Planning Board Meeting
The meeting of the
There was no one present who wished to speak. Klepack moved to close the Public Comment
period, seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Residence
Conversion:
The first item on the agenda was a Public Hearing for
Special Permit No. 1613, Pola and Dan Tallman, to convert their single family
residence at 5 Cherry Road in the Medium Density Residential District into a
One-Unit Residence Converted (two-family residence), Tax Parcel No.
44.1-1-33.2.
Dan
Tallman expressed their desire to put an apartment in the basement of their
home. Tallman provided proof of mailing
to Curtis. Halevy asked about parking
and Tallman responded that there are two spaces available over and beyond those
they needed for their own use. No one
from the public was present to speak on this Special Permit. Dankert moved to close the Public Hearing,
seconded by Klepack. All aye.
Curtis
stated it is a newly constructed residence and the owners are requesting to
convert the basement into an apartment.
Planning Board members were not provided with written materials or
drawings; Curtis stated he only had the floor plan for the basement, but that
the foot print of the existing house was not changing. Curtis stated this has been submitted to
Klepack
moved to classify this as a Type II action which does not require a SEQR
Review. Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
The
Board reviewed the General Conditions required for all Special Permits. Curtis noted that the Health Department must
confirm the septic system is adequate and this would be a condition for the
building permit, as well as other building code issues such as fire
separation. Dankert moved that the Board
finds that the applicant has met the general conditions specified in Section
304.05 of the Zoning Law. Seconded by
Klepack. All aye.
Klepack
moved to approve Special Permit No. 1613, seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Before
leaving, Curtis asked Tallman if he realized that a one-unit residence
converted meant it had to be owner occupied and he said yes.
The second item on the agenda was Special Permit No. 1615,
Transact Technologies, to construct a 10,500 sf addition and convert a 2,270 sf
courtyard into enclosed space for their existing light manufacturing building
at 20 Bomax Drive in the Business and Technology District, Tax Parcel No.
45.1-1-51.13.
There was no one from the public who wished to speak. Dankert moved to close the Public Hearing,
seconded by Klepack. All aye.
A representative from Transact provided the Planning Board
with materials and explained the reason for this expansion. She explained that there was recently an
article in the Ithaca Journal and they
will be closing their Connecticut facility and, although people will not be
moving here, Transact will be hiring additional workers here.
Jason Demerest, representing Tallman & Tallman,
architects for the project provided handouts and enlarged detailed drawings for
the Planning Board. It is a
straightforward project to add more office and warehouse space by adding an
addition and enclosing an existing courtyard.
The site plan submitted shows the development remains under the
allowable lot coverage. Due to the
expansion, Transact is looking for additional parking spaces which are proposed
for the strip along the south border.
The latest plan shows the layout of utilities and location of the septic
field. A few trees would be removed and
a light pole added. Curtis stated that
parking is not addressed directly in the Zoning Law because it is light
manufacturing. Tractor trailers parked
outside are used for storage currently and they will be removed. Curtis would recommend the j category be used
to determine required parking; it requires that parking and driveways be shown
to be adequate. The Transact
representative responded that they are requesting 38 parking spaces as they
have committed to NYS that they will be hiring an additional 38 employees to
join the 93 currently employed here. Currently, employees work 6-4:30 or 8-5:00
although they may go to two shifts at a later date. There will be about 140 total parking spaces
for about 130 employees. Cross commented that his first impression was that too
much of the lot was covered by the impervious areas of building, pond and
parking lot, but using a rough calculation, he found it to be approximately
50%. TG Millers based their pond design for the industrial park on 50% so they
have not exceeded their limit as proposed.
Visitors seldom come to the site although occasionally a vendor may
come. Klepack asked if any consideration
has been given to placing trees around the parking areas or in islands. The Transact representative responded that
the trees are around the building. Cross
stated the 150 ft. buffer is all wooded, but Curtis noted that the removed
trees are part of the original buffer and need to be replaced. Demerest stated
they would probably relocate those that are marked for removed as he doesn’t
think they are too large. Curtis noted
that the willow tree was planted to provide for a mixture of evergreen and
deciduous trees and will need to be replaced if removed. Halevy asked for a lighting plan for the
building for review by the Lighting Commission.
Curtis noted that a plan is needed to confirm that the additional
parking lot light and the security lights on the rear addition do not shine
into the apartments.
Cross felt the additional parking would not affect traffic
or circulation. His drainage comment was
already noted. Cross is uncertain of
where the existing dumpster is and whether it will need to be relocated. The Transact representative stated it is
located on the back northwest corner of the large addition. Klepack asked what the exterior material
being used for the addition was and Demerest responded stucco which is the same
as the existing walls.
The Board reviewed the General Conditions required for all
Special Permits. Brown moved that the
Board find that the applicant has met the general conditions specified in
Section 304.05 of the Zoning Law.
Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Curtis stated that a condition for approval is that any
trees removed would be replaced with trees of like caliper and height and
maintained.
Curtis noted this has been submitted to the County Planning Board for their review and
they had a favorable response.
A SEQR was completed.
A-No; B-No; C1-No; C2-No; C3-No; C4-No; C5-No; C6-No; C7-No; D-No. Klepack moved that the Board find that this
proposed action will not result in any significant adverse environmental
impact. Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Dankert moved to approve Special Permit No. 1615 subject
to the following conditions: (1) Any trees removed would be replaced and
maintained with trees of cumulative caliper and height; (2) A Lighting Plan be
submitted for review by the Lighting Commission and approval by the Planning
Board; and (3) A Landscape Plan be submitted for review and approval by the
Planning Board. Seconded by Klepack. All aye.
Public Hearing
-Special Permit No. 1616 – Suzan Schatz – Home Occupation:
The next item on the agenda was a Pubic Hearing for
Special Permit No. 1616, Suzan Schatz, to operate a home occupation for the
production of custom cakes and party food at her home at 844 Cayuga Heights Road
in the Low Density Residential District, Tax Parcel No. 48.1-2-37.2.
There was no one present who wished to speak. Klepack moved to close the Public Hearing.
Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Schatz has been making custom cakes for approx. 20 years
in Oklahoma and having moved into the Maines’ home on Cayuga Heights Road, she
is now proposing to run the business from one of the garage bays. She has spoken with the Health Department and
there are no problems. The only exterior
changes would be windows on the back.
There would be no signs. Schatz
uses word of mouth advertising and will not place her address on her business
cards. She does not expect traffic
because no goods will be sold on the site, although an occasional bride may
come to view books. There is adequate
parking on the long circular drive.
Schatz has spoken with the neighbors and they say there is no
problem. Halevy questioned the buses
that might arrive with the students.
Schatz stated she would check with her neighbors and she would only
contemplate this happening once a year.
Her business name will be Soigne and she might branch out beyond
desserts.
Curtis stated he has heard from Beth Brennan and she feels
it is a great proposal.
Curtis stated this is an exempt action under SEQR.
The Board reviewed the General Conditions required for all
Special Permits. Klepack moved that the
Board find that the applicant has met the general conditions specified in
Section 304.05 of the Zoning Law.
Seconded by Brown. All aye.
Klepack moved to approve Special Permit No. 1616, seconded
by Dankert. All aye.
Curtis reminded Schatz that a fire separation wall would
be required and she was in agreement.
Tops Plaza
Planned Sign Area - Proposed Applebee’s Amendment:
The next item on the agenda was a Proposed Amendment to
the Tops Plaza Planned Sign Area for Applebee’s. Curtis noted for a Planned Signed Area
amendment, action is required by the Board of
To offset their request, Applebee’s would like to work
with the Village and plant 12-20 6-8 ft. evergreen trees on the bank along N.
Triphammer Rd. to screen the roof and roof top equipment of the
restaurant. Curtis noted that provisions
could be made to escrow monies for future tree plantings like what was done for
Billy Bob Jacks, if there is uncertainty about how North Triphammer will be
configured in this area after all improvements are complete. The corner trees could be planted some now
and some in the future. Leopold has a
concern that other businesses in the same area may also request double the size
signage in the future for the same reasons.
Curtis stated that Tops has 20,000 sq.ft. of leasable
space in the plaza and Applebee’s is renting 5,000 sq.ft of it. Originally, the remainder was to be divided
into 6 retail spaces but now it appears it could be 4 tenants plus
Applebee’s. There is a little more than
14,000 sq.ft. remaining and Curtis
stated it would be possible in the future that a tenant ask to take more than
one store front or 5,000 sq.ft. or more and would also request additional
signage. Klepack noted that the PSA is
written per business and she feels this request would set too much of a
precedent with the doubling of signage.
She stated she is not concerned about the objects on the roof of the
building.
Halevy asked if there were any possibility of reducing the
size of the signs. Bell responded that
their traditional sign package states “neighborhood grill and bar” so they
would like to retain that as part of their recognition. Also the currently proposed sign that states
“Applebee’s” has been reduced in size, but is still 30 sq.ft. Bell stated that although they would not like
it, they could live without the “neighborhood grill and bar” portion but the
additional 5 sq.ft. for the “Applebee’s” sign is important.
Klepack asked why the 30 sq.ft. sign could not be shrunk
to 25 sq.ft. Bell responded that
proposed letter size is readable going 30 mph at 500 ft. but going down to
smaller letters makes it difficult to read while negotiating in traffic. Klepack stated that is the purpose of the
pylon sign. Curtis stated that to get to
the 25 sq.ft. would mean taking 3 inches off the top and bottom of the sign and
probably would mean the size of the letters need not be changed.
Dankert sees no problems with the 30 sq.ft. Brown feels it should remain at 25
sq.ft. Klepack wants to remain at 25
sq.ft. Leopold is unsure how the
P & C for their signage. The other small signs near the P & C are
25 sq.ft. Curtis also noted that the PSA
for Pyramid Mall is different as it is based on gross square footage (2,000
sq.ft.) for the mall is quite far and not very visible from North
Triphammer. Curtis noted the property
owner (Tops) requested the PSA which supersedes the Sign Law in that area. The Planning Board reviews the PSA request
and makes a recommendation to the Board of
In Summary, Halevy recommended the sign be pared down to
25 sf. The Planning Board will make a
recommendation to the Board of
Substation Road:
The Planning Board has received a request from NYSEG to
establish a legal address for their substation on Graham Road. NYSEG would like to name the section of the
existing road from Sheraton Drive north to the substation behind Triphammer
Mall “Substation Road”. Cross noted this
would actually be a renaming of the road as it is already Graham Road. Halevy has already spoken with the Mayor and
recommended it be named in honor of someone.
Curtis has stated the road naming is for 911 purposes and he has checked
several road names that would be acceptable to the county. Several names were discussed abut there was
no agreement on an appropriate road name though there was agreement that it was
not appropriate to name it Substation Road.
Cross noted that it is not often the Village receive the opportunity to
name a road as subdivision roads are often named by the developers. Brown moved to recommend to the Board of
Approval of
Minutes – Feb. 27, 2001:
Klepack moved to approve the February 27, 2000 minutes as
revised. Seconded by Dankert. All aye.
Reports:
Dankert attended the last Board of
Adjournment:
Klepack moved to adjourn the meeting at 9:45 PM. Seconded by Dankert. All aye.