HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1974-06-04 li
TOTRNT OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 4 , 1974
A regular meeting of the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca
was held on Tuesday , June 4 , 1974 , in the Town of Ithaca Offices at
. 108 East Green Street , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Chairwoman Barbara Holcomb , Jack Lowe , Robert Scannell,
Daniel Baker , Arnold Albrecht , Sam Slack , Robert Christianson , Reynolds
Metz ( Zoning Officer ) ,
ABSENT : Maurice Harris ,
ALSO PRESENT : Prof . Richard Fischer , Mrs . Beverly Livesay , Mrs .
Carol Sisler , Mr . Greenspan of Open House , other citizens of the Town
and members of the press and radio .
The Meeting was opened by the Chair at 7 : 35 p . m .
REPORT OF ZONING OFFICER
1 . Mr . Metz presented for the Board ' s opinion a proposal by
Mr . Carl Root of 336 Forest Home Drive , Parcel # 66 - 3 ® 4 , a lot with 3421
frontage on Forest Home Drive with a depth of 1121 at its deepest point
narrowing down to 501 depth . There exists on this lot a house which is
toward the West and rental building which lies towards the east or
pointed part of this triangular shaped lot . Mr . Root would like to
divide the lot and sell the house and move himself into the rental
building . The area is zoned R® 30 .
Mr . Scannell , Mr . Christianson and Mr . Slack voiced the opinion
that there is no possible way that this lot could be divided legally .
The consensus of the Board , which was transmitted to Mr . Metz ,
is that because the lot is only approximately 18 , 000 sq . ft . and the
present zoning requires 30 , 000 sq . ft . for a legal lot , there is no way
this lot can be divided into two .
2 . With reference to a lot owned by Mr . Frederick Crass , 646
Coddington Road , Mr . Metz stated that there had been an error on the
tax map # 49 which was made in 1960 in that the lot owned by Mr . Crass
and one other lot were shown as part of the larger parcel # 49 - 126 .
Lots 49 - 1 - 12 . 2 and 49 - 1 - 12 . 3 are the two lots not shown on the map .
The lots are 2 . 4 acres and 1 . 5 acres respectively with 801 and 501
frontage on Coddington Road , i . e . , they both have access to Coddington
Road , Mr . Crass is requesting a building . permit for a house on his lot .
The Planning Board noted that there must be Health Department
approval for the septic system and also as long as they meet side yard
requirements , rear lot line requirements , etc . , there is , in their
opinion , no problem in Mr . Metz granting the building permit .
t
3 . Re Mr . Louis Webster , 1039 Taughannock Blvd . This parcel
has 751 Lake frontage and 1401 on Route 89 , Mr . Webster wants to
remodel a barn which exists on the property close to Taughannock Blvd .
and make it suitable for living quarters . There also exists on the
property the original house nearer the lake front which has four
Town of Ithaca Planning Board - 2 - June 4 , 1974
students living in it . There are approximately 37 , 000 sq . ft . in the
parcel . The parcel is in an R- 15 zone .
Mrs . Holcomb read from Section 68 of the Zoning Ordinance refer -
ring to buildings on a lot which seems to be unclear as to number of
residences on one lot . Mrs . Holcomb suggested that Mr . Metz contact
the Health Department and ask them if they would approve two resi -
dences on that particular lot .
It was the general consensus that a decision in this matter is
not the province of the Planning Board .
REVISED LANDSCAPING PLAN FOR ELLIS HOLLOW ELDERLY HOUSING
Mrs . Holcomb presented a letter dated May 23 , 1974 , from Mr .
Carl Wren of Empire Pipeline Corp . ( See copy attached to the Official
Minutes of this Meeting ) .
The members of the Planning Board looked at the new landscape
plan and the one submitted to the Board on September 25 , 1973 . The
original plan called for barberry at the entrance way and Mr . Scannell
did not approve of the use of this sharp thorned bush adjacent to an
entrance . Mr . Scannell felt that they could use Vibernum along the
entrance way . Mr . Scannell also noted a misnomer for vinca minor
( periwinkle ) - the plan calls it vinca major . He noted that they
have chosen to use Norway maples along Ellis Hollow Road and felt that
there could be a much better choice . Norway maples are very dense and
will cause large bare spots underneath them . He noted that the silver
maples are still in and he had suggested red oaks since silver maples
are brittle . They could use pin oaks but they are very difficult to
grow in this area because of the type of root . Sugar maples would be
okay in Mr . Scannell ' s opinion instead of silver maple . However , Mr .
Scannell did say that they had added the shrubbery he suggested and
the maples even though they used Norway maples .
Mrs . Holcomb said that she will write a letter to Mr . Carl Wren
incorporating the comments of Mr . Scannell ,
EAST ITHACA PLAZA PLANTING STRIP
Mrs . Holcomb asked Mr . Scannell if it would be possible to put
in the Judd Falls planting strip now or should the Board wait until the
fall . Mr . Scannell stated that it is possible to plant now - Cornell
is planting through July , but the ideal time is next spring . Mr .
Scannell firmly recommended that if the Planning Board contracts for
planting now , we require that the firm maintain the plantings for one
year from installation date .
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SIGHT DISTANCE REGULATIONS
AT INTERSECTIONS
Mrs . Holcomb said that Mr . Robert Scannell had made a suggestion
that it would be well at this time to extract that part of the proposed
zoning ordinance referring to sight distance regulations and enact it
as a local law . She noted that the Town Board is holding a Public
Hearing on Monday , June 10 , 1974 , to discuss this proposed local law .
Mrs . Holcomb presented the proposed ordinance establishing sight
distance regulations which has been lifted in essence totally from the
Town of Ithaca Planning Board - 3 - June 4 , 1974
proposed zoning ordinance beginning on page 93 of that ordinance . The
proposal before the Board has been prepared by Mr . Buyoucos . ( See copy
® attached to the Minutes of this Meeting . )
After some discussion of this proposed local law and the noting
of an apparent omission of a few words in the typing of it , it was
determined that the Planning Board would urge the Town Board enact
this proposed ordinance as a local law immediately .
MOTION by Mr . Robert Christianson , seconded by Mr . Sam Slack :
RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca strongly
recommends that the Town Board adopt as a Local Law , the ordinance as
prepared by Mr . James Buyoucos entitled , "An Ordinance Establishing
Sight Distance Regulations at Intersections of Streets in the Town of
Ithaca " , as presented to the Planning Board on June 4 , 1974 , except
that the wording from " in excess of 36 inches . . . . " in the first
paragraph must be clarified to read essentially as it appears in the
proposed zoning ordinance .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote .
Aye - Holcomb , Lowe , Scannell , Baker , Albrecht , Slack , Christianson .
Nay - None .
The Motion was declared to be carried unanimously .
DISCUSSION OF PROPOSED REVISION OF NO PARKING ORDINANCE TO INCLUDE NO
PARKING ON SHOULDERS OF THE ROAD IN DESIGNATED AREAS ,
Mrs . Holcomb reported to the Board that the existing No Parking
Ordinance of the Town of Ithaca refers only to parking on the pavement
but at this point in time the Planning Board sees the need in certain
designated areas for no parking regulations directly referring to
shoulders of road also . e . g . , Snyder Hill Road , Buttermilk Falls
Road , parts of Coddington Road , etc .
The Planning Board approved in concept this change in the " No
Parking Ordinance " and Mrs . Holcomb will so report to the Town Board ,
on Monday , June 10 , 1974 .
CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF TOWN PRIORITIES AS RELATED TO REVENUE SHARING
AND SURPLUS MONEY .
The results of this discussion will be presented to the Town
Board on June 10 , 1974 .
Mrs . Holcomb said that it had been determined by the Planning
Board that surplus money or revenue sharing money should be used for
purposes which are not recurring , i . e . , it should be used for certain
one time expenses such as acquisition of land , acquisition of a build-
ing , equipment , etc . The members of the Planning Board have had time
to think about this question of which expenses should be given priority
in order to make a proposal to the Town Board ,
Mr . Slack stated that the East Ithaca Town Association had met
last week and discussed priorities . Mr . Richard Fischer was present at
that meeting and is present tonight . Mr . Slack would like to hear from
Town of Ithaca Planning Board - 4 - June 4 , 1974
Prof . Fischer ,
Prof . Fischer stated that there were 20 people present at the
East Ithaca Town Assoc . meeting , Only one person present was in favor ,
however , ranking it as # 3 choice , of the building of a new Town Hall .
However , everyone present felt that renting a part of Clinton House
was a very good idea since it is a public , historical building and
should be supported .
The strongest support , however , was for the money to be spent
for parks and recreation . This was followed closely by support for
the area of human services , e . g . , rehabilitative services . There was
some support for mass transit , There was weak support for police
protection or highway improvement . There was no support for a Town
fire department .
Mr . Scannell asked in what sense was there strong support for
parks and recreation and Mr . Fischer stated that it was in the area of
park acquisition . He noted that there is still a need for the develop -
ment of the Eastern Heights Park and a real need for a baseball field
in that area .
Mrs . Holcomb wondered if there existed an area of land flat
enough in the proposed Eastern Heights Park on the North side of Snyder
Hill Road for a baseball field . Mr . Fischer stated that there was and
Mr . Lowe agreed that there are approximately 22 acres there back from
the road .
Mrs . Livesay referred to the 5 acre parcel which had been
discussed at the time of the approval of Phase II of Eastern Heights
Subdivision . This is along the west boundary of the 22 acre parcel
mentioned above and adjacent to an existing hedgerow - the boundary
of this 22 acre parcel and Cornell Unviersity land to the west . She
felt this is flat enough for a baseball park . She noted that Eastern
Heights has not dedicated all the parkland they should have anyway .
Mr . Lowe noted that the drainage there is not good .
Mrs . Holcomb asked Mr . Fischer about the reaction to the
proposal for a Town Hall , Mr . Fischer stated that there had been no
support for building a new town hall . Mrs . Holcomb asked if it were
pointed out that if the Town rents space the citizens would have a tax
charge but if the Town builds and owns their own building it is tax
exempt and it is a one time expense . Mr . Fischer said that this had
not been discussed . It was felt , however , that it would be a good
use of public money to support a concept like the Clinton House . It
was very strongly felt that a central location is the very best place
for the Town Hall , It was suggested at this meeting that the Town
buy Boardman House , Mrs . Sisler commented that parking there for staff
would be a problem . Referring to parking , Prof . Fischer said that
parking had been discussed at their meeting with the following two con-
clusions
1 . When is parking a problem for Town Board meetings since they are
late in the day or in the evening ?
2 . There was concern about paving over more area when we might not
need to do so ,
Mr . Fischer noted that two quite elderly couples attending this
Town of Ithaca Planning Board - 5 - June 4 , 1974
meeting had stated that they could see no problem in parking so as to
do business at the Clinton House since the parking ramp is so close by .
. Mrs . Holcomb asked that there be a clarification of what the
townspeople meant by applying surplus money or revenue sharing money
to human services since there are some things that Towns cannot do in
0.
this area .
Mrs . Livesay replied that some specific areas wereo
1 . Youth services , e . g . , a ball field or community area where children
of working parents who come home and no one is there could go . A sort
of neighborhood place where they could go with a youth worker in
attendance .
2 . No interest really ( 4th place vote by 3 people ) in police protec -
tion . If money were spent in this area it should be in cooperation
with the County , i . e . , an additional sheriff or two ,
3 . No support whatever for a separate fire department - should be in
cooperation with the City Fire Department ,
Mrs . Holcomb asked if it would be fair to say that if a proposal
were made to increase fire protection in the Town by establishing a
volunteer fire department for the Town , this would not be a prime con-
cern ? Would there be anybody who would want to increase the payments
to the City ? Mrs . Livesay said yes to both questions . It was dis -
cussed and it was agreed that the Town would need at least three fire
stations , one for each hill so further support of the City would be a
better deal . Mrs . Holcomb commented that it might be true that if the
Town used the revenue sharing money the Town might be able to go the
route of having 3 stations built and equipped and run a volunteer unit
and not spend as much money as supporting the City fire department .
Mr . Greenspan who was present at this Planning Board meeting as
a representative of " Open House " located on East Buffalo Street , stated
that Open House had heard about the Town ' s surplus money and their
interest in areas of Human Services , Open House represents about 50
persons and has been funded by the State under the drug abuse program .
He stated that they would like to prepare a proposal for the Town
Board for support money since their funds had been cut back and would
appreciate direction and recommendations from the Planning Board ,
Mrs . Holcomb said that it was assumed on her part that human
services of this sort were on the County level . She stated that she
would re -read the revenue sharing data and see what is allowed on the
Town level . It had been her understanding that the Yough Bureau is
the only human service which the Town contributes to . The Yough Bureau
is run by the City of Ithaca and the Town contributes $ 16 , 000 . 00 to
their budget .
Mr . Greenspan stated that Open House makes their proposals to
the County and then they approve it and then it goes to the State .
The County gives Open House the money allocated to them and then is
reimbursed by the State .
Mr . Scannell asked Mr . Greenspan what they had in mind for any
money allocated . Mr . Greenspan stated that they did not have a pro
posal ready at this time but could prepare one . He suggested some
Town of Ithaca Planning Board ® 6 - June 4 , 1974
operating expenses might be sought . Mr . Scannell stated that operating
expenses probably would not be considered . Mr . Christianson said that
the only kind of proposals that should be considered are capital ex-
penditures of some kind - e . g . , a building .
Mrs . Holcomb was firm in her opinion that human services of the
above kind are done on the County level since they represent the entire
County , not just the citizens of a particular town .
Mr . Scannell stated that the Planning Board should check with the
Town Attorney for his professional opinion as to whether the Town can
support a project such as Open House ,
Mrs . Livesay was of the opinion that part of revenue sharing
money can be used for human services which is the reason why the State
funds have been cut in this area . She commented , however , that things
have tended to be different here in Tompkins County because the County
does so much .
Mr . Lowe asked what Trumansburg does for police protection .
Mrs . Holcomb said that the Village of Trumansburg has a contract with
the Sheriff . Two men are delegated to the Village who pays their
salary and provides a car on a day to day basis but they can be called
in by the Sheriff if he needs them . Trumansburg does not use revenue
sharing money for this service , it comes out of the tax dollar .
Mr . Scannell felt that if the Town used a similar approach it
should come out of tax money too .
Mrs . Livesay could see no objection to using revenue sharing
money on a project that is ongoing as long as people understand that
that is the way it is .
Mr . Lowe asked if there were a fire station built on West Hill ,
would that reduce the fire insurance rate . ( No answer was given ) . Mr .
Baker stated that he knows there is a group of West Hill people
looking into a volunteer fire department for that area . Mr . Lowe
stated that he felt very strongly that there are some items such as
fire protection , police protection or town hall that we are just going
to have to face up to . Mr . Scannell agreed completely , except that he
keeps hoping that we will eventually combine services with the City
and other municipalities . It is ridiculous to duplicate services , in
his opinion . He felt also that building a new town hall is ridiculous
and that we would ultimately end up with a white elephant in 15 to 20
years . He felt that Clinton House would be very expensive . He felt
strongly that the majority of the money should go to recreation .
Mr . Christianson noted that with a 10 -year lease at Clinton
House it would cost about $ 140 , 000 . 00 plus any increases . It might be
$ 150 , 000 . 00 at the end of the 10 years without anything to show for it .
Mrs . Livesay pointed out that out and out consolidation might
not be the way to go either because as two separate entities the City
and Town get more funding from the State and Federal governments .
Mrs . Sisler stated that the rental figure previously quoted for
Clinton House is $ 10 , 000 . 00 per year and not $ 14 , 000 . 00 and is still
negotiable .
On that note , the meeting was adjourned .
Town of Ithaca Planning Board ® 7 ® June 4 , 1974
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was declared adjourned at 10 : 20 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Nancy Mm Fuller , Secretary ,
TOWN OF ITHACA
AN ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING SIGHT DISTANCE REGULATIONS AT
INTERSECTIONS OF STREETS IN THE TOWN OF ITHACA
1 . Intersection sight distance . To prevent any obstruc -
tion of the sight of a motorist which would create a dangerous
situation , no plant , tree , hedges , shrubbery , earthwork , build -
ing or other structure or object , except as otherwise provided
herein , may be planted , maintained , erected , or placed within
the Sight Distance Triangle described below if said object is ,
or is expected to be , in excess of 36 inches in height above the
center line at which the elevation is determined will be at the j
intersection of the center line with aline which is perpendicular
to the center line and which intersects the proposed object .
A . Major and minor street definition . For the
purposes of this ordinance only , the major street . . shall be that
street with the highest speed limit . Where both streets have equal
speed limits , the major street shall be that street which , when
so designated , will be subject to the greatest requirements for
sight distance as determined by the Town Board . The minor street
shall be any street not designated a major street . The major
street and minor street designations shall be determined independ -
ently for each sight distance triangle calculated .
B . Sight Distance Triangle description . Beginning
at Point A , as found in the table set forth below , at the inter -
section of the center line of the major street and the center line
of the minor street , proceeding along the center line of the major
street a distance Y , as found in Table A , below , to Point B ; then
® proceeding in a straight line to Point C on the center line of the
minor street 60 feet from Point A measured along the center line
of the minor street ; and then proceeding along the center line of
the minor street to the point of beginning ( Point A ) .
1 r
2
C . In the case where the minor street is controlled
by a stop sign or traffic signal , the 60 foot distance may be
reduced to 50 feet .
D . Tables .
Table A
Major Street Speed Limit Distance Y
Less than 30 MPH 175 '
30 - 39 MPH 265 '
40 - 49 MPH 370 '
More than 49 MPH 400 '
i
Table B
This procedure shall be followed for all corners of
- each intersection .
Center Line
I
I
I
Pavement i
Edge i
60 '
Minor Street
I
. Y
!
Major Street
2 . This ordinance shall take effect immediately .
-
May 23 , 1974
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
108 East Green Street
Ithaca , New York
Attention : Ms . Barbara Holcomb
Dear Barbara :
I am enclosing herewith a copy of S / A drawing #A-02 revised
October 19 , 1973 . This drawing reflects a considerable amount of positive
changes from that submitted to the Board on September 25 , 1973 .
For the record , it emphasizes ( to the best of my knowledge ) the
suggestions of Robert Scannell , vis -a -vis the segmentation of the
intercourt area into three subcourts with separate emphasis to each
of the areas .
There is one section which , at this time , is in the state of flux ,
and that encompasses the utilization of code items 1 and 2 . This
results from the installation of a 3 - foot wide area of stone at these
points to facilitate roof drainage and additionally to eliminate back
splash on the siding .
Quite conceivably , we will add some segments of items 4 and 15
to relieve these areas ,
With sincere good wishes , I remain
ver7tru
,
arl Louis Wren
CLW : mfh
Encl .