No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 1985-12-09 TOM OF ITHACA REGULAR BOARD MEETING December 9 , 1985 At a Regular Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , held at the Town Offices at 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , at 5 : 30 P .M . , on the 9th day of December , 1985 , there were : iPRESENT : Noel Desch , Supervisor George Kugler , Councilman Shirley Raffensperger, Councilwoman • Marc Cramer , Councilman Henry McPeak, Councilman Gloria Howell , Councilwoman Robert Bartholf , Councilman ALSO PRESENT : Lawrence Fabbroni , Town Engineer Robert Parkin , Highway Superintendent John Barney , Town Attorney Peter Lovi , Town Planner Pat Leary , Councilwoman Elect David Klein , Planning Board Representatives of the Media : Ken Hughes , WHCU Ted Huntington , WTKO PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Supervisor led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance . REPORT OF 'TOWN OFFICIALS Supervisor ' s Report Financing Wastewater Treatment Plant Supervisor Desch stated that on Thursday , December 12th the bids on $ 14 , 000 , 000 in notes for the project will be opened . He went on to say that this will probably be the last borrowing of new money , although it is possible that a small amount will be needed in May when we renew the notes . • He went on to say that he expects the interest rates to be in the low 5% range and could very well break the 5 % level with high fours . • The Supervisor stated that it is quite ironic but there probably will be another reason why we were very fortunate to get the project started when we did and that is the new tax reform legislation . It may no longer be possible to enjoy tax exempt financing for capital projects where we clearly make a profit during the construction phase . For example , BAN ' s will be Permitted for only six month periods and permanent financing required after only one renewal . If this becomes law it is not likely to have a serious financial impact on our project because we are only one year away from permanent financing . Town Board 2 December 9 , 1985 Fire Master Planning Supervisor Desch noted that copies of the Mapping Committee report prepared by the technical experts have been distributed . This is an excellent report that will now allow us to focus on what we can afford and how we structure the policy making organization . The Master Planning Committee has formed two subccnmittees to pursue the matter , one to look at the financing and one to pursue the matter of goverance . On the financing end will be Sean Killeen , Monty May , Peter Lovi , Dominick Cafferillo and Chief Olmstead . One the governance end will be Mayor Gutenberger , myself , Ray Schater and Marc Cramer . • Town En ineer ' s Report • Town Engineer Lawrence Fabbroni reported that the staff report for the month was in each Board members folder . (Copy attached to minutes ) . He went on to say that he was making an attempt to complete the earthwork on the Burns Road project . The object is to get the fill in place as the frost will provide a natural compaction . The Forest Home Drive surveys have been ccanpleted . We are now working on the design phase with Cornell University and the City of Ithaca . Supervisor Desch asked what type of wall are you planning? Town Engineer Fabbroni responded , gabion wall . Town Engineer Fabbroni went on to say the next step in the hospital access was a another conference with the landowner and then if necessary proceed with the taking of the land . He went on to note that the blacktcpping of Blackstone Avenue had been postponed until next year . Hanshaw Road drainage was being coordinated with the County . The major interceptor sewer tie-ins have been completed on the South side of Route 13 . Temporary heat has been installed in the buildings . Also , last minute testing of tanks . The Engineer went on to say that there was a near major accident last week . A major section of the framing and steel work collapsed . We are now in the process of reshoring . We lost about twenty yards of concrete . Luckily an employee came out of it with only a scratch . A meeting of the minds has been held with the contractor on the lake portion of the project and the work should now proceed . Work has begun on the monitoring stations to monitor sewage coming into the City from the Town and Cornell . Councilman Cramer asked if the propane storage tank located at the Sewage Treatment Facility was permanent or temporary ? • Town Engineer Fabbroni responded temporary , for the temporary heat . • Highway Superintendent ' s Report Highway Superintendent Robert Parkin reported that Fall Cleanup had taken a full week . He went on to say the replacement for #7 dump truck had arrived . They were in the process of getting the cinder spreader mounted . The men have been working on Burns Road and Fall Creek , when the weather allowed such work . REVIEW ENVIRONMEN'T'AL ASSESSMENT FORM ON JOINT TRAFFIC AND SAFEaTy PROJEC'!' AT BUTTE; IV= FALLS STATE PARK Town Board 3 December 9 , 1985 Supervisor Desch stated that the State would design and make available a new right-of-way . As part of the agreement , we have agreed to be lead agency . The Supervisor went on to say that the Parks Department will decide if they abandon or fix the bridge . Councilman Cramer questioned the remaining portion of Old Spencer Road and did it need to be abandoned? Town Engineer Fabbroni responded that a portion of the road might be needed for storm sewers so we haven ' t abandoned it yet . Councilwoman Raffensperger noted that she did not see anything about the use or removal of gravel in the SEAR review . • Town Engineer Fabbroni responded that the area is limited to an area seventy-five feet frcm the existing road which was the gravel bank . The area has reseeded itself , however , the State will reseed • if deemed necessary . RESOLUTION N0 . 246 Motion by Councilwoman Raffensperger ; seconded by Councilman Cramer , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby declares after reviewing the Environmental Assessment Form on the joint traffic and safety project at Buttermilk Falls State Park a negative declaration provided that the gravel bank restoration of any area of the old gravel bank will be restored , a maximum of seventy-five feet from the existing road way . ( Copy attached to minutes ) , (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none) . FINANCIAL REPORT Supervisor Desch stated that there would be no Financial Report presented at this meeting because of computer scheduling conflicts . TAX LEVY AND EXrTENSION OF TAXES FOR 1986 COUNTY TAXES Supervisor Desch stated that the Town had received a letter from the Board of Representatives stated that under Chapter 828 of the Laws of 1985 , the Town must levy the tax and authorize the extension of taxes at a rate which will exactly equal the amount certified to be due . RESOLUTION NO , 247 Motion by Supervisor Desch ; seconded by Councilman McPeak , WHEREAS , the Board of Representatives of the County of Tcmpkins has • issued a certificate to the Chief Fiscal Officer of the Town certifying that the contribution of the Town of Ithaca to the taxes of the County of Tcopkins for the fiscal year beginning January 1 , 1986 is -0- Outside , $463 , 765 . 26 Inside , and WHEREAS , the Town must levy said sum against the taxable real estate and direct the extension of such taxes against each such parcel , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby levy the sum of -0- Outside , $ 473 , 765 . 26 Inside , z � • PROJECT I.D. NUMBER NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENSRIROyti1ENTti!. CONSERVATION DIVISION Of RECUL'ATORY AFFAIRS it State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I Project information (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1 . Applicant/sponsor Fat Project Name Joint Traffic and Safety Project Buttermilk Falls State Park , Ithaca , NY 3. Project location: Buttermilk Falls State Park Municipality County Tompkins 4. Is proposed action: ❑ New ❑ Expansion ©` Modification/alteration s . Describe project briefly: 1 ) Regrading and realignment of Sandbank Road at the intersection . with Buttermilk Falls access Road ; replacement of T- intersection with curve . ( see diagram) 2 ) Abandonment of. approximately 400 feet of sandbank road north of new curve and existing bridge over creek . 3 ) Demolition of existing building to make room for relocated roadway . 6 Precise location (road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map) See map . 7 . Amount of land affected: Initially +_ 1 acres Ultimately ± l acres 8 Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? ® Yes ❑ No If No, describe briefly 9 lVhe : is present land use in vicinity of project? ® Residential ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Agriculture ❑ Parklandlopen space ❑ Other f Describe: Project is located entirely upon lands of the New York State Park Commission , 10 Does action involve a permitlapproval, or funding- now or ultimately, from any other governmental agency (Federal, state or local)? ❑ Yes Q No If yes, list agency(s) and permitrapprovals 1. . Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? ❑ Yes No If Yes, list agency name and permitlapproval type 12 As result of proposed action will existing permiVapproval require modification? ❑ Yes No 1 CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicantisponsor nape;, Tre_ nce P_ abb O i P . E . Date: 11 / 19 / 85 Signature: TDwn Engineer If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER Town Board 4 December 9 , 1985 certified to it by the Board of Representatives as said Town ' s contribution to the taxes of the County of Tompkins for the fiscal year beginning January 1 , 1986 , RESOLVED FURTHER, that taxes due the County of Tompkins shall be extended against each parcel of taxable real estate at the rate of -0- Outside , $5 . 661 Inside , per $ 1 , 000 of taxable assessed value , AND RESOLVED FUR MR , that the Chief Fiscal Officer of the Town is hereby directed to execute and deliver a certificate to the Board of Representatives of the County of Tompkins certifying that the levy has been made and the extension of taxes directed in accordance with law . • (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none . Abstaining - Cramer) . • Councilman Cramer noted that he was abstaining from voting because he had no source of validity for the dollar numbers . TOWN BOARD MINUTES RESOLUTION N0 , 248 Motion by Councilwoman Raffensperger ; seconded by Councilman Bartholf , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approve the Town Board Minutes , as presented by the Town Clerk , for the meetings of October 7 , 1985 and November 7 , 1985 . ( Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak, Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . APPOIl !' OF CHAIRMAN FOR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS RESOLUTION NO , 249 Motion by Councilman Cramer ; seconded by Councilman Kugler , WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals recommends the reappointment of Henry Aron as Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the reappointment of Henry Aron as Chairman of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals for the year 1986 . ( Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . • APPOINTMENT OF ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MEMBER • RESOLUTION N0 . 250 Motion by Councilman McPeak ; seconded by Councilwoman Raffensperger , WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca. Zoning Board of Appeals recommends the reappointment of Joan Reuning to the Zoning Board of Appeals , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the reappointment of Joan Reuning to the Town Board 5 December 9 , 1985 Town of Ithaca Zoning Board of Appeals for a five year term beginning January 1 , 1986 . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none) . APPROVE DELINQUENT WATER AND SEWER CHARGES ON THE 1986 TAX ROLL RESOLUTION N0 , 251 Motion by Councilman Cramer ; seconded by Councilman Bartholf , • RESOLVED , by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca that delinquent Town of Ithaca water and sewer use bills in the amount of $ 8 , 775 . 20 ; Village of Cayuga Heights sewer rent charges in the amount of $ 3 , 663 . 83 ; and delinquent customer water repair bill charges of $ 70 . 00 , total of $ 12 , 509 . 03 , be added to the tax roll for 1986 , as a lien against the properties involved , and to become due and collectible as part of the tax bills for the Town of Ithaca. which will be mailed to property owners on December 31 , 1985 , and which will become due in January of 1986 . ( Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . ANNUAL MEETING RESOLUTION N0 , 252 Motion by Councilman Cramer; seconded by Councilman McPeak , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca will meet and conduct the year end business at 10 : 00 A . M . , on Tuesday , December 31 , 1985 , at the Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none) . TEMPORARY HIGHMY EMPLOYEES EXTENSION Town Engineer Fabbroni stated that he was requesting the two temporary highway employees be extended through February 10 , 1986 . He went on to note that there was a problem regarding when is a temporary employee considered temporary when they have been working for eight months and holidays occur during this period . Supervisor Desch asked the Town Engineer if he had any idea what would happen after the February 10 extension? • Town Engineer Fabbroni responded that it was hard to tell right now. He went on to say that there were a lot of projects up in the • air but he should have an answer in a month . Supervisor Desch remarked that the Town Board should think about bitting the bullet and decide whether or not to put the two employees on permanent . RESOLUTION NO , 253 Motion by Councilman Cramer; seconded by Councilwoman Howell , Town Board 6 December 9 , 1985 WHEREAS , the Town Highway Department will be alternating between snow removal and brush clearing and force account activities at Fall Creek , Burns Road , and Forest Home Drive , and WHEREAS , two temporary employees will ensure some level of continuity on the force account projects whatever the variability of the weather , NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED , by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca to continue employment of the two temporary highway employees through February 10 , 1986 , including holiday benefits on a prorated basis . • (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none) . • POLICY ON PERSONAL USE OF VEHICLES Supervisor Desch stated that there were several options available , show the benefit on the W-2 form as a $ 3 . 00 a day taxible benefit , handle the benefit in the same fashion the Commission plans on , that of increasing the salary of the Employees who use the vehicles about $ 250 or have the job descriptions changed to note that employees do field trips before coming into the office . He went on to say that the Commission recognizes that the employees have a cost factor and plan to issue a check on the last pay day each year . The Supervisor stated that he favored the approach the Commission was going to adopt . Councilman McPeak asked if there were any implications on the insurance , on the part of the employees , if the employees use the vehicles in a personal manner ? Town Engineer Fabbroni responsed that the vehicles were strictly used from home to work and work to home and not used for personal use . Town Attorney Barney remarked that the Town must be careful and determine exactly what the IRS considers personal use . He went on to say that the IRS will automatically assign the $ 3 . 00 charge if they think the vehicle has been used for personal use . Town Engineer Fabbroni stated that the end of the year payment would be a break even approach for the employees . Councilwoman Raffensperger added , keep in mind the employees will have to pay taxes on the $250 . RESOLUTION N0 , 254 Motion by Supervisor Desch ; seconded by Councilman Cramer , • RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby adopt the policy of issuing a check for $ 250 the last pay day in the year • to cover the $ 3 . 00 per day assessment by the IRS for personal use of vehicles . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none) . PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING LOCAL LAW NO . 1 - 1984 ( SEWER USE LAW) Town Board 7 December 9 , 1985 Supervisor Desch stated that this item would be adjourned until the February 1986 meeting . PERSONNEL MANUAL Supervisor Desch stated that the objective of the personnel manual was to get , in one place , all of the policies adopted over the years . He went on to say that the Personnel Committee had recommended some changes and in most cases they were improvements to the already adopted policy . Supervisor Desch stated that he had had some complaints about the • hours Town Hall was open so the committee had proposed that Town Hall be open from 8 : 30 A . M. , to 5 : 00 P . M . It was not the intent of the committee to expect all employees to be there during these hours . • Town Engineer Fabbroni remarked that the Supervisor had stated that he had had complaints because Town Hall was not open . He went on to ask if any persons had called up to thank him for the times the employees are here and help the public before 8 : 00 A . M. ? Councilman McPeak stated that he saw no need to change the hours that Town Hall would be open . He went on to say that after five years of having Town Hall open from 8 : 30 A .M . to 4 : 00 P .M . , people were used to these hours . PERSONNEL MANAGER Supervisor Desch stated that the committee had talked about the need to appoint a personnel manager and therefore , he recommended that the duties be added to Connie Allen ' s job description at no increase in salary . RESOLUTION NO . 255 Motion by Supervisor Desch ; seconded by Councilwoman Howell , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca approves the adding of the duties of personnel manager to the job description of Connie Allen , at no increase in salary . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . STREET RIGHTS-OF4QY Tawas Attorney Barney noted that street rights-of-ways come up in about twenty places in the Zoning Ordinance . He went on to say • that he was asking the Board for guidance as to whether or not they wanted every definition changed . • Supervisor Desch asked Building Inspector Lew Cartee what he felt was the easiest way? Building Inspector Cartee stated that he felt it was best to talk to the people personally . If he was not here to talk personally to people , then have a hand out explaining street rights-of-way . Supervisor Desch then asked the Board if they had a compelling desire to amend the Zoning Ordinance? Town Board 8 December 9 , 1985 The Board members indicated they were not in favor of changing the entire zoning Ordinance . WATER METERS Supervisor Desch stated that the CaYUmission had started a pilot program where property owners will read their own meters three out of the four times during the year . A card will be sent to the customer when its time to read the meter . The customer will then read his meter and mail the card back to the Commission . If they do not mail the card back they will receive an estimated bill . Hopefully this will make it possible for the Ca ussicn to use the • labor available for other projects . Town Engineer Fabbroni asked if the Cammissicn had ever considered estimated billing? • Town Supervisor Desch responded yes , we did consider estimated billing , however , we have problems going more than one step at a time . PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE TRAFFIC ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT PARKING ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF JUDD FALLS ROAD TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH STATE ROAD 366 Proof of posting and publication notice of a public hearing to consider amending the traffic ordinance to prohibit parking on the east and west sides of Judd Falls Road to its intersection with State Road 366 having been presented by the Town Clerk , the Supervisor opened the public hearing . Supervisor Desch stated that the request for the no parking came from Cornell University because of traffic hazzards . As no one present wished to speak for or against the proposed amendment , the Supervisor closed the public hearing . Councilman Cramer stated that he was concerned about the cost of the signage and asked if the Town would be required to cover the cost of the signs ? Supervisor Desch responded no , Cornell University will be paying for the signs and installing them . LOCAL LAW NO . 9 - 1985 Motion by Councilman Cramer ; seconded by Councilman McPeak , LOCAL LAW NO . 9 - 1985 • A LOCAL LAW AMENDING THE TRAFFIC ORDINANCE The Traffic Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca is hereby amended by adding to Section 1 . , Parking Vehicles as follows : " (i ) Prohibit parking on the east and west sides of Judd Falls Road from its intersection with Tower Road to its intersection with State Road 366 . " This law takes effect immediately . Town Board 9 December 9 , 1985 Supervisor Desch called for a roll call vote . Councilman Bartholf Voting Aye Councilman Cramer Voting Aye Councilwoman Howell Voting Aye Councilman Kugler Voting Aye Councilman McPeak Voting Aye Councilwoman Raffensperger Voting Aye Supervisor Desch Voting Aye Local Law # 9 - 1985 , was thereupon declared duly adopted . • 1986 OBJECTIVES Supervisor Desch stated that he would be presenting the 1986 Objectives at the January or February meeting . He then asked Town • Planner Peter Lovi if he had any thoughts about the Zoning Ordinance . Town Planner Lovi responded that he felt the Town Board should look at two or three areas of the Zoning Ordinance . Perhaps you should consider contemporary zoning . Supervisor Desch asked the Town Planner about public institution zones . Town Planner Lovi responded that he did not see a great deal of need for public institution zones . He went on to say that he felt the Board should focus on other areas of the Zoning Ordinance . A section needs to be added to allow for more detail on site plan review as this area is not quite as specific as he would like to see it . He went on to say that he felt amendments were an appropriate way of adopting the ordinance . 'There will always be amendments that will need to be made . The Town Planner noted that at some point in time , the ordinance needs to be renumbered , etc . Councilwoman Raffensperger questioned if it would be of any advantage to have a list of inconsistencies . The Town Planner Lovi remarked that we should always work to amend any inconsistencies . We have kind of a rough and ready document . If we move to a performance standard the Zoning Ordinance can be updated . Town Engineer Fabbroni remarked that the existing ordinance will show its being 32 year old . What were problems then are a new set of problems now. Industrial zones are a good example . Councilwoman Raffensperger remarked that it was not forseen that churches would be located in residential zones . • Councilman Cramer stated that he felt that there was a need to take a good look at the multiple residence zones . He went on to say that he felt multiple residence zones had been forced into other • zones . Town Engineer Fabbroni added that there were no performance caps and that the Zoning Ordinance was very loose . David Klein , Planning Board member stated that the Planning Boards power under multiple residence zones was not as strong as it was for clustering . He felt the Planning Board should be given more power and say . Town Board 10 December 9 , 1985 Councilwoman Raffensperger noted that education under public welfare was not as first envisioned . Town Planner Lovi stated that staff needs more guidelines from the Town Board on environmental reviews . DEC is in the process of proposing amendments for the area of education not for profit . He went on to say that for example , he was not able to access cost of fire protection . Fire protection is an important area and should be looked at carefully . When projects come in fran Cornell University or Ithaca College the staff should take a look at the effect on fire protection . • PARK ADVERTISING Town Attorney John Barney stated that Park Advertising had sued the Town because of the requirement that seven or nine signs had to be • removed . Nelson Roth appeared before Judge Swartwood in Owego . He went on to say that he did not expect Judge Swartwood to rule in the case until after the first of the year . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ON DEFINITION OF A FAMILY The Board reviewed the short Environmental Assessment Form on the definition of a family . Supervisor Desch noted that the action will effect residential and agricultural properties . He want on to say that it will not change the Ordinance , only eliminate all inconsistancies . A man in attendance fran the Pine Tree Road area stated that he could see unauthorized use of a building . He went on to say that he didn ' t have any idea of what the definition of a family was and that the thought the definition should be crystal clear . He noted that he heard seventeen duplexes were going to be built behind his house . Town Planner Lovi responded that the proposal was for 35 buildings containing two separate single family hones , connected , then 15 separate single family houses . Building Inspector Lew Cartee noted that the newest built house on Honness Lane was a single family house with an apartment . RESOLUTION NO . 256 Motion by Councilwoman Raffensperger ; seconded by Councilman McPeak , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby determines a negative declaration of environmental significance after reviewing the Short Environmental Assessment Form on the • definition of a family . (Copy attached to the minutes ) . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf • voting Aye . Nays - none) . PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE ON THE DEFINITION OF A FAMILY Proof of posting and publication notice of a public hearing to consider a local law to amend the Zoning Ordinance on the definition of a family having been presented by the Town Clerk , the Supervisor opened the public hearing . _ ? • � _ NEW. YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENViRONMENTAf, CONSERVATION PROJECT I.D. NU1613FR DIVISION OF RECULMORY AFFAIRS State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTfONS Only PART I Project Information (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) T . Applicant/sponsor 2 . Project Name Town of Ithaca " Family " Amendment to Zoning Ordinance 3 . Project location: Municipality Town of Ithaca county Tompkins V Is proposed action: ❑ New ❑ Expansion ® Modification/alteration S . Describe project briefly: See text of Zoning Amendment attached , 6 Precise location (road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc. or provide map) Townwide 7 . Amount of land affected: Townwide Initially acres Ultimately acres 8 Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? ❑ Yes No If No, describe briefly Action will amend existing Zoning Ordinance , 9 What is present land use in vicinity of project? Residential ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ® Agriculture ❑ Parkland;open space El Other ' Describe: Action will primarily affect residentially and agriculturally zoned lands , 10 Does action involve a permitiapproval, or funding, now or ultimately, from any other governmental agency (Federal, state or local)? ❑ Yes ® No If yes, list agency(s) and permitrapprovals 7 . Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? ❑ Yes No If yes, list agency name and permitlapproval type 12 As result of proposed action will existing permit+approval require modification? ❑ Yes No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicantrsponsor name: Noel Desch , Town Supervisor Date: 11 / 27 / 85 Signature: r If the action is in the Coastal Area* you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER PART 11 Environmental Assessment 0 o be completed by Agency) A. Does action exceed any Type 1 threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 617.12? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL/LONG FORM EAF. ❑ Yes © No B. Will action receive coordinated review as provided for Unlisted Actions in 6 NYCRP,, Part 617.71 I ( No, a negative declaration may be superceded by another involved action ❑ Yes No C. Could action result in ANY adverse effects on, to, or arising from the following: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) C1 . Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: No adverse environmental impact expected. on these criteria , C2. Historic, archeological, visual or aesthetic, or other natural or cultural resources; agricultural districts; or community or neighborhood character? Explain briefly; No adverse, environmental impact expected on these criteria , C3. Vegetation or fauna, movement of fish or wildfire species, significant habitats, or threatened or er)dangered species? Explain briefly: No adverse environmental impacte expected on . these criteria , C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly. The purpose of this amendment . is to bring the language of the Zoning Ordinance more in conformance with the intent , custom and present . - administrative practice , C5. Growth; subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly. This amendment does not actually change the Ordinance , as it is implemented . Therefore , it is unlikely that there will be any significant impact on subsequent developments , C6. Secondary, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C6? Explain briefly. w " None expected , C7. A change in use of either, quantity or type of energy? Explain briefly. Non expected , PART Ill Determination of Significance (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS : For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i . e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. if necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all . relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. ❑ Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts. which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FULL/LONG FORM: EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. ® Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WiLL. NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide here, and on attachments as necessary, the reasons supportng this determination: 1 ) This amendment does not actually change the intent or practical effect of the Zoning Ordinance , as it has been applied , 2 ) If this amendment is not adopted , it is likely that a significant change in the expectation of neighborhoods and elected officials concerning permitted residential occupancies could ensue , Agency Name Town of Itii a Plan in ` De a tment Agency Preparer's Name —Epter M T lei Preparer's Signaturef isle Date T 1 1 7 15 Town Board 11 December 9 , 1985 As no one present wished to speak for or against the amendment , the Supervisor closed the public hearing . LOCAL LAW #10 - 1985 Motion by Councilwoman Howell ; seconded by Councilman McPeak , LOCAL LAW # 10 - 1985 A LOCAL LAW TO AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE ON THE DEFINITION OF A FAMILY • The Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca as re-adopted , amended and revised effective February 26 , 1968 be further amended as follows • Article I . Section 1 , subsections 5 , 6 , 7 , 81 9 and 10 are amended respectively to read as follows : 5 . A " family " is defined as two or more persons related by blood , marriage , or adoption . 6 . A "dwelling " is defined as a building designed or used exclusively as the living quarters for one or more individuals or families . 7 . A "dwelling unit" is a dwelling , or portion of a dwelling , providing complete living facilities for one family or for an individual person . 8 . A "one-family dwelling" is a detached building containing a single dwelling unit . 9 . A " two-family dwelling" is a detached building containing two dwelling units . 10 . A "multiple-family dwelling" is a building , or group of buildings on one lot containing three or more dwelling units . This law shall take effect immediately . Supervisor Desch called for a roll call vote . Councilman Bartholf Voting Aye Councilman Cramer Voting Aye Councilwoman Howell Voting Aye Councilman Kugler Voting Aye • Councilman McPeak Voting Aye Councilwoman Raffensperger Voting Aye Supervisor Desch Voting Aye • Local Law # 10 - 1985 , was thereupon declared duly adopted . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ON MOBILE HOMES The Town Board members reviewed the Environmental Assessment Form on mobile homes . Councilwoman Raffensperger noted that in an R-15 zone there were restrictions for a one family dwelling, however , these same restrictions seem to be lacking in the R-5 zones . Town Board 12 December 9 , 1985 Town Planner Peter Lovi responded that you would treat a trailer as a one family dwelling . He went on to say that he assumed the Planning Board felt it would be a one family dwelling . Town Attorney Barney responded that Councilwoman Raffenspergers question on occupancy was a valid question . Also , there is nothing to preclude a person from subdividing a lot . Supervisor Desch stated that it sounded like the Board should not 1 make a determination on the environmental assessment form at this time . • PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A LOCAL LAW To AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE ON MOBILE HOMES Proof of posting and publication notice of a public hearing to • consider a local law to amend the Zoning Ordinance on mobile homes having been presented by the Town Clerk , the Supervisor opened the public hearing . As no one present wished to speak , the Supervisor closed the public hearing . Supervisor Desch suggested that the proposed local law to amend the Zoning Ordinance on mobile homes be referred back to the Planning Board for their consideration of new wording on occupancy restrictions , subdivision and common ownership . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM ON SATELLITE DISHES The Town Board reviewed the environmental assessment form on satellite dishes . There will be no environmental impact on the Town if the proposed local law is adopted , specifically noted because of the following sections under Part III : 1 ) The adverse impacts on aesthetics in the absence of this regulation is likely to be far greater than that expected as a result of this regulation . 2 ) Technological change in antenna construction is reducing the size and cost of these units . In the absence of regulation , it is likely that a proliferation of unsightly structures could be errected in the front yards of homes . This would create a number of non-conforming uses in the event of subsequent regulation . RESOLUTION N0 , 257 Motion by Supervisor Desch ; seconded by Councilman Bartholf , • RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby determines a negative declaration of environmental significance on the environmental assessment form for the amendment to the Zoning • Ordinance on Satellite Dishes , Councilwoman Raffensperger questioned if satellite dishes are considered the same as accessory buildings and can they be place within three feet of side and back lot lines ? Town Planner Lovi responded yes , in some residential zones . Councilman Cramer asked if the satellite dishes shouldn ' t be fenced 0 n for safety? Town Board 13 December 9 , 1985 Town Planner Lovi responded that he did not think satellite dishes needed to be fenced in . ' (Desch , Kugler , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - Raffensperger and Cramer) Councilwoman Raffensperger stated that she voted nay because she was opposed to the placement of satellite dishes within three feet of the lot line . Councilman Cramer stated he voted nay because he had a concern about the public safety aspect . • PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER A LOCAL LAW To AMEND THE ZONING ORDINANCE ON SATELLITE DISHES • Proof of posting and publication notice of a public hearing to consider a local law to amend the Zoning Ordinance on satellite dishes having been presented by the Town Clerk , the Supervisor opened the public hearing . As no one present wished to speak for or against the proposed local law , the Supervisor closed the public hearing . Councilwoman Raffensperger stated that she was in favor of regulations in R-9 , R-15 and R-30 zones . The only control will be in the local law as the Planning Board cannot help , us . She went on to say that she did not feel the dishes should be permitted any closer to the lot line than the diameter of the dish . Town Planner Lovi responded , someone can put up a fifteen foot tin roofed building three feet from a lot line , what ' s so special abet a dish? Councilwoman Raffensperger responded , if I put up an access building I wouldn ' t want it three feet from the lot line . She went on to say that a dish should be placed no less than the diameter of the dish from the lot line . Town Planner Lovi responded that he still has problems with the reasoning when conpared with a tin building . Councilman McPeak stated that he was concerned with the height of the satellite and the possibility of it falling over . Anybody can build a satellite with 2 x 4 ' s and chicken wire . Discussion was adjourned to the year end meeting . PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE REZONING OF 791 ACRES AT 921 , 925 -35 MITCHELL STREET , TAX PARCEL NOS . 60-1 -3 AND 60-1 -4 , OWNED BY • WILLIAM S . DOWNING , FROM RESIDENCE DISTRICT R- 30 To RESIDENCE DISTRICT R-9 • Proof of posting and publication notice of a public hearing to consider the rezoning of 7 . 1 acres at 921 , 925-35 Mitchell Street , Tax Parcel Nos . 60 -1 -3 and 60 -1-4 , awned by William S . Downing , from Residence District R-30 to Residence District R-9 having been presented by the Town Clerk , the Supervisor opened the public hearing . Supervisor Desch noted that the Planning Board at their meeting of December 3 , 1985 failed to pass the resolution on the rezoning of this parcel . PROJECT I. D. NUMBER NEST YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF FNVIRONMENTM CONSERVATION DIVISION OF REGULATORY AFFAIRS ? l State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I Project Information (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1 . Applicant/sponsor 2 . Project Name Town of Ithaca " Satellite Dish " Amendment to Zoning, Ordinai e 3 . Project location: Municipality Town of Ithaca county Tompkins 4 . Is proposed action: L1SI New ❑ Expansion ❑ Modification/alteration 5 . Describe project briefly: See text of Zoning .Amendment attached , 6 Precise location (road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc . or provide map) Townwide 7 . Amount of land affected: Townwide Initially acres Ultimately acres S Will proposed action comply with existing zoning or other existing land use restrictions? ❑ Yes IN No If No, describe briefly Action will amend existing Zoning Ordinance , 9 What is present land use in vicinity of project? ❑ Residential ❑ Industrial ❑ Commercial ❑ Agriculture ❑ Parkland/open space ❑ Other ' Describe: Action will have Townwide regulatory effect , 10 Dues action involve a permit,'approval, or funding. now or ultimately from any other governmental agency (Federal, state or local)? ❑ Yes 12 No If yes, list agency(s) and permit!approvals - 191 . Does any aspect of the action have a currently valid permit or approval? ❑ Yes El No If Yes, list agency name and permitrapproval type 12 As result of proposed action will existing permitlapproval require modification? ❑ Yes ® No 1 CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Noel Desch , Town _ Supervisor Date: 11127 / 85 Signature: `i�/ If the action is in the Coastal Area , and you are a state agGncy, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER z . PART 11 Environmental Assessment (To be completed by Agency) A. Does action exceed any ? ype i threshold in 6 NYCRR, Part 61,7.12? ❑ Yes El No yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULULONG FORM EAF. No B. Will action receive coordinated review as provided for Unlisted Actions in 6 NYCRP,, Part 617.7? If No, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved action ❑ Yes No C. Could action result in ANY adverse effects on, to, or arising from the followin air uali g: (Answers may be handwritten; if legible) C1 . Existing q ty, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic patterns, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion,. drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: No adverse impact expected for any of these criteria . C2. Historic, archeological, visual or aesthetic, or other natural or cultural resources, agricultural districts; or community or neighborhood character? Explain brie No adverse impacts expected for any of these criteria . C3. vegetation or fauna, movement of fish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: No adverse impacts expected for any of these criteria . C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly. - The regulation of satellite dishes is consistent with the community ' s existing policy concerning the regulation of other accessory buildings and structures . C5. Growth. subsequent &L-velopment, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly. Growth in this area is determined by factors outside the control of the municipality . C6. Secondary, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1-C6? Explain briefly. - The increase in satellite dish use will erode the revenue base of the cable television monopoly . This could have cumulative effects on the economics of providing extended service to rurfa >� areas . C7. A change in use o ei• er quantity or type of energy? Explain briefly. No change expected . PART 1.11 Determination of Significance (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e . urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials . Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all . relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. ❑ Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which: MAY occur.. Then; ^ proceed directly to the FULL/LONG FORM EAF and/or prepare a positive declaration . ❑ Check this box, if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the proposed action WILL NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide here, and on attachments as necessary, the reasons supportng this determination: 1 ) The adverse impacts on aesthetics in the absence of this regulation is likely to be far greater than that expected as 'a• result of this regulation , 2 ) Technological change in antenna construction is reducing the size and cost of these units. . In the absence of regulation , it is likely that a proliferation of unsightly structures could be errected in the front yards of homes : This would create a number of non- conforming uses in the event subsequent regulation . Agency Name TOtm Of _ ha.e � in r ' e.aartment Agency Preparers Name Peter PT T rnr ; Preparer's Signature..'Title Town Planner 11 / 27 / 65 I / Date Town Board 14 December 9 , 1985 Town Planner Lovi stated that the proposed project would have a large environmental impact based on the facts that there is a drainage way through the property . The slopes would drain upon the land , which parcels would be built upon . There is a 25 % slope . The Planning Board felt they did not have enough information on the ground . After construction all grades should be replanted . He went on to say there was a 28 % drop from the buildings to the pond . Town Planner Lovi stated that the final plans should include a report by a professional soils engineer and a landscaping revegetation plan . The Town Planner went on to say that there will be a significant environmental impact on a non-protected body of water and stream as • a result of this project . Also , there will be an impact on the surface flow and runoff drainage important to East Hill Plaza area . • William Downing stated that the existing culvert is three feet in diameter and adequate to handle the load , as you can see from the size of the pipe . He went on to say that a great deal of the East Hill Plaza area drainage goes into other drainage areas . Town Engineer Lawrence Fabbroni responded East Hill Plaza , Ellis Hollow Elderly Housing , Summerhill Apartments plus Cornell all drain through this pipe . Town Planner Lovi stated that New York State Department of Environmental Conservation must review the plans and issue an impoundment permit prior to final approval . He stated that he was not saying the project could not be done , we just need more information . Mr . Downing remarked that he did not believe the project hings on the pond . Town Planner Lovi went on to say that his reason for writing in that wood stoves would not be permitted was because when you live in a clutered project the smoke from wood stoves gets very close . Mr . Dawning responded that he felt all people have the urge to have fireplaces in their homes . Mr . Lovi went on to note that he saw no problems in the areas of plants or animals as there were no endangered species . The view will change because of the construction of the pond . Mr . Lovi noted that open space will be in access of one-quarter of the project . He noted that the additional traffic would cause no problems and that there would be no significant growth or character change in the neighborhood . The Town Planner went on to say that the Town Board could grant a negative declaration upon site plan review . The Town Board would • then review the covenants . John Magaroni , Cornell University stated that he hoped the Board • would not grant the rezoning for just this parcel , but if the rezoning is appropriate then rezone the whole area . Councilman Cramer questioned sixteen lots subdivided into thirty-two dwelling units . Town Planner Lovi responded that 3 . 5 per units apply to R- 15 and R-30 zones , not R-9 zones . He went on to say that the land had been divided into sixteen lots which could be developed into thirty-two units . Town Board 15 December 9 , 1985 Mr . Downing remarked that three of the sixteen lots were unbuildable , therefore , thirteen building lots you would be able to build twenty-eight units . Mr . Downing stated that the number of units per acre had not been determined . Councilwoman Howell stated that the density is already heavy for an R-9 zone . Councilman Cramer remarked that the density must have some basis for the Planning Board rejection . David Klein , Town Planning Board member stated that the Planning Board had discussed the density problem . The Board has also looked • at the sketch site plan and discussed the possibility of two or three lots being unbuildable lots . We also worked out the density if rezoned to R-15 but came out with fewer than the developer wanted . The Planning Board also discussed if rezoning was • appropriate . He went on to say that his feelings were that this was sort of sport zoning and perhaps the area was better suited for multiple residence zoning . We discussed economic liability - cost of the land divided by the number of dwelling units . He noted that the south part of the land would be very expensive to develop . Councilman Cramer asked if the adjacent land was zoned R-15 or R-30 ? Town Planner Lovi responded that of the two lard owners of consequence (Downing and Cornell University) the area was zoned R-30 . He went on to say that both could be rezoned to R-15 . Councilman Kugler stated , you are looking at trouble , rezoning to R-9 . R- 9 zone is arcaic . Town Planner Lovi remarked , slowly but surely we are moving back to smaller lots and smaller houses . Councilman Cramer noted that he had no problem with rezoning the area R-15 . Mr . Mangaroni again requested that instead of rezoning a strip , rezone all the land in the area to R-15 . Councilwoman Raffensperger asked if rezoning to R-15 would allow twenty-five units ? Town Planner Lovi responded , around twenty units . He went on to say that he preferred R-15 to R-9 . Town Supervisor Desch stated that he felt the consensus of the Board was that if Mr . Downing wants to cane in with another proposal for R-15 the Board would take a look at it . • RESOLUTION NO , 258 Motion by Supervisor Desch , seconded by Councilman Cramer , • RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca will meet and conduct a public hearing at 11 : 00 A. M . , on December 31 , 1985 , at the Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York to consider the rezoning of 7 . 1 acres at 921 , 925 -35 Mitchell Street , Tax Parcel Nos . 60-1-3 and 60-1-4 , awned by William S . Downing from Residence District R-30 to Residence District R-15 . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak, Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . Town Board 16 December 9 , 1985 BOLTON POINT WARRANTS RESOLUTION NO , 259 Motion by Supervisor Desch ; seconded by Councilman Kugler , RESOLVED , that the Bolton Point Warrants dated December 9 , 1985 , in the Operating Account are hereby approved, in the amount of rt, $ 61 , 856 . 24 after review and upon the recommendation of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission , they are in order for payment . (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf • voting Aye . Nays - none) . TOWN OF ITHACA VUUUR ANTS • RESOLUTION NO . 260 Motion by Councilman Cramer ; seconded by Councilman Bartholf , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves the Town of Ithaca Warrants dated December 9 , 1985 , in the following accounts : General Fund - Town Wide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 29 , 089 . 76 General Fund - Outside Village . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 11 , 677 . 29 Water & Sewer Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 35 , 828 . 23 Highway Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $30 , 831 . 68 Fire Protection Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 79 , 972 . 25 Lighting Districts Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 486 . 31 Federal Revenue Sharing Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 24 , 856 . 56 Capital Projects Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 1 , 286 . 91 (Desch , Kugler , Raffensperger , Cramer , McPeak , Howell and Bartholf voting Aye . Nays - none ) . ADJOURNMENT The meeting was duly adjourned . own Clerk • • REPORT OF THE TOWN PLANNER DECEMBER 9 , 1985 Subdivision Review Jerold Weisburd - Commonland Community ( Change to Final Site Plan granted 11 / 19 ) Paul Iacovelli - Coddington Road , 2 - lot subdivision ( Denied 11 / 19 ) Rezoning Review Rezoning of Mitchell Street parcel from R30 to R9 to support 30 - unit clustered subdivision . Environmental Reviews William Downing 30 - unit clustered subdivision . " Family " Amendment to Zoning Ordinance " Satellite Dish " Amendment to Zoning Ordinance - " Mobile Homes " Amendment to Zoning Ordinance Joint Traffic and Safety Project at Buttermilk Falls State Park Computer Support Support of computer software and hardware for Justice Wallenbeck . . - Research into advanced microcomputer surveying, engineering , and drafting programs . Other Projects Coordination of Fall Creek gabion wall construction . Drafting recommended changes to 1990 Census Map , Committee Work Six Mile Creek Oversight Committee ( 11 / 4 ) Airport Master Planning Committee ( 11 / 25 ) Citizen Assistance Meeting with Richard Atkins concerning mixed use development on Coddington Road . Meeting with William Downing Associates concerning clustered subdivision . PARKS AND RECREATION WAYS MONTHLY REPORT - NOVEMBER , 1985 Forest Home Walkway - construction of 150 foot long railing along steep section of trail , per user requests . Burns Road revegetation - tree and shrub planting . Park and trail maintenance . Park furniture repair . Landscaping evaluation of ongoing development projects . Susan Beeners Richard Schoch Dec . 6 , 1985