Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSix Mile Creek Overseer CommitteeCarolyn Peterson Common Council Elizabeth Mulholland Circle Greenway 111 Bridge Street Bud Gerkin Board of Public Works Joel Rabinowitz Hydropower Comm: 912 East State Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Martin Sampson Planning and Development Board 107 Ridgedale Road Ithaca, New York 14850 John Perko Conservation Advisory Comm. 614 N. Tioga Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dick Fischer Environmental Management Council 135 Pine Tree Road Ithaca, New York 14850 Leslie Dotson Tompkins County Planning Department 128 E. Buffalo Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Peter Lovi • TOwn of Ithaca Planning Department 126 E. Seneca Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Edna Clausen 1421 Slaterville Road Ithaca, New York 14850 SIX MILE CREEK OVERSEER COMMI'1TEE - At Large member Mr. David Ruether 1191 East Shore Drive - At large member, Ithaca, New York 14850 COMMON COUNCIL CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA. NEW YORK 14850 E M 0 u A F. D U M TC: CCFMOP COUNCIL BFW FLI! -.rNING STAFF FROM: X T1P•T E CREEK T t1 r.•Trrt Tm I � Lam: �,.__I:� . �C:• �.I__ E E RE: LAND ACQUISITION DATE: DECEMBE:? 15, 1989 RECEIVED DEC 19 1989 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 The Six Mile Creek Committee would like to see land acquisition in this area back,to the front burner for early 1990. To this end, the committee has passed several recommendations. These recommendations are based on ,years of discussion. and, more re- cently, the excellent new mapping provided by Peter Weed. Using Peter's base maps of property lines, topography, and trails, Carolyn Peterson, Betsy Darlington, and Dan Hoffman, added color coded lines for streams, alienation Parcels, 500 foot boundary from Six P::lle Creek and 200 foot boundary from feeder streams, suggested boundary for protected lands as made by them and an alternate boundary as made by City and Town planning staff. With this visual guide, the committee recommended the following; 1. Ton priority land acquisition 1 Sincebaugh land - entire parcel or at least the lower section if entire is infeasible 2 Baker land - portion below purple dots and dashes if owner is agreeable 3 Heffr.or_(Auble )<development threat) 4 Apgar, Somero/Fakkala, SsheragaB::Lowe,Sweet, ?andel, Commonland area if not sufficiently protected 2. Cr_ the map, modify the proposed boundary for p•otected lands by adhering to the purple dash line except around Therm .follow the purple cots and around Commonland follow the 3. Finally, if any prop—erty listed in the above 1 ib rcu.h 4 category comes on th..emarket, it should be bought even i "out of order". Peter eed has the color coded maps to use to rake sense out or this memo. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" CITY OF 1THACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR TO: Frank Liguori Sue Beeners FROM: H.M. Van Cort MEMORANDUM RE-: -SIXaMILE CREEK_WATERSHED-PRESERVATION DATE: August 5, 1988 RECEIVED AUG 9 1988 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 Attached please find a copy of a proposed study description of the Six Mile Creek Watershed. This attempts to identify goals, objectives and some of the study parameters. I think it will be helpful to have an expert in the field prepare a study work program. I would appreciate any comments you might have on this outline. After you've had a chance to look at it, we should probably have another meeting to chart our course from here. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" SIX MILE CREEK WATERSHED PRESERVATION • Study Outline Goal: To determine what is needed to ensure the optimum quality and quantity of water supplied to all users of water within the 6 -Mile Creek Watershed for the foreseeable future. OBJECTIVES: 1) To identify all practicable methods of ensuring the future quality and quantity of public drinking water supplied to the City of Ithaca and other users from Six Mile Creek Watershed, including consideration of present or potential need to improve purity or increase quantity. 2) To determine what measures would be effective in preserving natural habitat and recreational/scenic resources in the. watershed, consistent with their primary functions, with special emphasis on areas and features determined to be of particular ecological sensitivity which are, or may be subject to use of a type or intensity detrimental to them. To evaluate each of the methods and measures so identified, and to recommend the adoption and implementation of a coordinated package of legislation, regulations, procedures and actions best suited to assuring a supply of public drinking water of sufficient quantity and optimum quality for the population Six Mile Creek Watershed Preservation 2 served, and to assuring the maximum degree of conservation of natural habitat and recreational/scenic resources consistent therewith. ASSUMPTIONS 1. That individual private drinking water of sufficient quantity and acceptable quality will be ensured by measures taken to assure the quality and quantity of major public drinking water supply. 2. That adequate supply and quality of water for other uses will continue to be available from the same sources, but that in the event of need, such uses will be curtailed to the extent. required to maintain the desired level of public health. 3. That supplementary sources of drinking water (e.g. Bolton Point) will continue to be available to meet the emergency need and long term growth of the area whose primary source is 6 -Mile Creek, and that such supplementary sources will be augmented where and when determined necessary, bodies responsible for coordinated areawide water -resource planning. 4. That conservation of natural habitat and scenic/recreational resources, while inarguably of major importance to the provision and maintenance of the water supply, must to some as Six Mile Creek Watershed Preservation 3 yet undefined level of area growth remain of secondary importance where this objective conflicts with meeting the demand for water. Intended outcome of the Study: A coordinated, feasible and effective package of measures to accomplish the above goal, and a set of rational criteria for decisionmaking and action. The watershed study must project supply and demand for all uses of water within the boundaries of the watershed, identify all sources of water from within that area and any threats to the continued supply of high quality water, and a variety of measures from land acquisition to engineering to regulation which can be undertaken to protect this resource. The natural areas study should identify the important natural habitats as well as scenic and recreational resources within the watershed. Areas of ecological significance should be identified and classified in accordance to their importance for local flora and fauna and for threatened or endangered species. Any threats to these areas should be identified and, again, measures should be instituted to protect them. A similar classification and program should be put in place for the scenic and recreational resources. In order to proceed rationally with this program, which requires an extensive study of the watershed and its sub -areas, it will probably be Six Mile Creek Watershed Preservation 4 advisable to hire a consulting firm which specializes in such natural area studies, and a water resources engineering consultant to oversee the supply study. HMVC.eh 0-hd-SMilOut.Thys Ccs RECEIVED JUL 24 1989 204 Fairmount Ave. Ithaca, NY 14850 July 21, 1989 DeWitt Baker 223 E. Corning Rd. Corning, NY 14830 Dear Dr. Baker: The City of Ithaca is very concerned about protection of the Six -Mile Creek corridor, both because of its inherent value as a unique natural area and because it's the City watershed. In order to ensure the long-term protection of the area, the City has allocated funds for purchases of land or conservation easements. As Chair of the City's Conservation Advisory Council (CAC), I was asked to contact your mother to see if she might be willing to talk further with the City about the various possibilities. We are most concerned because we have heard that the Weisburds are attempting to buy her land for expansion of Commonlands. I have been trying to call your mother but have not gotten any answer --hence this letter to you. In case you are not familiar with conservation easements, perhaps it would help if I gave a brief explanation of how they work, since this might be an option that would appeal to your family more- than outright sale of the land. With a conservation easement, the landowner retains ownership of the land, but gives up the right to do certain things on it --usually development, at the least. The restrictions of the easement are tailored to fit the given situation. The landowner retains all other rights and responsibilities, including the right to limit access by the public (unless such access is specifically granted by the easement). The easement goes with the deed in perpetuity. If the assessed value of the land is lowered by the restrictions, then the tax assessor is supposed to lower the assessment --a case that should be quite easy to make in your mother's area of intense development pressure! Because of the tax laws (charitable deductions and estate taxes), in some situations, it may actually be more financially advantageous for a landowner to donate an easement than to sell it. But this is something a tax attorney would have to work out. In any event, if your family would be willing to pursue the various ways the City might be able to work with you to see that your mother's land is protected for future generations, I would like to suggest your calling Mr. Matthys Van Cort, Director of Planning for the City (272-1713). Or, if you would like to discuss things with me first, I would be happy to help in any way I can. (I have no power or authority in the City --the CAC is purely an advisory board.) I might mention that my husband and I are donating a conservation easement to the Finger Lakes Land Trust, on our 200 -acre farm in Candor, so I am becoming quite familiar with what is involved --but I am no expert. My phone number is (607) 273-0707. Except for a few days next week, I expect to be here all summer. Thanks for your help. Sincerely, Betsy Darlington Cc: Thys Van Cort CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET RECEIVED JUL 11 1989 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14950 DEPARTMENT OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT CODE 607 H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR To: From: Date: Re: MEMORANDUM Mayor Gutenberger M. Helen Jones, Planning Dept. July 10, 1989 Alienation \Larid�Acquis,iti.on The following parties are owners of the properties in the S;ix Mile Creek/-Codd"in`gton Road _owners identified for acquisition under the amended alienation proposal and should be included among those contacted regarding the city's plans: 1) Mrs. Ruth Johnson/Grigorov 611 Coddington Road Ithaca, NY 14850 2 3 Dr. Raymond Terepka and Dr. Nancy Stewart 509 Coddington Road Ithaca, NY 14850 Mrs. Lula Heffron 699 Coddington Road Ithaca, NY 14850 4) David Somero/Pakkala 135 Wheeler Road New Ipswich, NH 03071 A map of the subject area is attached with a memorandum from the Conservation Advisory Council. MHJ/mc Attachments cc: H. M. Van Cort O -HJ -Owners "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" Nov 181988 DEPARTMENT OF ��rc�T PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Six -Mile Creek Acquisitions November, 1988 Conservation Advisory Council policy statement In view of the City's •recent acquisition of land along Six -Mile Creek, and with the prospect of further acquisitions, the CAC recommends that Common Council state what its policy will be regarding these lands.. Over the course of several meetings, we came up with the following recommenda- tions for your consideration: 1. The overall objective for the lands belowthe rr bed, and .for a buffer zone 200 -feet -wide above it, should be to protect the natural character of these areas. Recreation should be entirely of the passive sort --walking and bird -watching, for example. The CAC feels that the City must commit itself to not putting in active recreational facilities below the tracks. Perhaps, although at least some of the land would be officially designated as "park," it could be called the Six -Mile ' Creek Natural Areas Park. The Adirondack Park sets a good precedent: the term "park" does not need to imply active uses of the land, and the state recognizes this. The city is fairly well endowed with developed parks and vast expanses of mowed grass. Unfortunately, it is not well supplied with areas of unspoiled 'natural beauty where one can go for quiet reflection and renewal. This type of recreation is just as important as ballfields and skating rinks; each type . of facility meets different needs.. As the City expands, we will continue to need both types' of recreational areas; the need for natural areas could well' grow disproportionately, considering the continual growth of the city and' surrounding towns. Open areas (abandoned fields) below the rr trad<s should be left to continue their succession back to forest. 2. We understand that the two acres of frontage along Coddington Rd. on the Maylin/Brahm parcel were appraised at $30,00.0 ($15,000 each). It -would: seem reasonable to sell off this portion, or perhaps one slightly larger, for housing. The remain ing 14 acres of the upper parcel is appraised at only $700 per acre. The city acquired it for even less than this. In other words, we got a terrific deal, and it would not 4 - make economic sense to sell it for the paltry returns that could be expected -at most, $9800. r The CAC feels that it would be prudent for the city to hold onto that above-the-rr land as protectioin for the watershed. Another reason to hold onto the above-the-rr property is that NYSEG currently sprays herbicides in certain areas below their power .line. Last June or July, Darlington and others observed large bands of dead woody plants, and a letter to NYSEG confirmed that they spray in that area. NYSEG claims to stay 600 feet from any stream, but at least one recent spraying went much closer to the stream on the upper section of the Maylin/Brahm parcel --Darlington estimates perhaps only fifty feet away. NYSEG does not spray on City watershed holdings. Unless the new property is already officially part of the "city watershed;' we request that the City look into so designating it. In any case the City would undoubtedly have more leverage in convincing NYSEG not to spray there than would a private owner. (There are, of course, good reasons to avoid spray.) Crier 3. Without having explored the parcel a bit to the SE of the Maylin/Brahm piece (and adjoining it on the downhill side of the rr bed) (see map), our tentative recommendation is that the City purchase only the portion below the rr bed and a buffer of at least 200 feet above the rr bed --the quantity of land should be determined by the natural and recreational value of it. For example, if the upper part of the parcel includes the stream that is near its boundary, the city should retain a buffer of at least 200 feet in each direction along the stream. (This stream runs through the Maylin/Brahm parcel below the rr, and drains into the Reservoir.) Alternatively, the City could purchase the entire parcel and sell off whatever it decides is not needed. R.R ossi,t( 5"."... 4. The 7 1/2 -acre triangle ju3L outsioe the city, below the switchback, goes down very close to the creek and is in one of the most beautiful, unusual, and unspoiled areas of the watershed. (See map.) It is exactly this sort of area that we must pass on to future generations in an unspoiled state. This must be kept off limits (to city crews) for anything but the most minimal trail maintenance. Natural refuges such as this will be needed more than ever as the City grows and takes on more of the problems associated with large size. 11-11- 5. [L5. The CAC recommends that any future acquisitions follow these guidelines: a. Hands-off policy on acquisitions below the rr bed and for a 2d0 -foot - wide buffer above it. For example, no facilities for active recreation, and no clearing of trees or other vegetation. b. On the north side of Six -Mile Creek there is no neat dividing line (such as a rr bed). Distances to the water are generally shorter and steeper than on the Coddington side. Any acquisitions on the north side must be protected from overuse. The Six -Mile Creek Committee has made recommendations for acquisitions in that area, and we recommend that the City follow their advice. c. We feel that the City must exercise great care regarding any lands that it decides to condemn and purchase, especially those on which the owners reside. The City must not find itself in the position of taking property for preservation or passive recreation purposes, and then of turning around and selling portions for possible development. There may be many instances in which the current owners are planning to give their properties long-term protection from development; the City must 3 be able to assure such owners that the City's aim in acquiring the land is to protect it as a natural area and to protect the City's water supply, not to either develop it as a high -use recreation area nor to sell it for development. d. We propose that the City acquire conservation easements along any streams that flow between Coddington Rd. and the rr bed, even if the adjacent property is not one the City wishes to buy. We recommend a band extending at least 200 feet in each direction from the banks of such streams, in order to give the water the needed protection from pollution. Alternatively, the City could purchase these waterway bands, or negotiate restrictive deed covenants with the owners. e. Except for item (d), we suggest that the City aim to acquire only lands below the rr bed and 200 feet above it (as a buffer). Exceptions could be made, however, for critical or unique areas above the rr bed. 6. Acquisition and protection of lands in the Six -Mile Creek corridor is of such overriding importance to the City that it must be seen on its own merits and not be contingent upon any other city projects. 7. The CAC recommends that the City set up a special fund for acquisition of Six -Mile Creek land. We also recommend that any income from sale of road -frontage land on Coddington or Slaterville Rds. be put into this fund. EQBA funds should also be sought --matching funds in particular may be relatively easy to get. 8. We also passed the following resolution: Be it resolved that the City of Ithaca create, maintain, and support by budget allocationn a small (5 person maximum) Committee for Land Acquisition Within the Six -Mile Creek Watershed that is empowered to publicize City Policy in this area, make and receive offers for the purchase of land (subject to Common Council approval), prepare and administer a budget, seek outside funding, and develop creative procedures in an aggressive program of land acquisition and watershed protection. iAtcl / A110•A A A J B 11 U ;° o'. So✓TH Hi.,a, F -c.0 C- kT) on.) WA4 (E,uST.”C. r)hTH A/tD YROTv,.CD YRAIL .':NTE) LAND CO`EC/L Q FeK<SY Ty�w�TAT. DN rs��w AG ACnv£ Ac{c1C.,✓T4. A; 1.,A<r)vE AE¢ C r✓QE q—j SET= te • • • •• Approximate Boundaries of city -owned lands Initial Lands Identified for acquisition • • 1 .0O 200 2 2O0 400 H ' SCALE • 1• 1 AREA PLAN 2/17/C9 SLE 6.H SC RI ` �,TO KT, OF ITr.ACF ���>i0•.S. .r. EPIr.G DEPT 26 E. SE 6CST �? OFFICE OF MAYOR CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 MEMORANDUM TO: James Mason, Tompkins County Noel Desch, Town of Ithaca Clinton Cotterill, Town of Dryden Wilson Kone, Town of Caroline FROM: Mayor John C. Gutenberger DATE: July 6, 1988 RE: Six Mile Creek Watershed TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 Thank you for meeting with me on June 30th to discuss the Six Mile Creek Watershed Area. I am very pleased that we share a common interest in developing a plan for the protection of this important water and natural resource. I have directed Thys Van Cort to contact Frank Liguori and Sue Beeners to begin work on a study outline of the watershed. When this outline is completed, I will call another meeting of our group. Thanks again for your cooperation. I look forward to working with you in the coming months on this important project. cc: Thys Van Cort Frank Liguori Sue Beeners o n e e e Celebrating e 0 9 0 ®1888 - 1988 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" CITY DF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 COMMON COUNCIL TO: Board of Public Works FROM: Six Mile Creek Cverseer Committee DATE: June 27,1989 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 June 27 1989 Catt 12 -14 -°/41 - The Six Mile Creek Oversseer Committee and Circle Greenway thanks the Board of Public Works for hearing our opinions about the Youth Bureau stairway project in the gorge. The Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee, adhering to the 1984 Six Mile Gorge plan, once again reaffirms the basis of that plan W:Idc dower• that Six Mile Gorge is a natural area and'preserve (not a park,which has different meaning) where access is allowed with easier walking paths off Giles Street and more difficult, more subtly maintained trails as one walks in further. There is a Witcl-Flan r fully organized maintenance plan for thts"preserve based on the natural area concept. It involves Circle Greenway volunteers for light work -scheduled litter pick-up, path maintenance, and +::L:'+( wildflower monitoring,plus heavy work by a DPW crew- cutting of dangerous trees, maintaining the parking lot surface, stream bank stabilization, and other liability prone work. \Ye see the stairway as a one time project and not part of future trail development in the area, which is planned to remain natural. The project could provide three positive goals: Historic restoration _ Decreased liability Safer,easier access on this part of the trail If the project is done, historic restoration should be accurate andshould blend in and not damage the aesthetics of the area or the integrity of the adjacent waterfall.Without consultation and supervision in planning and construction by a qualified person ( landscape architect, engineer,mason,etc.) the project could become an extra liability, an inappropriate thrust into "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" -two- an area already planned to be a natural environment, and a waste of public monies. Thus, to ensure the project's dura- bility and appropriateness in the area, the following is recommended: Protect adjacent flora and fauna Respect the falls adjacent to the worksite Consultation and supervision with appropriate persons :CONFIDENTIAL. DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR To: CITY OF ITHACA 10S EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 MEMORANDUM Mayor John C. Gutenberger Planning and Development Committee Common Council Members RECEIVED JUN 2 31989 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 From: Ad Hoc Committee on Watershed Acquisitions) Re: Protection of Land in the Six Mile Creek Watershed Date: June 21, 1989 We were given the assignment of seeking ways to implement Common Council's decision to achieve greater protection of land in the Six Mile Creek watershed. First, we defined what area to concentrate on, identified alternative methods of protection, and sett priorities and criteria for making decisions about individual parcels. We decided for the short-term to concentrate on the area surrounding the city's current holdings, as far as the Dryden -Ithaca Town line -- but aim to extend outwards, eventually to the headwaters. We feel that it is important to work cooperatively with the Town of Ithaca and others involved on achieving greater protection for the broader area, including both the water supply and the natural values unique to Six Mile Creek, through zoning and other land - use tools. We would like the city to systematically pursue such protection, ,working with the Town, if possible. We voted (unanimously) to ask the Planning and Development Committee to take the following recommendations forward to Common Council on July 5, with hopes of speedy action: 1 D. Hoffman, J. Johnson (P&D Committee); C. Peterson (Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee); E. Mulholland (Circle Greenway); B. Darlington (Conservation Advisory Council); staff support - J. Meigs, W. Gray "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" Protection/Six Mile Creek -2- 6/22/89 1. Begin negotiations immediately (and designate someone to do this)2 with landowners of the following parcels, for the least expensive way to achieve permanent protection of the land and the watershed: a. a cluster of three small parcels owned by Apgar, next to the City -Town line; Assessment parcels 54- 2-22, 54-2-23, 54-2-24 (possibly including an adjoining r.o.w.) b. triangular parcel owned by Somero and Pakkala; 53- 1-1 c. larger parcel owned by Sincebaugh.; 53-1-13 The parcels (which are in the Town of Ithaca) are shown on the attached map. We feel that it is very important to take immediate action to get this process under way, due to the current level of development activity in the area. 2. If owners donate or sell conservation easements,. someone from the city should be prepared to go with them to the tax assessor, if necessary, to argue the case for a lowered assessment.Since all of the parcels that are of immediate concern are in an area under severe development pressure, this should be easily accomplished. (The state's conservation easement law says that if a land's value is lowered by the conservation easement, the assessor should lower the assessment.) 3. Establish, or, if appropriate, affirm existing policies/procedures (with any needed updating), regarding how the city will handle any watershed land acquired. The policy should state that the land will be managed to enhance, protect, and preserve it in its natural state (in most cases, simply engaging in routine trail maintenance and water facility maintenance). It should be clearly stated whether active recreational facilities should be created in any Six Mile Creek area that the city acquires. 4. Immediately following Common Council's decision, send the attached letter (or one similar) to the three property owner's. 5. Involve the City Attorney's office in the process of preparing for purchase of conservation easements or for 2 The negotiator should report back to you by July 26, 1989 so that any further action needed from Council can be placed - on the agenda for August 1st. Protection/Six Mile Creek -3- 6/22/89 direct purchase of property, through eminent domain, if necessary. Our committee will make recommendations in the near future on the next set of priority properties to be protected. DH/mc Attachments cc: H. M. Van Cort R. W. Nash, Esq. 0-P&DComm-ProtSixM. • Dear DRAFT Possible Letter From Mayor To Property Owners Date: The City of Ithaca is concerned about the protection of the Six Mile Creek corridor, both because it is the city's watershed and because of its unique natural features. We have identified your property (Assessment parcel ) as one whose future use is of particular concern in these respects. We would like to discuss thi-s, and ways to insure permanent protection of watershed resources, with you at the earliest opportunity. The main options are sale or donation of the'land or of conservation easements on it, to the city. (In some cases, donation can -- for complicated tax reasons -- be more desirable for a property owner than sale). With conservation easement, the owner retains all rights and responsibilities on the land except the right to do certain things, such as develop it. Common Council has made a commitment that all watershed land acquired by the city will be managed to enhance, protect, and preserve it in its natural and undeveloped state -- in most cases,simply engaging in routine trail maintenance and water facility maintenance. Informal uses of the area (hiking,. picnicking) would be permitted but no facilities for organized intensive group use (ballfields, picnic shelters) would be Six Mile Creek Properties -2- created in any watershed areas the city acquires.1 will be contacting you soon to discuss the various options with you, and we look forward to working with you to achieve permanent protection of this important natural area. Thank you for your help. Sincerely, 1 This paragraph, of course, contingent upon common Council's adopting such a policy. RECEIVED JUN 15 1989 TOWN OF ITHACA 126 EAST SENECA STREIT QTHACA, NEW YORK 14850 June 13, 1989 Honorable John C. Gutenberger Mayor City of Ithaca_ 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear John: The experience of this past month with respect to the State bill affecting large tracts of land in the Town points to the need to renew efforts to pursue the overall Six Mile Creek study that we discussed a year ago. That effort was to have included legislative representation from the Towns of Ithaca and Caroline, the City and the County. I propose that we jointly convene that same group with the goal in mind of prioritizing the actions that need to be taken to assure protection of this invaluable natural resource including the headwaters. Perhaps we can start our effort with the study outline prepared by Mr. Van Cort a year ago. May I suggest that the first meeting take place in June? Please call me to discuss a date. ND/js cc: Town Board Very truly yours, Noel Desch Supervisor RECEIVED JUN 16 1989 BOARD O R PRESENTATIVES Court Hou e,' `h ca, . 1'Y 14850 12 June 1989 Honorable John C. Gutenberger Mayor, City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Gutie: Enclosed please find an article which appeared in the Ithaca Journal on 28 April 1989. I Ilave waited until now to write as it was my hope more information would be forthcoming. None has, and I am a bit concerned. Because Six Mile Creek flows through the Towns of Caroline, Dryden, and Ithaca before it reaches the City, I would hope that each of these municipalities, and their respective representatives, would have the opportunity to be kept abreast of developments, and the City's plans for the creek, prior to any move to "...grab onto properties immediately" as H.M. Van Cort proposes. While I cannot speak for other elected officials, I certainly would like to meet to discuss your desires, and what effect they may have, if any, on the Town of Caroline. Thank you for the opportunity. Cordialsly, ef /V4 Frank P. Proto, Representative (Town of Caroline FPP:an PC: K.Tillapaugh B.Livesay S.Stein W.Kone J.Schug N.Desch J.Mason Efforts under way -, to rotect creek "'-be/ Efforts 'to protect the city's Six Mile Creek watershed are under '.1 way. The'city had set $200,000 aside in this .year's budget for land acquisi- tion, and Common Council's plan- Hing committee • decided Wednes- day td start a new committee to r decide how to use- the money. - • • .j The new committee would most (likely operate on two levels, city planning . director H. Matthys Van • Cort said: "A 'short-term :thing • ; which would grab onto properties immediately," and a long-term stu- dy to develop "a comprehensive plan for protecting the watershed." The long-term study would take three to five years, he said, and would be expensive. . - The .city draws its water from a_.. Six Mile Creek reservoir, and wants to acquire properties bounding the ' creek to prevent them from devel- E opment .tltat daurd liurt t}`re•water- Van Cort said the committee: • would someday face a choice be tween picking properties that affect the water and those that protect natural areas. "Our resources are not unlimit=' I ed,'' he said. "There will come_ a time when you will have to choose between one and the other." CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 DEPARTMENT OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR MEMORANDUM TO: Ralph W. Nash, City Attorney FROM: M. Helen Jones, City Planner —01 DATE: June 6, 1989 RE: Alienation On June 1, 1989, the City's Intergovernmental Relations Committee met with Noel Desch, members of the Town Board, Town Planning Board and Town staff to discuss amendment of the alienation proposal to include lands in the Town along Six Mile Creek. Key issues arising from that meeting which I would like to refer to you are the following: 1. Can the City use eminent domain to acquire lands for recreational purposes? If lands are acquired for watershed protection, can they be used as "recreational lands?" 2. Town staff believe there are discrepancies in the legal descriptions of the lands included in the amendment bill (particularly with regard to the Johnson property). 3. What type(s) of binding agreement can we make with the Town to guarantee that the lands we acquire will remain protected in perpetuity? Thys and I will be meeting with the Town Planner on June 13. Any initial information which might be available prior to our meeting will be appreciated. epj/MHJ cc: Mayor Gutenberger H. M. Van Cort 0-WP/Helen/Alien.mem "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" CODE 607 Memo to: Mayor John Gutenberter Members of Common Council City Attorney Ralph Nash and staff Ivan Newell, Century 21 realtor From: Betsy Darlington, CAC Chair, Date: May 29, 1988 Re: New "city land along Six -Mile Creek I would like to thank all of you for the support you gave me for the City's acquisition of the parcel along Coddington Rd. I still feel overwhelmed and deeply grateful. My husband and I spent a few hours exploring the property on May 26, and I would really like to show anyone who's interested what's there. The two gorges are especially beautiful. And, since they have been mostly left alone, they're almost pristine. (Nearly zero trash, trails that appear to have little traffic, lots of neat birds, and masses of spring wildflowers and ferns that are uncommon elsewhere.) In order to accommodate members of Common Council, the Planning Dept., DPW and BPW, CAC, 6 -Mile C.C, etc., I thought Ind lead two nature walks on the parcel. If you'd like to come to either of these, it would help if you'd give me a call so Ill know if anyone is coming. (273.0707) We'll meet at the Coddington Rd. entrance to the site, just a few houses before Burns Rd., next to an orange fire hydrant. (Around 685-687 Coddington Rd.) Here are the dates: Sat. June llth at 9 AM (raindate June 12th, 9 AM) Wed. June 15th at 9 AM (raindate June 16th, 9 AM) If you can't make any of these dates but are anxious to see the site, call me and I'll try to set up another time for you. Plan on about 2 1/2 hours or so, going at a slow pace and stopping often (unless you turn back early). If you have a great fear of heights, think twice about coming. One trail is on a ridge between the two gorges. It is very high, very steep, and very narrow (undercut, in places). (Much of the ridge is no wider than the trail itself.) Also, unless you don't have anything else, please do NOT wear heavy -soled hiking boots. The trail and the plants are fragile in much of the area we will go to. I find old running shoes are perfect --good traction without being unduly destructive. (Otherwise we might have to do an environmental impact statement for this trip!!) I promise not to take you through "brambles, so shorts would be fine, even for scrambling up or down some banks. If you're a bird watcher and have binoculars, you might want to bring them. (Rose -breasted grosbeak, scarlet tanager, black -billed cuckoo, blue -winged warbler, yellowthroat, black -throated green warbler, veery, red -bellied woodpecker, are some of the likely possibilities to at least hear.) 41)w. ,=N A RECEIVED MAY 18 1989 Our concern is that the bikeway is a rough grading for a future road. Some giveaways in the draft Comprehensive Plan: "Six Mile Creek- approximately 600 acres of developable land, mostly in large parcels, exists between Coddington Rd. and Six Mile Creek.. About 370 acres of this land are located between the 545 acres City Watershed property and the abandoned D.L.and W railroad right of way, which is the probable location of a future sanitary sewer to serve the Coddington Rd corridor up to Troy Road. p. 17 # `i (Hot= thi3 w:1'. later 'have tr.: br juetif ed by development in the area. One of the prior ob;e t1 of the Town is to have the " Water and setter extensions ..primaril y be constructed by developers.") Tart of the area on the creek side might be appropriate as recreational land to serve the Ithaca area....such as soccer, softball, running, extension skiing...birdwatcing,botonizing. Such facilities would be linked by....South Hill Trail which is planned to be developed on the railroad right of way itself, and by streets provided by the development above the railroad right of way Some low density residential development may be sensitively integrated with the recreational development, for efficient use of the sewer extension along the former right of way.' p 17 44 (Notice we now have a network of streets to serve the playfields and we all know you need lots of parking as demonstrated by Cass Park.) 'New Streets- area plans developed for South Hill shall recognize the need to eliminate long deadend streets such as PeninsgI wiiti Ave_ •and Juniper Dr., as well as the need for an efficient system of both local and primary roads.' I Co (Please note that the proposed bikeway would be blacktopped from Hudson Street and connecting up with Juniper Dr., thus the first step to eliminating Juniper Dr. as a deadend road.) CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET RECEIVED MAY 5 1989 ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 DEPARTMENT OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR To: From: Re: Date: MEMORANDUM Mayor John C..Gutenberger (U4476 May -4989 Alienation This memorandum is written to request that you call a meeting of the Intergovernmental Relations Committee to discuss the proposed Home Rule Message legislation with the Town of Ithaca officials at the earliest possible date. CODE 607 The background on this request is as follows: On Tuesday afternoon, 5/2/89, Ray Schlather stopped in our office because he had received a call from Noel Desch who, it seems, was extremely concerned about the Home Rule Legislation which is on the agenda for consideration at the May 3 meeting. Noel told Ray that he was not aware that the property along Six Mile Creek was now part of the substitution. To make a long story short, we discussed this with Helen Jones who explained that this was the same language as in last year's Home Rule Message and that the Home Rule Message as worded did not require acquisition of the entire parcels named in the Message but simply allowed the city to acquire as much as necessary to affect the substitution. Helen, Ray, and I discussed this problem and decided that it would be best to postpone action by Common Council until we have had a chance to work this out with Noel Desch and the other appropriate Town officials. I then called Marty Luster to discuss the Assembly's schedule. Marty told me that the earliest closing date for the Assembly this year is scheduled for June 21. He still felt there was some possibility that if the Council does not act on the Home Rule Message until June 7 that the Assembly and Senate won't "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" Alienation/J. C. Gutenberger —2— May 4, 1989 have a chance to act on it before the end of the session. He suggested that we might want to have a special meeting of Common Council after we meet with the Town. Helen called George Frantz and discussed the problem with him. It was agreed that we should hold an IGR meeting as soon as possible. Ray agreed to call Noel to tell him that we would recommend tabling the Home Rule Message until we have had a chance to talk to the Town. I would appreciate your discussing this with me, Ray, or Helen at your earliest convenience. HMVC/mc cc: Raymond M. Schlather, Esq. M. Helen Jones O—VC—SpMeet.CC 204 Fairmount Ave. April 29, 1989 Shirley Raffensperger 139 Pine Tree Rd. Dear Shirley: After getting off the phone with you yesterday, I got to thinking about Noel Desch's apparent surprise at the City's request to the state legislature to acquire Six -Mile Creek land in its alienation package (instead of the Festival Lands) . I almost called you back, but then thought what a pain all your phone calls must be and realized it would be easier for you if I put this in writing. I also have copied some CAC communications which you may or may not have seen. I think the City would be surprised to find that Desch did not know about the alienation switch since Susan Beeners and George Frantz were at a .number of meetings during which -this was talked about'' In addition, as members of the Six -Mile Creek Committee, they received the CAC's November, '88 policy statement on acquisitions (enclosed), and these were discussed in Six -Mile Creek Committee meetings. The Mayor has talked to Desch, I am told, about implementing greater 6 -Mile Creek protections, and tile Ve T w en included in various large meetings to discuss this. h' rleeayor as received a positive and co- operative response from Desch --including, as I understand it, on the question of acquisitions in general. Susan Beeners said at a meeting on April 5, 1988 that the Town was committed to helping the City protect the area northeast of the rr bed. (The whole thrust of the conversation was land acquisition.) (By the way, the City Attorney says that the City has a legal right to acquire land anywhere in the watershed --though legalities aren't really the question here.) The alienation switch has also been in Common Council minutes and agenda(s?), but I can understand Desch not reading them. In other words, I don't think the City has been trying to hide anything from the Town, and had every reason to believe Frantz and Beeners would pass on to the Town whatever transpired at the various meetings. Given the cooperative response the City has received re acquisitions in general, I think the Mayor will be distressed to find that Desch was both unaware and disturbed by the alienation. switch. Acquisition of land along Six -Mile Creek has been part of planning for the area for a long time. In 1984, the Six -Mile Creek Study Committee came out with a big report, (with which Susan and George are familiar). It identified land acquisition in and along the current watershed holdings as a "high priority." Regarding the recreation trail: this same 1984 study recommends that the rr bed should become wilder and more natural the farther it gets from the City, and that it should be for walking, with no bicycles permitted. So, the statement in the EAF that the proposed trail is in accord with City plans is just not correct. Furthermore, the Town has not worked with the City on plans for the trail, which lat- is especially unfortunate, given that there is an entire committee (made up almost entirely of Town residents) dedicated to Six -Mile Creek. Its members include many knowledgeable people --Dick Fischer, Bill Dress, and Beth Mulholland, to name just three. If you'd like to walk from the NW end of the rr bed to just beyond German Cross Rd. with me, we could take two cars and park one at each end. Its helpful to see what a difference trail width makes --and the width varies considerably in that stretch. Thanks for reading all this! Best wishes, Betsy Darlington ke,11,_nsa CreLV�,: te,. 4 -s Tools for Protection of Six -Mile Creek RECEIVED APR 4 1989 March 22, 1989 etsy gton Buzz Lavine, MargaretFabrizio, various waysJohnson, enha and eprotection nof the corridor. met on March 20 to co atershed and ro the he unique sentnatural out rea along the several months Six -Mile Creek by Thys Van Cort, We went through the list, and discussed each idea (Buzz s expertise was invaluable!): tool 1. New watershed rules and regulationheaes proposed by Steve Bakers. This could be a ubefore for protecting water quality. he moved away last Juneo talk toould rotect not just the creek but John Andersson at the CountyllHe tributaries as well. Buzz is going tand tell them a letter Dept. and Ill talk to City Engineer, Bill Gray, may come from our joint-!� committee, .wsku'g f someC action. reZ that the 2. Conservation Overlay Zones. The �ludes omprehensCOZlseforPlan 6-Mile. le. Buzdz Town of Ithaca is working on apparently going to ask Susan Beeners what the plan recommends. l 3. TDR's (Transfer of development gf rs). A many yearls;aevented tmorehunl'kely�es a lot of planning. Unlikely in Dryden in Caroline. But possiblein Town of Ithaca. The Town Board members need encouragement to adopthist The basic principle is that everyone shares equally in development rights. Let's say Mr. Newt owns 10 acres below the rr bed that the Town has decided may not be developed. Ms. Toad owns 10 acres in a part of town that can be developed. Mrh She for the development developmay ineed go ahead anghts s that 10 acres, but only after paying on some (all?) of his tdevelope . That is, she his land, in order �topgantthe�righN to for not being able to think that's how Buzz explained it.) develop her own land. (At least, I s 4. Conservation easements. implies, XCEPT for rights that arwner retains ownership of se spelled and all the rights that this out in the easement--usthleYeasemenmenEasements are sold or donated. cr part of the land can be covered by If donated, there can be considerable tax benefits to the owner: a, charitable deduction Ob��eetheand donation and after); (fes the difference in value between the land e b. possible reduction in property taxes (assessors are not required to lower the taxes, but they should, and they should be urged to do so); c. reduction in estate taxes. s.but theiryincome and assets200 acrareerather s ofT low • They might think they valuable, developable property can protect their land by leaving it to The kids t -an their conservation -minded children. taxesThey aredso.high they meusttsell he quickly discover that the estate land to pay the taxes. Since an easement would greatly reduce the �v�u�es of the land, the estate taxes would-t.Jee much lower..94 Tvpic..Lb 1.i5� ,�. s \\ La sell -�� lQ , - The tax benefits of donating an easement naturally depend on how much has been given up. If all development rights are donated, the tax benefits will be greater than if certain areas are designated as ones on which development can take place. An easement does not open the land to the public, unless the owner says so in the easement. 5. Deed restrictions. Although restrictions can be put into the deeds on any piece of property, this usually happens only at the time the land changes hands, and especially when it is proposed for development. A municipality can require deed restrictions as a condition for approval for a development. Municipalities should be urged to use this tool. r`'Deed restrictions are much easier to break (legally) than conservation .1 easements. 6. Runoff management. Controls should be required as part of the normal development approval process in 'a municipality. Erosion and sedimenfafion cw.41,u ordinances are especially helpful in this. Betsy is going to call Stuart Stein (on the County Bd. of Reps.) and ask him to to have his committee ask the County Planning staff to prepare some sample ordinances and to circulate these to the various municipalities in the County, urging their adoption. 7. Critical Environmental Areas (CEAs) and unique natural areas. Useful to have these designations, but not a whole lot of teeth in them. The second has no teeth at all, except as a warning to reviewers of proposals to proceed with caution. An action that takes place in a CEA automatically becomes a Type I action, thus requiring environmental review. John Johnson is going to ask Paul Mazzarella what the status is for 6 -Mile: is it already a CEA? If not, we should start the process•of getting it designated. 8. Mapping - potential streets, etc. An official document. Probably not a lot to be done on this now, but we should be involved in decisions regarding roads and other map changes in the 6 -Mile Cr. area. Question for Susan or George: what does the Comprehensive Plan propose? 9. Wild, scenic, and recreational river designation. This would be useful and should be pursued. -- 10. Outright acquisition of land, either from willing donors or sellers or by condemnation. This naturally affords the greatest protection. We agreed that there is a need for a plan: a. what to purchase (whether easements or outright acquisition), and b. what the priorities are - highest would be lands the City should acquire, either through donation or purchase; next would be land that is only valuable enough to get some cheaper way than through purchase; and lowest priority would be land that needed protection but not as desperately as the others, and for which deed restrictions should be sufficient. Michael Jones has done a lot of work for the Town on 6 -Mile and should be included in figuring out which lands to put into which categories. a C-6 N 1 1 OFFICE OF CITY OF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA. NEW YORK 14850 RECEIVED MAR 22 1989 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL CODE 607 March 20, 1989 Richard J. Cook CNG Transmission Corp. 445 W. Main St. Clarksburg, W. V A 26302-2450 Dear Mr. Cook: Thanks for your call last week. Every thing is all set for a meeting with interested parties about the pipeline across Six -Mile Creek: Tuesday, April 18th at 1 PM at the Planning Dept. third floor of City Hall (108 E. Green St.). Representatives from the Planning Dept., the Dep -L. of Public Works, the Six -Mile Creek Committee, Circle Greenway, and the Conservation Advisory Council will all be there. (Possibly others as well.) See you April 18th. Sincerely, Betsy Darlington, CAC Chair "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" OFFICE OF CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 March 6, 1989 Mr. Richard J. Cook CNG Transmission Corp. 445 W. Main St. Clarksburg, W. V A 26302-2450 Dear Mr. Cook: RECEIVED MAR 7 1989 I read in the legal notices on February 28th that your company is planning to construct a natural gas pipeline across Six -Mile Creek just east of the Ithaca Reservoir. As I understand the notice, much of the pipeline will run along the current NYSEG powerline. Are you aware that this powerline crosses City land,' near Coddington Rd. as far as the old railroad bed, and again in the City watershed holdings? In addition to concerns with siltation and other pollution of the water supply, the Six -Mile Creek area is designated by the County Environmental Management Council as a "unique natural area" because of its many rare or scarce plants, animals, and ecological communities, its spectacular scenery, and its interesting geological features. The area is characterized by deep gorges with highly erodible banks, leading down to the main creek. What measures will your company be taking to: a. Minimize disturbance to the plants and wildlife; b. Minimize problems of runoff, erosion, and sedimentation during construction; c. Minimize construction damage; d. Minimize pollution (including trash) by your construction crews and their machinery? Also, what will you be doing to involve the City in review and oversight of the project? Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Betsy Darlington, Conservation Advisory Council Chair Cc: NYS DEC -- (U w,w.r.sSaa>La4.7049 Public Service Commission NYSEG Mayor Gut entsege'ompres(Rnekr'it tipi1tiveActionProgram" TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 RECEIVED MAR 7 1989 Memo to: Supervisor Noel Desch Members of Ithaca Town Board Town Planners, Susan Beeners and George Frantz Town Attorney John Barney From: Betsy Darlington, Conservation Advisory Council (CAC) Chair 12_45H,."'.40`, Re: Six -Mile Creek Recreation Trail EAF Date: March 6, 1989 I understand the Town Board will be discussing, and maybe voting on, the bikeway EAF on March 13. I urge you to delay the vote. I. I only learned a little over a week ago that an EAF had been done for this project. If the City is an "involved agency," it should be included in the SEQR process. I have three bits of information concerning this: A. Bonnie McLaud, the NYSEG negotiator, said she thought --but was not sure --that the City would have to give its approval for the bikeway to cross the new City parcel. Susan Beeners asked Attorney Barney about this and he felt City approval would not be needed. Someone (or some document) at NYSEG should be able to clarify this. B. Susan Beeners said that Mr. Barney felt that the City would have to give its approval for use of the Wildflower Preserve Trail, in from Renzetti Pl.--if that is, iri fact, an official trail. C. Ralph Nash told me that if City approval is needed for any part of the project, then the City will conduct its own environmental review when the time comes, if it is not included now. This would delay the project -- possibly at an awkward time for you. , I would like to suggest that the City be included and a vote on the EAF be delayed until this has happened. This will give people in the City an opportunity to state any concerns, and also avoid later delays. II. In the event that you decide to go ahead without comments from the City, I would like to make a few now, although I have not yet had time to study the document carefully. 1. Trail width: Few people seem to favor a width of 8 feet. There are narrow maintenance vehicles designed for use on narrow trails, and access for trucks is the only reason I've heard for having the trail so wide. (For removing fallen trees from the trail, the ecologically soundest procedure would be to simply leave the trees in the woods.) A number of users of the Honness Lane trail feel that is it far wider than necessary or desirable. Along Six -Mile Creek, which is so much wilder a place, the extra width would destroy the sense of being on a remote, isolated trail through the woods. If the trail is narrower --4 or 5 feet maybe?--at least some of the opposition to it will disappear. 2. Sewer line, etc.: There is always a problem of knowing what to address in doing an EAF. One of the City planners and I were told by John Lockrow, Sr. Analyst at the DEC in Albany, (regarding the City's Alienation process) that an environmental assessment must address a "worst case" scenario; other things that could follow as a result of the project must be addressed. In this instance, there are five major things that could happen, once the project is approved, and these should be addressed in the EAF: a. Extension of the sewer line out along the right-of-way, b. Intense development below Coddington Rd. as a result of (a); c. Construction of a road where the trail now is (some of this is in fact already planned); d. Deterioration of the valuable natural area below the rr bed because of (b); e. Degradation of the water supply because of (b), (c), and (d). One could argue that leaky septic systems along Coddington Rd. pose a greater risk. (If so, why isn't the County correcting the problem?) First, sewer lines also can leak (and the one west of Northfield may be doing just that!). Also, a new study shows that with development comes greatly increased pollution of groundwater (which, of course, along Coddington Rd., ends up in Six-Mile Creek). This pollution is from many different substances - pesticides, solvents, salt, gasoline, etc. Of course, there is also greater runoff and more pollution of surface water with development. 3. Mitigating measures: If we wish to protect the water supply and the outstanding and unique natural area that extends upward for a considerable distance from it, measures must be taken before the bikeway is approved. Here are some possibilities: a. Be sure that the easements from NYSEG and Therm allow for only the bikeway and not a sewer line or future road; b. Be sure that there are not other conditions in the easement that could stimulate intense development below Coddington Rd.; c. Go for an easement, and not purchase, of the right-of-way. (Otherwise some future board could overturn any protections you put in place.) d. Ask for an easement of, say, 20' rather than 66'. * A determination of significance cannot be made until terms of the easement are known. 4. Cost of project: Many people are concerned about the cost of the project. Couldn't a good bike trail be made at far less expense by simply smoothing g:2%-.77 3 out the bumps, putting bark chips or cinders in and trimming brush where it is threatenin especially muddy places, g to overrun the trail? I believe that many people would support the trail if 1) the narrower and less manicured or "suburban" in trail were were made --ensured incharacter; 2) if a commitment partand olthtohevere easement conditions --not to ever extend the sewer line along it, put in a road; and 3) if the cost were reduced. I think many people like the idea of having the trail maintained and monitored to some degree. of the proposed Chang es nor of the future iimhey just don't like the extent a sewer line would have. TrailsPacts that such things as can be beautiful, and this one already is. Let's not do so much to it that we ruin it. think the project will enjoy widespread� If it's done right, I support. Thanks for your attention! IN OFFICE OF MAYOR a• CITY OF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14650 MEMORANDUM TO: Helen Jones FROM: Mayor John C. Gutenberger DATE: February 3, 1989 RE: Sixty Foot Dam TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 For your files please find a Notice of Surrender of Exemption concerning the Sixty Foot Dam project. Enc. . e G e o Celebrating o ®o o m 1888 - 1988 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" UNITED STATES OF AMERICA FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION City of Ithaca Project No. 6872-004 - New York NOTICE OF SURRENDER OF EXEMPTION (January 25, 1989) Take notice that the City of Ithaca, exemptee for the Sixty Foot Dam Project No. 6872, has requested that the exemption be terminated. The exemption for Project No. 6872 was issued on August 8, 1986. The project would have been located on the Six Mile Creek, in Tompkins County, New York. No construction has started. The exemptee filed the request on January 9, 1989, and the exemption for Proiect No. 6872 shall remain in effect through the thirtieth day after issuance of this notice unless that day is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday as described in 18 C.F.R. §385.2007, in which case the exemption shall remain in effect through the first business day following that day. New applications involving this project site, to the extent provided for under 18 C.F.R. Part 4, may be filed on the next business day. Lois D. Cashell Secretary FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20426 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $300 P -0006872004 100089 ..![:OI -Ii I C. GUTENE F PGER , MAYOR :G •T•HACA CITY OF (NY) CITY HALL :l08 EAST GREEN STREET :['TH.. ACA ; NY :1.4850 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION FERC -351 CITY DF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 COMMON COUNCIL Dear Supervisor Desch, As Chairwoman of the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee, I am forwarding to you a resolution passed unanimously by that committee at our January 10, 1989 meeting. In view of the fact that the town has hired a consultant to review the draft comprehensive plan document, the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee urges the Town of Ithaca to include in this document a formal policy regarding the con- servation of lands along Six Mile Creek. Minimum standards for such a plan should include 1. On the South side, at the least, strong protection for the land between the reser- voir and the railroad right of way 2. Other developed policy (including protection of land on the north side of the creek) should be at least consistent with the Six Mile Creek Gorge Report People and Preservation. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Your planning staff members Susan Beeners and Geaorge Frantz have been working with us on this issue and are a good resource as are members of our committee. Ptulor TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 January 25, 1989 cc: Montgomery May Susan Beeners Mayor Gutenbereger Council Bud Gerkin, BPW Jack Dougherty Betsy Darlington Sincerely, P -- "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" c\isr- A ,t)<4-7,\ i CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CONSERVATION ADVISORY COUNCIL CODE 607 Dec. 7, 1988 Vice -President John Burness Day Hall Cornell University Dear John: At 1345 Slaterville Rd., just past the city line, Francis Paolangeli has turned a beautiful portion of the Six -Mile Creek area into a moon- scape. (He now is applying for subdivision approval.) What does Cornell have to do with this? A whole lot, I'm sorry to say! It turns out that Cornell hired Paolangeli to remove dirt from construction sites. What he did was bulldoze the vegetation from about six acres of this sensitive area and dump the dirt there (now bulldozed smooth). In addition to being an unusually sensitive area in terms of flora and fauna, Six -Mile Creek is the city's watershed. What mechanism does Cornell have for regulating where construction dirt (and other debris, too) is dumped? Surely, given the huge volumns being excavated, Cornell should feel a sense of responsibility about what is done with it. I would urge Cornell to accept this responsibility and put provisions for dirt and other debris into all contracts, stating where the material vvtu i v.441 go. Given the large amount still to be dug just from the Theory Center site, how might controls be put in place right now, before it is too late? What a tragedy if, while saving one gorge, we ruined some other very special natural area? It is estimated that in the United States alone, 700 more plants will become extinct in the next year. The Six -Mile Creek area s one of several in the County which has some rare plants (birds, too, in fact). It would not take an awful lot of the sort of carelessness displayed by Paolangeli--and Cornell --to hasten the extinction of some unusual species, at the very least in Tompkins County. What action is Cornell going to take to get control of this? Thanks! Sincerely, Betsy Darlington, CAC Chair Cc : 1-iator asizA,Ci,C,. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program' Six -Mile Creek Acquisitions November, 1988 Conservation Advisory Council policy statement In view of the City's recent acquisition of land along Six -Mile Creek, and with the prospect of further acquisitions, the CAC recommends that Common Council state what its policy will be regarding these lands. Over the course of several meetings, we carne up with the following recommenda- tions for your consideration: 1. The overall objective for the lands below the rr bed, and for a buffer zone 200 -feet -wide above it, should be to protect the natural character of these areas. Recreation should be entirely of the passive sort --walking and bird -watching, for example. The CAC feels that the City must commit itself to not putting in active recreational facilities below the tracks. Perhaps, aThough at least some of the land would be officially designated as "park," it could be called -the Six -Mile -Creek Natural Areas Park. The Adirondack Park sets a good precedent: the term "park" does not need to imply active uses of the land, and the state recognizes this. The city is fairly well endowed with developed parks and vast expanses of mowed grass. Unfortunately, it is not well supplied with areas of unspoiled natural beauty where one can go for quiet reflection and renewal. This type of recreation is just as important as ballfields and skating rinks; each type of facility meets different needs. As the City expands, we will continue to need both types of recreational areas; the need for natural areas could well grow disproportionately, considering the continual growth of the city and surrounding towns. Open areas (abandoned fields) below the rr tracks should be left to continue their succession back to forest. 2. We understand that the two acres of frontage along Coddington Rd. on the Maylin/Brahm parcel were appraised at $30,000 ($15,000 each). It would seem reasonable to sell off this portion, or perhaps one slightly larger, for housing. The remain ing 14 acres of the upper parcel is appraised at only $700 per acre. The, city acquired it for even less than this. In other words, we got a terrific deal, and it would not make economic sense to sell it for the paltry returns that could be expected --at most, $9800. The CAC feels that it would be prudent for the city to hold onto that above-the-rr land as protectioin for the watershed. Another reason to hold onto the above-the-rr property is that NYSEG currently sprays herbicides in certain areas below their power line. Last June or July, Darlington and others observed large bands of dead woody plants, and a letter to NYSEG confirmed that they spray in that area. NYSEG claims to stay 600 feet from any stream, but at least one recent spraying went much closer to the stream on the upper section of the Maylin/Brahm parcel --Darlington estimates perhaps only fifty feet away. NYSEG does not spray on City watershed holdings. Unless the new property is already officially part of the "city watershed," we request that the City look into so designating it. In any case the City would undoubtedly have more leverage in convincing NYSEG not to spray there than would a private owner. (There are, of course, good reasons to avoid spray.) C of -h 3. Without having explored the parcel a bit to the SE of the Maylin/Brahm piece (and adjoining it on the downhill side of the rr bed) (see map), our tentative recommendation is that the City purchase only the portion below the rr bed and a buffer of at least 200 feet above the rr bed --the quantity of land should be determined by the natural and recreational value of it. For example, if the upper part of the parcel includes the stream that is near its boundary, the city should retain a buffer of at least 200 feet in each direction along the stream. (This stream runs through the Maylin/Brahm parcel below the rr, and drains into the Reservoir.)\�� p Alternatively, the City could purchase the entire parcel and sell �, off whatever it decides is not needed. -1' \49)1,-'3) - ?o1SSit fef S�vto VS `OC.O�YION 7� ‘,"),J') 2R" 1. 4. The 7 1/2 -acre triangle just outside the city, below the switchback, goes down very close to the creek and is in one of the most beautiful, unusual, and unspoiled areas of the watershed. (See map.) It is exactly this sort of area that we must pass on to future generations in an unspoiled state. This must be kept off limits (to city crews) for anything but the most minimal trail maintenance. Natural refuges such as this will be needed more than ever as the City grows and takes on more of the problems associated with large size. 2 R fL Sw;4,k6a,Jc 5. The CAC recommends that any future acquisitions follow these guidelines: a. Hands-off policy on acquisitions below the rr bed and for a 200 -foot - wide buffer above it. For example, no facilities for active recreation, and no clearing of trees or other vegetation. b. On the north side of Six -Mile Creek there is no neat dividing line (such as a rr bed). Distances to the water are generally shorter and steeper than on the Coddington side. Any acquisitions on the north side must be protected from overuse. The Six -Mile Creek Committee has made recommendations for acquisitions in that area, and we recommend that the City follow their advice. c. We feel that the City must exercise great care regarding any lands that it decides to condemn and purchase, especially those on which the owners reside. The City must not find itself in the position of taking property for preservation or passive recreation purposes, and then of turning around and selling portions for possible development. There may be many instances in which the current owners are planning to give their properties long-term protection from development; the City must be able to assure such owners that the City's aim in acquiring the land is to protect it as a natural area and to protect the City's water supply, not to either develop it as a high -use recreation area nor to sell it for development. d. We propose that the City acquire conservation easements along any streams that flow between Coddington Rd. and the rr bed, even if the adjacent property is not one the City wishes to buy. We recommend a band extending at least 200 feet in each direction from the banks of such streams, in order to give the water the needed protection from pollution. Alternatively, the City could purchase these waterway bands, or negotiate restrictive deed covenants with the owners. e. Except for item (d), we suggest that the City aim to acquire only lands below the rr bed and 200 feet above it (as a buffer). Exceptions could be made, however, for critical or unique areas above the rr bed. 6. Acquisition and protection of lands in the Six -Mile Creek corridor is of such overriding importance to the City that it must be seen on its own merits and not be contingent upon any other city projects. 7. The CAC recommends that the City set up a special fund for acquisition of Six -Mile Creek land. We also recommend that any income from sale of road -frontage land on Coddington or Slaterville Rds. be put into this fund. EQBA funds should also be sought --matching funds in particular may be relatively easy to get. 8. We also passed the following resolution: Be it resolved that the City of Ithaca create, maintain, and support by budget allocationn a small (5 person maximum) Committee for Land Acquisition Within the Six -Mile Creek Watershed that is empowered to publicize City Policy in this area, make and receive offers for the purchase of land (subject to Common Council approval), prepare and administer a budget, seek outside funding, and develop creative procedures in an aggressive program of land acquisition and watershed protection. OFFICE OF MAYOR October 13, 1988 Mr. George R. Frantz Assistant Town Planner Town of Ithaca 126 East Seneca Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Re: Six Mile Creek Dear Mr. F antz: CITY OF ITHACA 1O8 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 Enclosed please find a copy of recommendations from the Six Mile Creek Study Committee showing the dates approved by Common Council along with the City's Environmental Assessment Form. I hope this material will be of assistance to you. Sincerely • John C. Gutenberger Mayor Enc. tahaom lirt e 0 Celebrating ©®e ®1888 - 1988 "An Equal Opportunity Ernployer with an Affirmative Action Program" RECEIVED SEP 27 1988 TO rir ACA 126 EAST SENECA STREP 1THACA, NEW YORK 14830 September 26, 1988 Hon. John C. Gutenberger, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Mayor Gutenberger: The Town of Ithaca Planning Department is studying the potential effects of its proposed South Hill Recreationway on the Six Mile Creek Watershed area. We would appreciate it if you would provide us with y of the regulations governin• .ubl' •_,. he area as off' ly aa.opted by T e i y. Also, we would like a cop attendant envy a ssment or impact statement w ich the City would nave completed pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act requirements prior to adoption of the regulations. This material would be of assistance to us in completing an environmental assessment of the proposed South Hill Recreationway. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me at 273-1747. Sincerely, George R. Frantz Assistant Town Planner GRF/nf COPY FOR YOUR INFORMATION RICHARD SIMHERG REGIONAL DIRECTOR August 24, 1988 _£—CEL1100. STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 333 EAST WASHINGTON STREET SYRACUSE. N.Y. 13202 Mr. John A. Dougherty Superintendent of Public Works City of Ithaca 108'E. Green St. Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Sir: RECEIVED AUG 30 1988 FRANKLIN E. WHITE COMMISSIONER RE: REVIEW OF PARKING ON ROUTE 79 AT WATERSHED YOUR LETTER OF AUG. 15, 1988 This is to acknowledge receipt of the above captioned request. A formal investigation will be conducted at the subject location. Upon completion of the investigation, you will be notified of the results. Your interest in this matter_is greatly appreciated. Sincerely, RAYMOND F. NOVAK, P. E. Acting Regional Director of..Transportation Region 3 By. Barry A. Stevens, P. E. Regional Traffic Engineer TOWN OF ; } ACA 126 EAST SEMECA STREST ITHACA, NEW YORK 14SS0 Hon. John C. Gutenberger, Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear John: RECEIVED JUL 27 1988 July 26, 1988 I must protest the action taken this past Wednesday, July 20, 1988, by the City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council regarding the Town of Ithaca's proposed South Hill recreationway, and the follow-up news reports on WHCU-AM radio. The Conservation Advisory Council discussed a Town of Ithaca project which it knew relatively little about, without any Town representative present, and, on the basis of second- or third -hand information, wrong information, and a distinct lack of information, endorsed the attached statement. I agreed to meet with the Conservation Advisory Council on August 15, 1988, as a courtesy to the City of Ithaca, to discuss our plans for the proposed recreationway. (A schedule conflict prevented me from meeting with the Council on the 20th of July.) At that time, I had planned to provide the Advisory Council with a detailed and accurate overview of the project and address, or take back to our office for further consideration, those concerns the Advisory Council may have had upon receipt of such information. The staff of the Town of Ithaca Planning Department places great importance on the promotion of intermunicipal cooperation between the Town and the City. It is toward this end that I have already discussed plans for the proposed trail with the Board of Public Works, the Planning and Development Board, and the Six Mile Creek Advisory Committee. Input from the BPW and the P & D Board, in fact, led to some design changes in the trail and additional monies being budgeted for landscape materials and barriers to control bike access to the Circle Greenway trail network in the vicinity of Van Nattas Dam. I would like to continue my efforts to inform the various bodies of the City of Ithaca and address their concerns on this and any Town project which may be of interest to the City, however, at the same time I must insist on a minimum level of responsibility and courtesy on the part of such bodies. At the very least, their reaction to such projects should be based on complete and accurate first-hand information and responses to their questions and concerns. Thank you for your attention to this matter. GRF/nf Sincerely, George R. Frantz Assistant Town Planner At our July 20, 1988 meeting, the Conservation Advisory Council voted unanimously to endorse the following statement and the enclosed letter about Six -Mile Creek and related issues, such as the bikeway, possible park plans, and the extension of the water -sewer lines out along the rr bed. The CAC wants to especially emphasize its concern over the destructiveness of having the water and sewer line put in along the rr bed as well as with the development this would generate. Also, members familiar with bike paths--espcially the avid bikers on the Council --say that biking and running and walking are highly incompatible, much as one may want this to be a multi -use facility. Finally, the CAC recommends that the rr bed be maintained as a semi -primitive trail. 51 Betsy__ Darlington, for the CAC Memo to: George Frantz, Town Planner Cc: Susan Beeners, Town Planner CAC From: Betsy Darlington, CAC Chair Re: What"s so special about Six -Mile Creek Date: July 20, 1988 This memo is to give you the information you requested about Six -Mile Creek, explaining some of the things that make it an unusual, special --indeed, unique --natural area. I talked to Bob Wesley to get more specific information, and I hope that you will have a chance to also. He is recognized among local botanists and other naturalists as one of the leading plant ecologists in this area. Cornell Plantations, the Nature Conservancy, Tompkins County, and the City of Ithaca are among those who hire him to do plant inventories, etc. Most of the botanical portions of this letter will be reporting on what Bob Wesley told me. Recently;1 wrote to ornithologist Stephen Mountainspring for- his list of birds, which I now have. After talking to you, I asked Beth Mulholland to send me the numbers of rare plants (she won't give out the list itself -- it's a tightly guarded secret because they have had so much trouble with plant thefts!). Beth is also going to send me an article about Six -Mile Creek, written by Professor Emeritus Richard B. Fischer (well known throughout the state for his knowledge of environmental issues and natural history). I will tell you about these when I receive them. Virtually all of what we call "Six -Mile Creek," from the old railroad bed down to the water (on the south- side), and .for - some distance on the north side, is on the EMC's list of unique areas in the county. The south side in particular -is regarded as very undisturbed and valuable, but the whole area contains many features that make it deserving of special protection: 1. It contains a number of unusual, rare, threatened, or endangered plants. ' 2. It supports a large number of birds (at least 192 species), including 3 on the state's "threatened" list and 8 on its "special concern" list. 3. It contains a large, contiguous, and relatively undisturbed forest (one reason it supports so many species of wildlife and plants). 4. It contains a rich diversity of species and ecological communities. 5. It contains the water supply for most of the city and some of the Town of Ithaca, with obvious implications for future activities in the area. 6. It has highly erodible soils on the slopes. 7. It contains fine examples of a variety of forest types that are no longer well represented because of human destruction. For example, one community of old beech woods is as old and rare as anything in the county.., Some other examples: * South -facing slopes with their oak -hickory forests and the associated herbaceous plants such as trailing arbutus, rue anemone, some unusual rock cresses, moss phlox, 4 -leaved milkweed, rock saxifrage, pussy -toes, fragile fern, and some species I won't name because of their rarity. * North -facing slopes with their hemlocks, ferns, and again, some rare species. * Tops of slopes with a dry, warm climate, featuring trailing arbutus, various unusual sedges, some unusual lichens, wintergreen, partridgeberry, ovate -leaved violet, fringed polygala, 4 -leaved milkweed, and some rarities. * Fields that were once farmed and which support a number of interesting wildflowers -various- asters and goldenrods, for example --and young trees and shrubs. (Also some interesting birds--e.g. blue -winged warblers and willow flycatchers --that require this sort of second -growth habitat.) Eventually: these fields will revert back to forest, which will be a fine thing. But -. in the meantime, they are of ecological importance (and interest) in their own right. As for birds, a number of species require a large - uninterrupted expa• nse of forest to successfully breed. The forest fragmentation that is occurring nearly everywhere is having a severe impact on their populations. An article: -H in the June 21 NY Times said, 'once -common woodland songbirds have plunged into steep population declines in forest tracts fragmented by suburban sprawl.". Neotropical migrants are among those whose numbers are declining precipi tously -because of this: vireos, flycatchers,- warblers,- and thrushes, -for - - - example. Ovenbirds and two different waterthrushes are three examples of warbler species found at Six -Mile that require large expanses of forest. Likewise, red -shouldered hawks, on the NYS threatened list. I have a list of birds found in the Six -Mile Creek area by Stephen Mountain - spring who was a graduate student in ornithology at Cornell a few years ago. (He went on to work for the Fish and Wildlife Service in Hawaii, and rediscovered a bird that people thought had been extinct since the early 1900's.) The list he sent me of 192 species was compiled in over 100 field trips spanning 1975-1980. Each trip lasted 4-6 hours, in all seasons, and all hours of the day and night. His list includes .8 species on the states "special concern" list and 3 species on the "threatened" list. I don't know how many species on his list are rare or threatened in the Cayuga Lake Basin. If you would like a copy, Ind be happy to send it to you. Six -Mile Creek (and I mean the entire area, not just the part along the creek itself) is of such great importance that disturbances from humans must be minimized. It is very important that before the Town goes ahead with developing the rr bed into a bikeway that it document that the increased traffic along the path would not spill over onto the area below the tracks. Surely other places have put in such facilities through watersheds and natural areas and we could find out what their experience has been. Anytime you have lots of people using a natural area, you lose something. Some birds can't tolerate a lot of human traffic; plants get trampled, picked, or dug up by the careless, thoughtless, ignorant, or greedy; highly erodible slopes get denuded of vegetation by people's feet, and then wash away; and so on. Of course, there are recreational (and emotional!) benefits in having people go into such areas, but we already have this access on the north side where it is carefully monitored and patrolled. Aside from the bikeway, an area such as this should never see developed "parks" in its midst. No such thing should be contemplated by the Town for any area below the railroad bed (either the main line or the switchback). While leaving the rr bed to explore areas below it cannot be prohibited or prevented --and probably shouldn't be—nothing should be done to encourage /' it either. While you are probably right that most people would stay on the path itself, the more people you have using it, obviously the more people you will have leaving it to explore beckoning ravines and forests where the most fragile stuff still survives. While the Town probably can plant tangly stuff like blackberries at strategic locations (not the invasive multiflora rose in this sensitive place!), I don't see how this could be done at every place where it might be needed. Another serious concern is the destruction that will occur if the Town extends the water and sewer lines out along the rr bed, as you said was in the plans. Why can't these go along Coddington Rd.? I was very relieved to hear that the plans call for a path 8' wide, not 12' --but in this case, why does. the Town need a 60 -foot right-of-way? If there is something which mandates this, the Town must make an ironclad _—__commitment to_ never _putting_in_a: road there._ Perhaps_ this could ,be.written, into the deed from NYSEG. As for the paved section, I've been told that joggers are the main current users. They can't stand to run on pavement, and there willbe howls of protest (and pain!) if that part of the plan is implemented. In conclusion, I have to ask why the Town wants to do this? You told me the Town wants to get people out of their cars and onto their bicycles. This is indeed a laudible goal. But the current path, with perhaps a little smoothing out here and there, is already -77177 bike path. The "suburban" type path that the Town wants would be totally out of character with the area it goes through. Why spend thousands of taxpayer dollars putting in something that is unneeded, unwanted, out -of -character, and could have some significant and irreversible impacts on the area to its north? I would urge you to proceed very carefully with this and not just assume that there will be no significant impacts. , This is one area we can't afford to experiment with. Thanks for listening! We look forward to your meeting with us on August 15 to discuss this further. RECEIVED JUL 251988 TOWN OF ITHACA 126 EAST SENECA STRUT ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 July 22, 1988 Ms. Carolyn K. Peterson, Chair Six Mile Creek Advisory Committee 108 East Green Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Carolyn: Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the Town's proposed recreation trail. on South Hill with the Six Mile Creek Advisory Committee. I would like to correct a misunderstanding concerning the potential for a road being constructed within the old railroad right of way. In a telephone conversation Betsy Darlington expressed concern about the Town, constructing a road in the right of way within the next ten years or so, basing this concern on information she said you had given her since the Committee meeting. The Town of Ithaca has no plans to build any road along any portion of the old railroad bed. What was discussed at the meeting as possibly being built in the next decade was a sewer line extension to serve homes in the Coddington Road area of the Town. The only portions of the former railroad that have been recently considered for use as a Town road are short sections in the area of Juniper Drive, Pennsylvania Avenue, and Kendall Avenue. The current Klondike Manor plan proposes only a crossing of the railroad bed. Future extension of Juniper Drive to connect with Pennsylvania Avenue and Kendall Avenue, to provide a much-needed second outlet for those three cul -de sacs, would also involve only a crossing. G Ven existing and proposed street alignments in the area, as well as topographical conditions, it is not foreseen that any sections of the railroad bed in this area would be used for anything other than crossings. The Town of Ithaca has a long=standing policy of requiring developers to build those roads required by their project, on their land. Upon completion of a road to Town specifications, and upon approval of the Town Engineer after recommendation by the Town Highway Superintendent, the road and accompanying sixty -foot right of way is then accepted by the Town Board. I anticipate that this same policy will be pursued should any development occur along Cuddington Road in the vicinity of the railroad bed. Thus, should the Town acquire the railroad right of way and develop it as a recreationway, it would take a major change of Town of Ithaca policy regarding new road Ms. Carolyn K. Peterson -2- July 22, 1988 construction for any portion of the right of way to be used for road purposes. I would like to emphasize, as I did in the meeting, that there are also a number of engineering constraints due to the narrow cross section of the railroad bed and topography that make extensive road development infeasible. I hope this clarifies the issue of possible use of the railroad bed for a road. Again, the Town of Ithaca has no plans for construction of a road along it at any time. The existing policy of having developers construct roads on their _land has served the Town well, and it is highly unlikely that the Town would make the necessary major policy change and sacrifice a valuable recreation and open space resource in order to allow any road to be constructed on the railroad bed should it be developed as a trail. In closing, I would like to request a copy of the Committee's resolution regarding the South Hill trail. I would also like to have a copy of the City of Ithaca regulations governing public access and use of the Six Mile Creek watershed area, and the companion SEQR environmental assessment form. Should you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at 273-1747. Sincerely, George R. Frantz Assistant Town Planner GRF/nf cc - Members, SMCAC Betsy Darlington Mayor John C. Gutenberger H. Matthys VanCort CITY OF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF MAYOR CONFIDENTIAL July 15, 1988 Mr. and Mrs. Richard Walker 1000 Coddington Road Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Walker: TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 My administration has been actively pursuing various methods of protecting the natural areas surrounding the city's water supply in the Six Mile Creek area. In addition, I have been having discussions with various Town Supervisors and the County to formulate plans for the protection of the entire Six Mile Creek watershed area from the City through the Town of Caroline. Maps of this area indicate that you own 100+ acres of land below Coddington Road and abutting Six Mile Creek. My reason for writing is to ask if you would be interested in talking about the City of Ithaca acquiring some or all of these 100+ acres. If you• are interested in discussing this possibility, please contact me at your earliest convenience. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, John C. Gutenberger Mayor cc: Common Council Ralph Nash, City Attorney 0 0 0 0 0 Celebrating 000001888 - 1988 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 TO: Frank Liguori Sue.Beeners FROM: H. M. Van Cort RE: Six Mile Creek Watershed DATE: July 5, 1988 MEMORANDUM As you probably know, the chief elected officials of Tompkins County, City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Town of Caroline and Town of Dryden met on June 30 to discuss Six Mile Creek Watershed. There was a high degree of agreement that these jurisdictions should work together to protect the water and other natural resources in the watershed. I was directed -by the group to request your assistance i n developing an outline for the study of the area. There appears at this point to be a consensus that the County should play an important, if not lead, role in this study. I look forward to working with you on this very important inter -jurisdictional problem. Marie Corina of my office will be calling to set up a time when we can meet, preferably before July 14. HMVC:eh xc: "John._C. Gutenberger, Mayor: 0-hd-SMWater.Thys "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" TOWN OF CAROLINE "This is my home!" Settled 1 794 Wilson V. Kone, Supervisor P.O. Box 36 Slaterville Springs, N.Y. 14881 30 June 1988 Department of the Army Buffalo District, Corps of Engineers 1776 Niagara Street Buffalo, NY 14207-3199 RE: Application No. 88-998-4 Dear Mr. Daniel Decker, )/y. P-') (607) 539.7796 539-6464 The Town of Caroline has reviewed the referenced project to determine if there are alternative methods of accomplishing the desired flood and erosion control other than as proposed. We have identified three alternatives, none of which will provide the desired long term results. A description of each alternative and rational for rejection follows. Alternative 1: Leave stream flow in its current channel, stabilizing the bank which is experiencing_the erosion with heavy stone fill. This would only provide a temporary relief to the situation. The escarpment would continue to erode due to weather effects continuing to deposit silt and debris into Six -Mile Creek. Because of the steepness of the escarpment and the force of the creek making the bend at that point it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to place heavy stones against the bank in a manner which they would stay in position over any length of time. It is estimated that such a set-up would last about two years before the earth behind the stones would be washed away and the stones fall into the creek. This would not mitigate the problem of the erosion of the escarpment by the weather. Alternative 2: Dig new channel with re -enforced walls closer to Six Hundred Road, making a canal type of arrangement, eliminating any bend in the creek. The present channel would merely be blocked off by the new canal and left unfilled letting natural erosion fill it in. The cost of completing such a project is far above the funding levels of the Town of Caroline. This would also remove currently productive farm land and a residence from use. The owner of the effected land has indicated he is not willing to give up his land for such a purpose, thus any legal action to condemn the land would add to the cost and time to complete the project. Alternative 3: Complete the project as planned except no fill would be placed behind the block retaining wall. All excavated fill would be removed and deposited away from the creek. This would still require the placement of retaining blocks in the current creek course to divert it to the desired path. Without some fill placed behind the retaining wall blocks they would not be stable enough over a long period of time to maintain the creek in its desired course. The ...erosion of_..the__steep escarpment would continue due to weather effects and result in silt and debris falling into the old channel. This course of action would also add to the cost of the project due to the need to haul the excavation away from the site, as the land owners do not want the material placed on their land. The main advantages of the proposed course of action are that it uses a previous creek channel, addresses the problem of the _. escarpment weather erosion,' provides a long term solution to the problem of flood control and erosion, is agreeable to the adjacent property owners, and provides a solution at an affordable cost to the community. If this project is done in the planned period of August - September, the creek will be at its lowest level (possibly dry) and the excavation and fill operation would have minimal adverse effect on the creek. Failure to complete this project will greatly increase the amount of silt flowing into the creek and the City of Ithaca water reservoir. The debris will also greatly increase the chances of flood down stream later this winter and next spring: As a minimum approval of alternative 3 would be desired over not doing anything for another year. Your expedited action on this request is desirable. Sincerely, Wilson V. Kone Supervisor xc: Hon. Matt McHugh Hon. John C. Gutenberger CERTIFIED HAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED PrPtY TO ATTINTION Of Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY BUFFALO DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1770 NIAGARA STREET BUFFALO, NEW YORK 14207-3100 �O`~1 25 ,q r g SUBJECT: Return of Department of the Army Permit Application No. g$_ cj.cr 8 mr. L) 9. V. Kayla_ S v p g -e0 k.#1.1Tcw,. Cr) CO -4..2.2_ Z P, a. (30x. 36 Dear mr. Kos Your aplication for a Department of the Armypermit is. incomplete and returned with this letter. •The. enclosures with this letter identify information required for processing of your application and general. information relative to the Department of the Army Regulatory Program. Please resubmit your application along with the following required information: ( ) Completed Drawings ( ) Coastal Zone Management Consistency Statement (X) Study of Alternatives as Required for Compliance with United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). We will start processing upon receipt of a complete application. This letter la-also-~i-nte•n-de-d--to--alert you to the fact that before any work is performed -in and along navigable waters,, ,it is necessary to obtain proper Department of the Army authorization for the work. Section 10 o.f the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403) requires that a Department of the Army permit be obtained for all work to be performed in.a navigable water of the United States. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (3.3 U.S.0 1344) requires a permit for the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States and certain freshwater wetlands. -2 - Regulatory Branch SUBJECT: Return of Department of the Army Permit Application No. Questions pertaining to this matter should be'directed to f�r Do -y, Bei t ecik-Q 1- , who may be contacted . by calling. . 716-876-5454, extension -,VY/,S , or by writing to the above. address. The Buffalo Dis-tri-c t:- Lie-ad-ereh-ip- -i-n---Engineering. Sincerely, . (4LDani R. Clark Colonel, U.S. Army Commanding 4, GUIDELINE COMPLIANCE The USEPA Guidelines at 40 CFR 230.10(a) require that no discharge of dredged or fill material be permitted, if there is a practicable alternative to the proposed discharge which would have less adverse impact on the aquatic eco— system. In addition, the guidelines also specify that when.a discharge of dredged and fill material is proposed for a special aquatic site and that activity does not require access to or siting within the special aquatic site to achieve its basic purpose, practicable alternatives that do not involve the conversion of these eiteby filling are presumed to be available unless clearly demonstrated otherwise. The issuance of a Department of the Army permit•for any discharge of dredged or fill material is contingent upon .compliance with the USEPA guidelines (as well as compatibility with the public interest). t $) The proposed project does not appear to comply with the USEPA guidelines at 40 CFR 230 because the intended project purpose can be. fulfilled -. without placing fill in a: ()C) Water of the United States that is not a special aquatic site ( ) Water, of the United States that is a special aquatic site ( ) Sanctuary/Refuge ( ) Wetland ( ) Mud Flat • ( ) Vegetated Shallow .( ) Riffle and Pool Complex ()C) Modification of your proposal is necessary to make the discharge less damaging to the aquatic ecosystem. Suggested practicable alternatives include but are not limited to the following: • S'tab4(4 q • Six fie Cr , (.L if s egi¢le P o _– (3 ea. Z;. v 54Uive -7i(f�. %� sf�h�l.., 4).42-�/ C e ( CS t�7gtl�a rnttj ort_T,x- r.,kuR� �►e-e,Q7rly C.:.kst4,- roblers Vi t h..<i� C -f , X. -es r.ro)r 5 anci'AJ. 6i <.w7. r hist (Jlae.n e3.n,/ �r 11 S 1-v10 • ,f e n q • i i•-.42.4-1Ca h� s.+� z( — �+.�.ee..� e9 e 4.4( 0)1'1 C./elLCi . YsJr... 1 J In the event that you decide not to modify the proposal and reaffirm your request for approval of the original plan you must clearly and factually explain in writing why practicable alternatives do not exist which are: less damaging to the aquatic environment. •(. ) Alternatives are presumed to exist which would allow you to•fulfill the basic project purpose without filling in a waters of the United States that is a special aquatic site. You should consider modifying your proposal as follows: Your project as currently proposed does not appear to comply with the USEPA Guidelines. The November 13, 1986 regulations governing the conduct :-of the Corps of Engineers permit program state at Title 33 of the Code -of Federal Regulations part 320.4(a)(1) that for activities involving the discharge of dredged or fill material into -waters of the United States a permit will be denied if the discharge that.would be authorized by such a permit would not comply with the USEPA guidelines. 'I must point out that you are not required to provide the documentation on -practicable alternatives. However, the evaluation of your proposal in terms of. the United States Environmental Protection Agency guidelines ie a prerequisite to the public interest balancing I amfrequired,to perform. In this regard, it would be in your best interest to furnish the requested information to insure that all relevant data are before me prior to proceeding with the guideline compliance determination. If you decline that request, I must presume that leas environmentally damaging :practicable alternatives are available. '. _A copy of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines at 40 CFR 230/ is attached for your information. -TOWN..OF, CAROLINE;' Phis is niv home!" Settle( I 17o4 Wilson V. Kone, Supervisor I'.C). li(x 3(i Slatcrvillc Springs, N.Y. 14881 31 March 1988 Department of the Army Buffalo District, Corps of Engineers 1776 Niagara Street Buffalo, NY 1+207-3199 RE: Application No. 87-998-17 Dear Mr. Schroeder, ((1O7) 531).771)6 531)41464 co as In 1987 my predecessor submitted application for work to be done on one of the creeks in our town. The application was returned for completed drawings. The requested drawings have now been done, with copies enclosed. Also enclosed is the original application and associated correspondence. I hope this will now meet with your approval so we can complete this much needed errosion control effort. Sincerely, Wilson V. Kone `Supervisor W o o'DEO f1REP * ?LON VIEW of C .EEK E s cARPMENT ARE • CONCsaftE CD CD 3 °: �. CD CDr. 58-0GK RFTAJNIN40 0 0 W FILL ? CD 0 O • v,-), SIX': 1-W1+4001'0 50' --- i40�-._._.-- ------ -► (7 (O ne.z 0 0 0 ?1 C/) .5?-.). m Z 0 EbGE of six 1 VNPII.Ep Ro rfo Ho vie TRAtCffR G12 sS SECT) DN A .-rHR✓ ESCRIZPriErir RaE4 S8 -.-......._ a•a Notes ELEVRTioNj REI.a11VE ro STREAM WoTErt LINE a /oO.0 © No sc4t6. 10 -toJ lao• .; r- CD (D 7.1' - -s4-142 - - 3 , --- .-b-di.. - .. — - •_-__-- I Z2' 9- :7 CD 0 6. (D (D 0 0 -n /) CD ID `DcD z •0 ENLARGED cRos5 SEcTronr TARti Look% AREA le6.1r PRoP,sEo Ci EE{K LoCRno N Ivt.l. IoS, NorES —� EX 1ST) N6 L0CATtoNS — — — ♦ ?ROPOSEp LocaTroWS 1 Ro9oSED s L a fE F f 1.6 110 SCA LE EXisfgN4 CREVK loe.o_ r tee.o ecA n.rr IRoPCnEo CONCi-€1E 3c.oCI RErA,H1n4 Eli S'rrrc Scoff 1.3 m 3 0• 0 0 C) cQ 5.1z (D 0 a Z 0 0010 0 0 CD 0 Z- . o• : Frank R. Liguori,. P.E. _ " Commissioner of Planning _DEPA Biggs Building it its•,,, a ECEVVED MAY 18 1988 NNING . MEMO TO: Planning & Economic Development Committee FROM: Frank R. Liguori, Commissioner of Planning Telephone (607) 274-5360 RE: Six Mile Creek Gorge - People and Preservation Report DATE: May 11, 1988 Attached for your information is a copy of a summary report of the Six Mile Creek Study Committee provided through the courtesy of Thys Van Cort, City Planning Department. Mitchell Lavine, County Planning staff, has participated in the committee activities as a non-voting member. As you know, the City is interested in discussing an intermunicipal approach for conservation of the gorge and the Planning and Economic Development Committee has expressed an interest in learning more about the proposals. I will have Buzz Lavine attend the Committee meeting to help fill in gaps during any discussion.I could also arrange to have a City staff member at the meeting. The full report is over 100 pages. If you are interested in reviewing the full report, I can arrange to have copies made. FRL/mdg xc; Scott Heyman Other Board of Representatives members Phyllis Howell Mitchell (Buzz) Lavine atthys VanCort (memo only) DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT H. MATTHYS VAN CORT, DIRECTOR CITY OF ITHA.CA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850. RECEIVED MAY 12 1988 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 MEMORANDUM - TO: John C. Gutenberger FROM: H.. M. Van. Cort RE: Si=x=Mi 1e_ Creek_y DATE: May 4,. 1988 The related issues of'watershed and natural area protection in. and around Six Mile Creek have become of increased public concern since the publication 'of.the Six Mile Creek Gorge People and Preservation Report of March '84. There are many :reasons for this increased concern, including the city's ongoing reliance on and investment in its water supply system; increasing development pressure in the greater. (City) watershed area and along the boundariesof the designated water- shed in the Town of Ithaca and beyond; and the accelerating shrinkage, of undeveloped areas in the. City, Town and County making these areas ever more important to all County residents. Recent staff discussions which have included a varietyof people concerned with these problems lead to the recommendation that a major, intensive land use study of the Six Mile Creek watershed and the. remaining natural areas along Six Mile Creek be undertaken with the statedgoals of protection for the watershed and natural areas. This study should begin as soon as. possible so that protective action maybe taken in the near future, and so that,these efforts may bemade part of the City's Centennial activities. The study would examine the above broad goals and make specific recommendations on, selection of the areas to be protected, the. boundaries of those areasand a study of the various preservation techniques which could be used. Selection criteria 'might include value of and/or impact on water supply, habitat for flora and fauna, unique geological area and proposed development. which threatens the above. Boundariescould include natural border such as cliffs and water ways, or zoning, etc. Among the land use controls to be studied are: watershed rules and regulations, conservation overlay zoning, cluster development, acquisition, transfer of development rights, conservation easements, acquisition of development rights, restrictive covenants, runoff management, unique natural areas designation, critical environmental area designation, erosion and sedimentation control, official mapping, and any others the study would advise. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action.Program" Mayor Gutenberger - Six Mile Creek -2- May 4, 1988 There is a consensus among those involved that an appropriate next step would be discussion with the other involved jurisdictions. We would appreciate your contacting the appropriate officials from the County and the Towns of Ithaca, Dryden and Caroline so that a joint planning effort could be undertaken. Other interested individuals and I are available to discuss this further with you at your convenience. Thank you very much for your interest and assistance. HMVC:eh 0-hd-SxMiGut.Thys OFFICE OF MAYOR CITY OF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK '141350 MEMORANDUM TO: Common Council Jack Dougherty Thys Van Cort Betsy Darlington Stuart Stein FROM: Mayor John C. Gutenberger DATE: April 21, 1988 RE: Six Mile Creek Enclosed please find two letters (Town of Ithaca and County Board of Representatives) concerning Six Mile Creek. Enc. TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 Celebrating 0 0 0 ®1888 - 1988 "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" TOWN OF ITHACA 126 EAST SENECA STREET ITHACA, NEM YORK 14550 April 7, 1988 Honorable John -C.-Gutenberger Mayor City of Ithaca 108 East Green Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear John: I am told that the Six Mile Creek Committee is once again actively pursuing a plan for the preservation of the natural areas in and adjacent to the Six Mile Creek Watershed. Since the Town and the City both have a considerable interest in future land uses in the area, I propose that a Town Board member, a Planning Board member and I be added to the membership of the committee. In doing this, we may be in a better position to move the process forward including grant applications, funding commitments, etc. Assuming that you will concur with this proposal I will, also by this letter, ask the Planning Board to appoint a person from their Board. Very truly yours, Noel Desch Supervisor ND/js cc: Town Board Montgomery May Susan Beeners ( 0. t BOARD Oiik RE ' ' SENTATIVES Cowl l Ouse Ttharca, 4850 TO: Stuart Stein, Chairman Planning & Economic Development Committee FROM: James A. Mason, Chairman, Board of Representative DATE: April 12, 1988 RE: Ithaca City Watershed Study As you know, the City of Ithaca is considering undertaking a comprehensive study of their Six Mile Creek watershed. Inmemennamosinal In that the watershed traverses several township in Tompkins County, there is a real need for strong inter -municipal cooperation in this study. I have suggested to Mayor Gutenberger that the County would be willing to assist in this endeavor by making available to the municipalities involved, the services of the Planning Department and the County Planning Board. Would you, through your Committee, initiate discussions with the Mayor and other appropriate individuals to ascertain what assistance the County might be able to provide, and what role, if any, we should have in this project? Many thanks. - JAM:jf cc: John Gutenberger, Mayor, City of Ithaca t/t Planning and Economic Development Committee Scott -Heyman, County Administrator_ Frank Liguori, Commissioner of Planning Noel Desch, Supervisor, Town of Ithaca Wilson Kone, Supervisor, Town of Caroline Clinton Cotterill, Supervisor, Town of Dryden Meeting April.5, 1988 AGENDA 1. Introduction 2. Preservation of Six Creek 1. Watershed protection 2. Wildlife habitation 3. Scenic areas 3. Selection of areas - Selection Criteria Watershed protection Quality of habitat Scenic value Vulnerability 4. Protection Purchase - outright. Purchase - preservation easement Purchase - development rights Designation: Environmentally Critical Areas 5. Government juridiction 6. Funding sources State: EQBA Federal: Land and Water Conservation Local: City Town County 7. Next Steps CITY OF ITHACA 1OB EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 COMMON COUNCIL TO: Planning Committee FROM: Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee RE: Parks Commission DATE: February 8, 1988 RECEIVED FEB 9 1988 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 The following motion was passed unanimously at the February 1, 1988 meeting o± the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee. RESOLVED that the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee alert individuals and committees that natural areas(such as Six Mile Gorge and Fuertes Sanctuary and the Biological Field Station) have the potential of being lost within a parks organization that does not have as its primary goal the preservation of the natural systems of an area. In other words, the committee wishes to stress that current talk of a parks commission has focused on recreational opportunities in much used parks, yet Six Mile Gorge has frequently been referred to as a park as well. There are immense differences between Stewart Park, for example, and Six Mile Gorge. In your deliberations, then, please consider whether one Parks Commission can cover recreational parks and natural areas, and if more than Stewart Park is covered exactly which other areas would fall under the Commission's juris- diction. "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" Mayor John Gutenburger City of Ithaca 108 East Greene St Ithaca NY 14850 Dear Mayor: RECEIVED SEP 8 1987 HC 73 Box 1 Smithville Flats NY 13841 5 Septe; ber 1987 I have served as your Gorge Ranger at Six Mile Creek for the past 4 months and have recently been made aware of a letter sent to you by a Brett'Beemer, which condemned my conduct in the gorge. First of all I want you to know that I consider myself a professional in any job,I do and I always go beyond my duties to help other people. I found that I had to take a firmer stand on swimmers in the gorge because being "Mr. -Nice Guy" wasn't cutting it. I have heard several people say, Oh, here comes the ranger, but soon as he leaves we can jump back in the water. They were taking advantage of the situation and I felt' if a firmer stand wasn't taken there would be no control at -all. In regards to the part about a woman almost getting raped, that is the first I have heard about it. It was my duty to protect the public and'if I'm not informed of an incident, I can't help. There is a lot of territory to cover on one day and I can -'t be everywhere at once. The three main problem areas - VanNatta's Dam, 30' Dam and: the 60' dam are all at least a mile apart. Plus the problem we've been having on the South Rail Bed trail with motorcycles. 1 Getting back to professionalism, one person who is on the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee, David Reuther, definately does not act professional. He encourages swimming to the utmost possible. I have caught him swimming on more than one ocdassion. When I talk to him at the 30' dim, he doesn't even have the decenigy to clothe himself. He thinks nothing of discussing gorge problems with me while he's standing there totally nude. I can't understand how a person like him can be allowed on a committee when he has total disregard for gorge regulations. I would suggest that he be asked to resign himself from the committee. If you check with the minutes of last months Six Nile Creek Committee meeting you will see that David "threatened"'me with people disobeying my orders if I continued to crack down on swimming. He thinks that as long as I make an appearance to the stammers and ask them to get out of the water, the city is covered from any lawsuits. He also has told me once I ask people to get out of the water, too leave the area - however I find this to be rather disrespectfull because five minutes after I leave, everyone is back in the water again. Is the city covered by lawsuits then?? Earlier in the season I was having problems with gays "making out" with each other in different areas of the gorge. Although I have nothing against gays, there is a place for them to do what they want to do to each other, but not in a public "park". David has reprimanded me for "harassing" gays. I consider them no different from straight couples - if they are intercoursing in public view I will ask them to leave - I have received many complaints from the public about the indecency of the gays in the area. David told me to let the gays do what they want in the gorge - it's acceptable. It appears that David is trying to get his own group of swimmers and gays in there and totally disregard the purpose of Six Mile Creek - as a Wildflower preserve. Ovl I have fe_t that I did a good job as the ranger. I enjoyed the job immensley, have met many professional people, and I myself have received no complaints on my conduct except from people who were kicked out of the gorge for various reasons - jumping off cliffs, drinking, swimming (after being told several times to get out of the water), etc. More than likely, this person who wrote the letter was one of them. More likely than that, David probably encouraged this person to write because David wouldn't write it himself being he is on the committee. In regards to the part of the $500 fine for swimming - if you check the code book for the Six Mile Creek (I believe the last update was 1932) it states that a x`100 fine can be incurred for trespassing on the water course, for each offense. You add another 4100 fine for disobeying a direct order, $100 fine for swimming, etch, it adds up to $500 quickly - this information I was given by a couple of police officers, plus my own research. Maybe it's about time people are arrested for swimming. I would like to thank Steve Baker of the Water Treatment Plant, Jack Dougherty of Public Works and Beth Mulholland of Circle Greenway, in addition to Carolyn Peterson of Common Council, for all the help they havd given me during my tenure as ranger. They too are all professionals and are concerned about swimming and lawsuits against the city. It's too bad one person on the committee has to disagree and "fight" the system. I could rattle on and on but I know you are a busy person and I just wanted to defend myself for the letter you received. I do know that letter was sent to other people besides yourself and I would like them to receive a copy of my letter if you so chose to do. Thank you for your consideration aid time and Good Luck during the elections. till Lenga Gorge Ranger 1987 C \/ beli9erL RECEIVED SEP 4 1987 P.O. Box 3b3 Ithaca, N.Y. 14851 September 1, 1987 Mr. Jack Dougherty: I am writing to you to express my extreme displeasure at the conduct of the Six Mile Creek ranger. I visit the area often, so I have had the opportunity to observe him frequently this Summer. Past rangers have brought good manners and friendliness to the job, a necessity in an occupation that involves constant interaction with many people. The current ranger acts as if he just left the Marines. He orders people around, resulting in a total disregard for what he says when he leaves and a lack of trust in his ability. A friend of mine was nearly raped by several men there, but she wouldn't seek the ranger for help because she didn't trust him. In addition to his behavior, the ranger has made false threats to people swimming. On many occassions he has threatened people with arrest or a $500 fine, neither of which, I understand, is within his right to do. He has also ordered people swimming to leave the area completely, again stepping beyond the duty of a ranger. Previous rangers have done none of this and have been people who were helpful and honest. The Six Mile Creek ranger is not just someone to enforce rules, but is someone people can approach with questions and someone people can trust in an emergency. These qualities are severely lacking in the person currently employed in that position. CC: Carolyn Peterson Dan Hoffman John Gutenb$rger Brett Beeman RECEIVED MAY 29 1985741‘17/1 A-h- fet-e4-4 a2ti - — - ; - �, 7 c- a OFFICE OF YOUTH BUREAU ,. CITY • OF ITHACA w+ mAr mmw err 1 P41J'1b. 8 K RS 5 SIX MILE CREEK PROJECT TELEPHONE: 273-8364 CODE 607 The following is a proposal to fund a service delivery 'program for Tompkins County predelinquent and non -delinquent youth. The program g goals are to provide a"selfTsustaining, non-profit learning -by -doing program for youth, and•to provide V the greater Ithaca community facility at Six Mile Creek. with an enhanced recreational Six Mile Creek, between 30 and 60 foot dams4 a City of Ithaca facility, will resource for a recreational and educational facility the be a for Tompkins County youth. The program will coordinate resources from city and county agencies, private youth organizations, com- munity centers, public and private schools and citizens at large to create this practical and creative delinquency -preven- tion program. The Need A need exists for programs which provide youth with creative opportunities to be involved in community life to reduce their inclination to engage in disruptive, truant, -2 -- or delinquent behavior. There is a growing realization that a disproportionate reliance is being placed on the judicial system and the Family Court to prevent and deter from antisocial and disruptive behavior through PINS and juvenile delinquence proceedings. A New York childrenes rights group, Statewide Youth Advocacy, recently issued a report stating that while about 10,000 "non -delinquent" youths are being processed in Family Court each year, few receive services or placement that could not have been provided withoutourt involvement.' The resources of the Family Court are limited in t preventing and controlling juvenile criminals and dis- ruptive youth. There is a growing body of evidence in the field of crime prevention which questions the utility of after -the -fact court intervention as a deterrent from undesirable social behavior. Many studies exist which identifysocialand economic causes of delinquency. These studies conclude that youths' antisocial behavior is largely resistant to court intervention techniques. The field of delinquency prevention seems to be turning to communities as the place to which society must look as the most effective resource for juvenile crime deterrence. 1 The Ithaca Journal, Thursday, January 27 1983 -3- One glaring youth program deficiency is the dearth of programs which provide positive work experience in the ,o community for youth. Children who have such opportunities do better economically and socially ,in their adult lives than children who do not. This crucial connection. between early work experience and positive socialization as adults is confirmed_by a recently publicized 35 -year study by a Harvard University pshcyiatrist which concludes that the dominant factor in a youth's socialization is good, early work habits provided by early work experiences.2 The program�C proposed attempts to meet this need. This program will also meet the need for academic work programs which reinforce and enrich the significance of the youth's work experiences. Creative work involvement whilc a youth is in school can contribute to the solution to an ever growing truancy problem. This conclusion is demonstrated in Ithaca by the marked success of such institutions as the Learning Web, .the .Community .Studies Program in the Alternative Community School, and the Ithaca 2 "Natural History of Male Psychological Health, X: Work as a Predictor of Positive Mental Health," by George E. Vaillant, M.D., and Caroline O. Vaillant, M.S.S.W. American Journal of Psychiatry, 138:11, November 1981 -4 - Youth Bureau Outing Program, where students are given process learning opportunities in the community. This program will also provide the greater Ithaca community and its environs with an improved recreational facility at Six Mile Creek. The City of Ithaca has jurisdic- tion in the area which has been undeveloped and neglected for many years. Proposals for the redesigning and imporvement of Six Mile Creek have been generated as seen in the old W.P.A. projects and circle greenway thus far. There-is,a history of municipal pride and community involvement in the area which may be drawn upon to provide support for t the program we propose. The Six Mile Creek area will serve the youth and agencies involved in a variety of ways. The area is well suited for recreation, such as climbing, .rappelling, hiking, rope course work, and new games. It can also be used for classroom -related projects in science, math. or English, Work projects, such as construction of bridges, stream stabilization, reforestation, land reclamation. and study and maintenance of old W.P.A. projects can also be implemented in the area. A jobs program could be designed through which young people could create and implement projects of their own. College students can use the area through field place- ments or such activities as designing sculptures for the area, helping to engineer a bridge system, or giving talks about the area flora and fauna. This summer and next year serve as the first stages for the ongoing program. The following stages are already in progress: 1) Discussions are being held by Ithaca Youth Bureau staff with school personnel from Boynton Middle School, DeWitt Middle School, Ithaca High School, and the Alternative Community School to secure commitment to the program for Fall, 1985. The aims of these meetings are' to develop a unified program format, contact personnel who will work directly with toe.• designated students, refine program philosophy, and work out referral procedures, pre-scheduling,.and support services. Support services such as Dispositional Alternatives. -Group Homes, One -to -One Family Support, and the Probation Department have already been notified about the program and can make referrals to the program directly through the schools. • 2) Youth Bureau staff, the Department of Public Works, Cornell Traditions, Youth Employment Service, Common Council. and the Six Mile Creek Committee are meeting to design a five-year work devleopment plan in the Six Mile Creek -area. The five-year plan was agreed upon in principal and a first-year work plan was designed and accepted. Ongoing disucssions to formulate a specific work plan are in process in conjunction with stage 1. • -6- 3) Youth Einpldyment.Service„ GIAC, and other Youth Bureau staff are establishing a training program to train young people for this summer's programs. Training will explore racial and sexual issues, youth empowerment, interpersonal problem solving, and work ethics. The program will train all youth who are elibible for .summer employment -through the Youth Bureau, helping place those. who are qualified with ap- propriate businesses or agencies or with the Six Mile :. Creek Project. Youth workers will work with each of the young people to develop certain learning and behavioral goals for him or her. The young person's performance in relation to these goals will be evaluated by him/her and agency personnel. The goals which are established can be tailored to the young person's particular needs, addressing a broad range of problems via the breadth of available program activities. Also, youth workers from all the agencies involved will meet weekly to discuss the participants' progress, addressing needs and seeking solutions. Six Mile Creek facility has enormous potential as the resource for this program. In effect, the site is self -potentiating. The area will be the initial focus of the program providing much needed improvement while at the same time serving as a creative source of educational _Y• material in the classroom. Other ideas for the activities of participants in this program can proliferate. Different kinds of possibilities include wild flower, shrub, and tree identification; identification of nature trails; improved picnic and hiking areas; a fishing pond; an outdoor performing arts area; cross country ski trails; space for school outdoor program planning and art and nature study classes. An additional plan is to bring back the trolley, using the existing tracks, which used to run from downwn Ithaca to Slaterville Springs once a very popular tourist attraction. All of these projects would involve youth from the initial design phases to the actual building of the facilities and the day-to-day operation of the facilities. Program Objectives The following are the objectives of this proposal: (1) Establish a self-sustaining, educationaland recreational facility at Six Mile Creek for the greater Ithaca community and Tompkins County. a facility designed, built,*and operated by non -delinquent and pre -delinquent youth and the Ithaca Youth Bureau. (2) Provide young people with a meaningful vocational activity in addition to their academic programs. The program will apprentice roughly 50 secondary school age children. (3) Provide the opportunity for youth to develop skills, attitudes and behaviors to enable them to become responsible, self-reliant members of the community. The program will improve their school attendance, learning attitude and performance, self-image and confidence, future employability and image in the community. h P -8- (4) Minimize the possibility of Family Court action and institutionalization for pre -delinquent youth. (5) Provide a .showcase for the principle that imagina- tive use of community resources combined with real community concern for youth may result in a self-sustaining community resource valuable to all future youth and other citizens. We hope to prove that a program such as this is replicable in other communities. Organization The.hope of this program is to develop a comprehensive youth service delivery program with a wide base of community input and support, overseen by advisory boards and directed by the Ithaca Youth BureaQ's Outing Program. The temporary program structure sought by this proposal will be to build the following organizational structure: (1) The cornerstone of the program will be the integrated resources from county groups, including the Youth Bureau of the City of Ithaca, the Probation Department, Family Court, the Ithaca School System, the City of.Ithaca, Board of the Department of Public Works, the Greater Ithaca Activities Center, the Learning Web, community centers, local businesses, city and county social service agencies, private youth organizations such as the YMCA and the Three Fires Council of Camp Fire, and the citizens at large. (2) Advisory groups have been formed with representatives from some of the above groups, the City Depart- ment of Public Works, the Greater Ithaca Activities Center, and youth who are actively involved in the program itself. (3) Youth Bureau Outing Program coordinator of program. (4) On-site supervisors will work at the site with the youth in the program. Supervisors will include Youth Bureau and GIAC staff along with Cornell Traditions and work study students. i.! , . • '",!*! ' • i .' • .1, d att okoi-e_c_a_wv ilt_tia42-z,/ tr41;df, -§a1144 111 Cottage Place Ithaca, NY 14850 July 23, 1984 Ms. Susan Cummings 214 Fayette Street Ithaca, New York 14850 Dear Sue, It is quite exciting to see all the changes that are occuring to the Six Mile Creek area. However as a property owner adjacent to one of the trails, there are several concerns that I have regarding some of these changes. Specifically - 1) The July 12, 1984 issue of the Ithaca Times listed Hudson at Renzetti Place as a public entrance to the Six Mile Creek area. Because of this error we have noted several parties coming up Cottage Place and down Renzetti Place seeking the trail. I need some assistance to discreetly mark Renzetti and Cottage Place as private property. 2) As there is no place to park ones car at the Uu„� o Street enterance, a consideration might be made for noL'S"i' at the enterance and that this be left primarily for local re - idents use. This was suggested by Mr. Frank Moon, a member of the Six Mile Creek Study Committee. 3) I would appreciate having the Gorge Ranger oversee the Hudson Street trail in addition to the other areas. 4) As there are several properties adjacent to the Hudson Street trail, I would appreciate having the trail well kept. 5) At a meeting at the South Hill School, last spring, Mr. Moon proposed plantings that would deter people from leaving the Six Mile Creek Trail and entering on private property. I would appreciate hearing from you regarding these con- cerns, and would also appreciate your voicing my concerns to the powers that be. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can by of any assistance to you. JH/cp i / Sincerely, j t.— Jerry Hersh OFFICE OF MAYOR C TY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK '14850 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607-• MEMO TO: CAROLYN PETERSON, COMMON COUNCIL ELIZABETH MULHOLLAND, CIRCLE GREENWAY BUD GERKIN, BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS JOEL RABINOWITZ, HYDROPOWER COMM. MARTIN SAMPSON, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD JOHN PERKO, CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMM. DICK FISCHER, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COUNCIL LESLIE.DOTSON, TOMPKINS COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PETER LOVI, TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT EDNA CLAUSEN, AT LARGE MEMBER DAVID RUETHER, AT LARGE MEMBER FROM: MAYOR JOHN C. GU1'ENBERGERk DATE: July 3, 1984 SUBJECT: SIX MILE CREEK OVERSEER COMvIITTEE Attached hereto please find a copy of a letter received from Mr. Ric Dietrich of the Ithaca Youth Bureau in which he is requesting an exception to the rule for climbing in the second dam area of Six Mile Creek for your attention. ATTACH. CC: L. Richard Stumbar, Corporate Counsel Jack Dougherty, Assistant Supt. of Public Works "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" es CITY OF ITHACA 1701 NORTH CAYUGA STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 OFFICE OF YOUTH BUREAU Mr. Gutenburger Mayor City Hall Ri'VEJVED J JL 2 1984 TELEPHONE: 273-8364 CODE 607 Ric Dietrich Outing Supervisor Ithaca Youth Bureau Mayor Gutenberger: As per your instuructions in Common Council chambers Friday, June 22, 1984 I am requesting an exception to the rule for climbing in the second dam area of Six Mile Creek. We have maintained -a particular spot for climbing near the second dam area for six years, processing 200 to 300 Ithaca City School children through the area per year with no accidents. All of our clients are in school related programs insured by the schools, with the full knowledge of our insurance company. The spot makes scheduling and access an important issue. There are other spots but the time it.takes-to reach them makes the program more difficult. The state parks prohibit climbing in their area, but will make exceptions for qualified people on a regular basis. 1 would be willing.to meet with you: to answer any questions. Respectfully, Ric ]ietri, h "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" COMMON COUNCIL •/4LC CITY OF ITHACA 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 141350 JUL 2 7 1984 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 c, /78-y diiA tya. t A/Zitewa,r- -%., &-ufe:e4. _ter" Wt-c.t.o e.ot %t" 9' 1 6 tc L-6- c-4(Asgte-s6/LeeL c 3 u/ )444c.tc. a u�z 049t-t,t__ 4/`-1 cbr (--€_-e14-- r_ OFFICE OF MAYOR MEM TO: airy ®F i1-Fi C: 108 EAST GREEN STREET ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850 TELEPHONE: 272-1713 CODE 607 CAROLYN PETERSON, COMMON COUNCIL ELIZABETH MULHOLLAND, CIRCLE GREENWAY BUD.GERKIN, BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS JOEL RABINOWITZ, HYDROPOWER COMM,. MARTIN SAMPSON, PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD JOHN PERKO, CONSERVATION ADVISORY COMM. DICK FISCHER, ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COUNCIL LESLIE DOTSON, TOMPKINS COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT PETER LOVI, TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT EDNA CLAUSEN, AT LARGE MEMBER DAVID RUETHER, AT LARGE MEMBER FROM: MAYOR JOHN C. GUTENBERGER DATE: JUNE 21, 1984 SUBJECT: SIX MILE CREEK OVERSEER COMMITTEE It is my intention to appoint the Six Mile Creek Overseer Committee at the July Common Council Meeting and I would like to appoint all of you to this committee. This committee would basically monitor activities, make recommenda- tions on improvements, changes, what should be permissible, etc.. You would be appointing your own Chair and setting your own meeting dates. PLEASE give my office a call (272-1713 Ext. 231) by Friday, June 29th, to let me know if you would be interested in serving on this committee. Thank you. CC: Mr. Joseph Rundle, City Clerk Mr. Gerald Schickel, Board of Public Works "An Equal Opportunity Employer with an Affirmative Action Program" 4410i, OVERSEER COMMITTEE FOR SIX MILE CREEK GORGE • Possibilities for Appointment: Six Mile Creek Study Committee members: Gerry Schickle (BPW), Chair, 202 Sunrise Road Dan Hoffman (CC); 607 Tioga Street, North Carolyn Peterson (CC)(6-Mile Preservation Asso.) 110 Dey Street Joel Rabinowitz (Hydro), 912 East State Street Francis Moon (CG)(Hydro), 507 Turner Place Elizabeth Mulholland (CG), 111 Bridge Street Harold Gerkin, 116 Mitchell Street Peter Rogers, 806 North Tioga John Perko (CAC) 614 North Tioga Jeff Coleman (6 -MPA, 7A Park Lane, Lansing Leslie Dotson (EMC), Commonland, Slaterville Road Richard Fischer (EMC)(also, person most responsible for the Wildflower Preserve designation of 1970), 135 Pine Tree Road Montgomery May (Town'of Ithaca Planning Bd), 1360 Slaterville Rd Peter Lovi (Town Planner), Commonland, Slaterville Road Interested Groups or Persons (Gerry has a list): Edna Clausen (resides near Gorge, knows it well) 14.21 Slaterville Rd Cayuga Bird Club, contact John Confer, Hammond Hill Road, Brook'le 1 /z c/W ,••• ••••••:--"-4) c,_?? >,0 Gf ity e . ALL 4,r-4)-. C r51- 0' CA \ ‘23 aLJ E• co-v_e„..e,cJ ,L)