. We meet all the setbacks, including from the stream/wetlands and we are under the maximum lot coverage. We think we have solutions for every item that was previously listed and intend to meet the IVOD regulations at the final approval stage. Questions Ms. Cameron asked about the material cladding and roofing materials. Mr. Best responded that the idea is to keep it simple, with some type of rough timber, with standard seam metal roof and batting siding and cultured stone. The inspiration for this was through early talks with the Planning Dept; now we may have to make some changes due to the IVOD,but the idea remains. PB 2023-10-17 (Filed 1/28/24) Pg. 1 Ms. Cameron then asked what determines what the"principal"building is in this type of project and secondly, do the design guidelines just apply to the primary structure or buildings visible from the road or all the structures? Mr. Best responded that the initial plan was to have the road-facing buildings be IVOD design based and shielding the interior structures that would be more traditional style,but after talking with Mr. Moseley,we will be adhering to the design standards for all the buildings. Ms. Cameron asked staff if there was any room for interpretation on that because she felt that those interior buildings shouldn't have to meet those design standards. She thought it would be an unfair burden to ask for. Mr. Best said he agreed, and the intent had been to make the entire street-facing facade meet the standards, and having all buildings meet the IVOD is a large investment. Ms. Cameron said the memo seems to say that the solar panel readiness of the roofs is a guideline, not a requirement and as there are 4 southeast facing buildings, there shouldn't be any other design changes necessary to meet that guideline. She added that she also felt the design standard was met by the base-middle-top of the single and two-story buildings. She asked if the gates were sliding and said she was more worried about traffic ingress and egress and stacking on the busy road as some of those gates take a minute to enter the pass key and open. Mr. Best responded that they are, and because of the design standards and the front, the concept is to have them made of a nice wrought iron or similar. The occupants will have an app on their phone that will open the gates as they approach,but he will look into her concern. He added that in their experience,there are never more than two cars at any given time trying to get in. They will be submitting a circulation plan and there are bigger trucks that are common for this type of use; and we will have that fleshed out in the next phase. Mr. Arms said that the IVOD vision and how this area is going to develop has been adopted and he is rather sad that the two projects for the area submitted so far are not part of that vision. He was sympathetic to the fact that they were both hit with COVID hardships and then the passage of the IVOD, but there will be extra scrutiny on the design and materials. He then asked about the access, saying that the intersection there is a nasty junction, with a lane merging there and people speeding up to make the light and he thought they should consider using Five Mile Dr. Ms. Balestra stated that DOT has a large ROW there and they have told us in the past that they are not likely to grant a curb cut permit for Five Mile Dr. There is also a steep grade there that doesn't show up on a flat map, but it is there. PB 2023-10-17 (Filed 1/28/24) Pg. 2 Mr. Arms said he was not worried about parking, as long as the foliage is good, and we should be flexible given this particularly difficult site. Ms. Bageant said she echoes some of the previous comments, and she would be paying special attention to the IVOD standards, and she has thought about the access and although it is not great, this is possibly the best use for this parcel as there is such limited user-traffic. She said she would like to see very accurate renderings at the next appearance and more realistic in terms of the context and the surrounding area. Ms. Cameron asked about HVAC, mechanicals and trash handling. She added that she is fine with the parking in the front as it fits the design. Mr. Best responded that there are no trash enclosures planned as renters tend to use those to excess if they are made available and the HVAC is minimal and will be concealed from public view and meet energy code requirements. The area will be monitored by motion sensor cameras and most of the parcel will be fenced. Ms. Bageant asked about the vegetation buffering, and Mr. Moseley stated that it is covered in the IVOD. Mr. Best added that that will be depicted in the final plans. Mr. Casper turned back to the cladding materials and the IVOD and the interpretation on that requirement. Mr. Moseley stated that the IVOD does not differentiate between the building being principle or not and it doesn't differentiate between internal and external viewable aspects. Ms. Cameron said the siding doesn't bother her as much as the roof lines standards which are unnecessary for internal buildings and would be a financial burden. Ms. Brock responded that some IVOD requirements only apply to road-fronting buildings and until there is a final plan, we can't look at the specific section of the Code. There was some discussion regarding parking in the front and whether there will be a variance needed to permit parking in the front and then whether a variance will be needed to access from Elmira Road rather than Five Mile Drive as the secondary road and how the DOT ROW comes into play. Ms. Cameron asked about the side yard setbacks and Mr. Best stated that they will be shifting the layout to meet the regulations. Mr. Casper summarized, saying that the four members present seem to be in favor of the project. 2. Persons to be heard—None 3. Approval of minutes—None PB 2023-10-17 (Filed 1/28/24) Pg. 3 4. Other Business—Review of next agenda and training reminder The meeting was adjourned upon motion by Mr. Casper, seconded by Mr. Arms,unanimous. SubmittKpy r Paulette Rosa, Town Clerk PB 2023-10-17(Filed 1128/24) Pg.4