No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1979-07-10 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD JULY 10 , 1979 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , y, July 10 , 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Henry Aron , Liese Bronfenbrenner , Edward Mazza , Montgomery - May , Carolyn Grigorov , Barbara Schultz , James Baker , Bernard Stanton , Lawrence Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) , Barbara Restaino ( Planner . ALSO PRESENT : Frank Sharp , 162 Ridgecrest Road ; Lagrand E . Chase ; Randy Chase ; Thomas G . Miller ; Jerold M . Weisburd ; Claudia Weisburd ; Dennis Lowes ; Randy Hausner ; David Minnick ; Debbie Minnick ; Miriam Clements ; Fred Brown ; Betty Brown ; Suzanne Fullager ; Evan N . Monkemeyer ; Ivar Jonson ; Rocco P . Lucente ; Otto Schoenfeld ; Willis S . Hilker ; Helen Mundell ( Ithaca Journal ) . w Chairman Aron declared the meeting duly open . . at 7 : 35 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR INLET VALLEY LAND CO - OP , INC . , 171 CALKINS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , APPROXIMATELY 97 ACRES . JERRY WEISBURD . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly open at 7 : 35 p . m . and presented for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the ::Notice of Public Hearing on July 3 , 1979 , and July 5 , 1979 , respectively . Mr . Aron stated , with respect to the Environmental Assessment Form , Long Form , which has been studied by the Town Engineer , that he would like to ask Mr . Fabbroni whether he has anything which is either derogatory or in favor or agreeable to say as to this form .Las ,=. completed by Mr . Weisburd . Mr . Fabbroni stated that as he had commented at the preliminary subdivision approval hearing held on May 15 , 1979 , his questions related to the possibility of moving gravel on the site and from where on the site to use for roadways and building sites . He stated that he had questions at that time also about the future use of the water dam that is in the creek now , Woodcock Creek , that is . And , he had questions in regard to the drainage courses and how they would be identified on the plan . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that these are really subdivision questions , and not specific to the EAF . Mr . Fabbroni now referred to the EAF and stated that Mr . Weisburd submitted this form to the Town at the preliminary hearing and it is important that the Board address it tonight , at least in a prelimi - nary action . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he is reasonably satisfied with the form as be.in _' easonably completed . Mr . Stanton pointed out that Item # 11 on the form presented indicates the number of proposed dwelling units as " 9 " and the number of commercial units as " 0 " . He wondered where the school fits in , and also the parking spaces shown under proposed in Item # 12 indicates 9 . Mr . Weisburd said that the form shows the 9 spaces because there will be one for each home ® proposed . He said they could specify for the school too . Mr . Weisburd continued and stated that the form had been prepared for the preliminary hearing presentation and the school has since decided to come in as an actual part . of the subdivision . Mr . Aron asked if there were any further questions on the EAF sub - mitted . Mr . May requested more time to consider . Planning Board - 2 - July 10 , 1979 Mr . May referred to Item # 33 on the form which relates to discharge of waste materials or effluent into a stream or groundwaters , and which is marked " yes " . He asked how they are doing this ? Mr . Weisburd stated that the homes will be served by septic systems . Mr . May then wondered what will be discharged into the stream , noting again the " yes " comment . Mr . Dennis Lowes , Mr . Weisburd ' s Surveyor , and a. - member of the Engineering firm of Rowell and Associates handling Mr . Weisburd ' s project , stated that technically even with approved septic systems there is sooner or later discharge into the land strictly through ground percolation . Mr . Fabbroni agreed that Mr . Lowes was pinning it down very fine and that technically whatever hits the stream is effluent . Mr . May stated that he did not think that is what that item really means to have stated . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out that -the check is the Health Department approval . Mr . Stanton asked again about the school , wondering if it is separate r or a part of the subdivision . Mr . Weisburd explained that he had been required by the Health Department to file the New York State Long Form EAF which is slightly different from the adopted Town .of Ithaca EAF and he did include the school in that form that went to the Health Department , Mr . Stanton suggested that it might be useful to mention the school under Item #49 . Mr . Aron stated that he would suggest to . Mr . . : Weisburd that he insert under Item #49 a brief description of the school . Mr . Weisburd did so . Mrs . Schultz asked in the form of a statement that the stream is not going to be modified in any way . Mr . Weisburd agreed that the stream would not be modified . Mrs . Bron :fenbrenner suggested that the Board ought to require at least two parking spaces per dwelling unit . Mr .. . Weisburd stated that he thought the Town zoning permits two family dwellings , but that the ' By - Laws of the Corporation prohibit this . However , Mr . Weisburd agreed to amend the EAF by noting under Item # 12 that 30 parj� ing � , spaces are proposed instead of 9 . Mr . Fabbroni asked that under Item 12 also , Mr . Weisburd should probably indicate 50 round trips a day as the traffic generated instead of 25 . Mr . Weisburd did so . Mr . Aron asked if there were any further questions in re the EAF submitted and amended by Mr . Weisburd . There were none . MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board accept and hereby does accept as approved the Environmental Assessment Form , Long Form , as presented by Mr . Jerold M . Weisburd under date of May 15 , 1979 , as amended this date , July 10 , 1979 . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Bronfenbrenner , May , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker , Stanton . Nay - None . Abstain ,, - Mazza . Planning Board - 3 - July 10 , 1979 The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . . Mr . Aron noted that the By - Laws of the Co - Operative have not been approved by the Town Attorney . Mr . Weisburd stated that the Town Attorney has the By - Laws in his office . Mr . Aron suggested that it might be well to adjourn a final decision on the school . Mr . Weisburd pointed out that the school is a part of the ten leaseholds . Mr . Weisburd continued and noted that they have been through the Health Department requirements and the only thing outstanding right now is the SPEDES permit which takes about two months . He stated that the . Health Department is prepared to grant approval but will not until the SPEDES permit comes through . Mr . Weisburd stated that he was hoping the Planning Board would grant final approval contingent upon obtaining the SPEDES permit . Mr . Weisburd stated that he submitted an entire package in the form of a booklet to the Town Engineer on June 26th , Mr . Weisburd stated that they r have incurred great expense so far and suggested again the granting of final subdivision approval contingent upon the SPEDES permit . Mr . Weisburd pointed out that the Town Attorney is going to have to review the entire matter as far as the school is concerned and as far as the bank is con - cerned . He stated that the development of this Co - Op :is based on the State format for co - operatives . Mr . Aron agreed that Mr . Weisburd has a Co - Operat =ive and that is clear , but , the Planning Board does not wish to lose control over the subdivision . Mr . Mazza explained that this is a co - operative venture and . its bytlaws stipulate that it must conform to all zoning ordinances . Mr . Weisburd stated that he has worked closely with his attorney and that in a subdivision , whether it be owned by several indiv =iduals , one indivi - dual , or a corporation , the Town has concerns over accesses to the road and the zoning . He said that they have incorporated the Zoning Ordinance in the By - Laws . He pointed out that the By - Laws have been changed some - what from the preliminary hearing . Mr . Stanton stated that it seems to him that final approval could be given subject to the final approval of the Town Attorney plus the SPEDES permit . Mr . Aron asked again about the final approval from the Health Department . Mr . Weisburd explained how that is tied in with the SPEDES permit . Mr . Weisburd stated that the co - operative has reckoned with that problem - - they have told potential leaseholders about this . Mrs . Grigorov asked if the co - operative has officers . Mr . . Weisburd replied that it does . Mrs . Grigorov asked if the officers are responsible for the co - operative . Mr . Weisburd replied that they are . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that she did not believe there is anything in the by - laws about the provisions that the corporation might have made if the Co -Op is dissolved and she asked in that connection what happens to the individual leaseholders . Mr . Weisburd replied that the Co - Op can only be dissolved by the leaseholders - - there is some percentage that must vote to do so - it may read unanimous , or unanimous less one . Mr . Weisburd looked the question up in the by - laws and found the section and stated that such a provision is in there . Mr . Fabbroni discussed with Mr . Dennis Lowes , Mr . Weisburd ' s engineer , drainage and volume of water . Mr . Lowes indicated that the volume of water is not appreciable but are natural drainage ways . He noted that they are proposing to modify one indicating the use of rip rap . Mr . Fabbroni a Planning Board - 4 - July 10 , 1979 . wondered . if there were a big problem with carrying the one drainage way that they are diverting , noting the way it sits there now . Mr . .Lowes stated that there essentially was a problem , the biggest problem being the way the road gradient is working out . He stated that a minimum of gradient is desirable . He stated that they will take what water will come down through there , again , not appreciable , and divert it into a roadside ditch on the upper side of the road . Mr . Fabbroni noted that the plans show a 24 " culvert south of the existing farm road and he asked what happens then - - does it all go down to the south side from this culvert ? Mr . Lowes stated that anything smaller would have a tendency to clog the undercrossing , adding that any runoff tends to fall off to the south and some does tend down the south side of the road . The old farm road was discussed . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he would prefer to see them carry the waterway as is where it is proposed to divert this waterway because this water from the uplands along the road , where they are describing , comes from the north , and , if necessary rip rap the drainage way itself , rather than try and turn it 90 degrees where it hits the road . He stated that he thought that it will , in time , work out a lot better in view of a spring melt that is going to wash that road out otherwise . Mr . Baker pointed out that this farm road was once a Town road and abandoned after a flood around 1936 , and it probably would be a good idea to have a look at the area before any final decision is made . Mr . Aron noted that Mr . Baker wished to walk this land before the Board comes to a final decision and thereupon asked for three members of the Board to go over this parcel and report back to the Board . The Chair appointed Mr . Baker , Mr . Stanton , and Mr . May to such an ad hoc committee . Mr . Aron , with Mr . Baker ' s agreement , stated that Mr . Baker will chair this committee and will arrange the time and place of meeting . Mr . Aron said the Board would also like to have a copy. of the current by - laws . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Barbara Schultz : RESOLVED , that the Public Hearing in the matter of the consideration of final subdivision approval for Inlet Valley Land Co - Op , Inc . , 171 Calkins Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , approximately 97 acres , be and hereby is adjourned to Tuesday , July 17 , 1979 , at 7 : 30 p . m . By way of discussion , Mr . Weisburd asked if they submit the final by - laws and the engineering work is done , could they then obtain a deci - sion on the 17th ? Mr . Aron stated that the Board cannot guarangee that at at this time . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . • Aye - Aron , Bronfenbrenner , May , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker , Stanton . Nay - None . Abstain - Mazza . Planning Board - 5 - July 10 , 1979 f The MOTION to adjourn the Public Hearing was declared to be carried . Mr . Fabbroni asked Mr . Weisburd if at this time he planned to utilize the gravel deposits on the site as part of his construction so that the members of the ad hoc committee might be alerted to where it will be used . Mr . Weisburd replied that they really do not know how much at this time - - the road is not to Town specs so so much gravel would not be used . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF REVISION OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA WATER AND SEWER BENEFIT FORMULA ADOPTED NOVEMBER 18 , 1971 , AMENDED DECEMBER 13 , 1977 ) WITH RESPECT TO AN APPROVED SUBDIVISION WHERE A DEVELOPER HAS CONSTRUCTED AN APPROVED WATER DISTRIBUTION MAIN AND / OR A SANITARY SEWER COLLECTOR SERVING PART OR ALL OF THE SUBDIVISION . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 30 p . m . , and presented for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing on July 3 , 1979 , and July 5 , 1979 , respectively . Chairman Aron read the proposed revision amendment to the Benefit Formula as follows : " In an approved subdivision where a developer has constructed an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector serving part or all of the subdivision , the benefit on that portion of the subdivi - sion served shall be determined by the standard provisions herein as if the utility improvements did not exist for a period , of three ( 3 ) years after construction of same has been approved except that the sale of any lot in any manner or the issuance of a permit to build on a lot to anyone will make such lot ( s ) subject to the standard provisions herein and all the remaining land will be subject to standard provisions herein at the end of the three years . The developer must certify his ownership annually to the Town Clerk between September 1 and October 1 . " Mr . Aron stated that Mr . Fabbroni will give the Board some background on the proposal and explain it . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he thought the revision as proposed is fairly self - explanatory . He went on and stated that if you have an empty piece of land that is , under the standard provisions , charged acreage benefit and then if you obtain subdivision approval from the Planning Board for that empty piece of land , and you develop lots on it by constructing utilities , you would not , under this proposal , be charged benefit on those lots for up to three years . However , once a permit is issued for building you would be charged benefit for that lot on the next tax year . Mr . Fabbroni reiterated,,.-that if the now developed lot is sold , or leased or in some manner ceases to be owned by the developer that is a basis for putting benefit on that lot , however , if the developer maintains ownership of the lot under this proposal he may not be charged benefit on that lot for up to three years ; the acreage benefit charge remains operative . Mr . Aron asked if there were any comments from the public . Mr . Evan Monkemeyer asked from the floor why the term was based upon three years - some have been thinking of a five year term . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that in relation to the absorption rate of housing , especially in the Town of Ithaca , three years might not be enough time . - - five years might be better . Planning Board - 6 - July 10 , 1979 Mr . Fabbroni explained the rationale for the proposing of a three year term . He said that it might be because of the way the formula is presently established , but it would appear from building statistics that most developers do not develop beyond a three - year time frame . He was of the opinion that in five years time most property would move . He said again that his study indicated that they did not develop beyond three years , but that there . may be some exceptions . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that the longer the term , .'- in terms of flexibility , the better . He said that in certain areas lots are not absorbed as fast as others . Mr . Otto Schoenfeld stated from the floor that he has had the occasion many times of being required to put in water and sewer for up to 50 lots because of the :requirements for looping lines . He stated that many times it takes many more than three years to sell lots . Mr . Schoenfeld stated that he did not know , but he thought there might be some situations where someone can sell within three years , but it was his opinion that five years would be better . Mr . Schoenfeld stated that , as explained by Mr . Fabbroni , five years would not penalize the Town of Ithaca since the minute you sell a lot it is charged benefit on the next tax year . He pointed out that 50 lots at $ 102 a lot is a lot of money . Mr . Schoenfeld stated that his money is costing 13 - 3 / 4 % . He stated that the cost of improvements is very expensive just from the carrying cost point of view alone . Mr . Schoenfeld stated that any developer wants to get rid of lots as quickly as possible . He said that he thought that five years is not an unusual request . • Mr . Willis Hilker asked from the floor if this amendment would be retroactive for the same period of time . Mr . Fabbroni explained that it would be retroactive in that if you were in the third year you would get benefit from the proposal , but not reimbursement . Mr . Hilker stated that he agreed also that a five year term would be a much better time . Mr . Hilker pointed out that mortgages are very difficult to obtain right now and that will probably continue and so , again , lots will not move that fast . Mr . Mazza asked what the present situation is in terms of the benefit formula . Mr . Fabbroni explained that now when a developer builds a subdivision in terms of utilities , on the very next tax year the developer pays the full benefit on each lot . Mr . Fabbroni stated that perhaps one of the most compelling aspects of this proposal to the Planning Board is to try to lower the cost of land to the buyer . He said that there are pro - bably 50 different angles from which you could approach an assessment of this proposition and each one would lead to a different final conclusion as to its merits . Mr . Rocco Lucente spoke from the floor and referred to the five year term consideration . Mr . Lucente stated that he keeps his developments down just because of this type of thing . He said a developer must balance carrying costs versus the savings he makes by putting in more road and sewer and water costs . He felt that if the term were five years the developer could pass these savings along to the buyer . Mr . Lucente stated that it is all the same as far as the Town treasury is concerned . • Chairman Aron stated that he wished the Board to be clear in its own mind that any statement on the proposition is in the form of a recommenda - tion to the Town Board . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mrs . Liese Bronfenbrenner : 3 Planning Board - 7 - July 10 , 1979 RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board that the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer Benefit Formula adopted November 18 , 1971 , amended December 13 , 1977 , be further amended by adding the following paragraph to said Water and Sewer Benefit Formula , as amended : " In an approved subdivision where a developer has constructed an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector serving part or all of the subdivision , the benefit on that portion of the sub - division served shall be determined by the standard provisions herein as if the utility improvements did not . exist for a period of five ( 5 ) years after construction of same has been approved except that the sale , land contract or lease of any lot in any manner or the issuance of a permit to build on a lot to anyone will make such lot ( s ) subject to the standard pro - visions herein and all the remaining land will be subject to standard pro - visions herein at the end of the five ( 5 ) years . The developer must certify his ownership annually to the Town Clerk between September 1 and October l . " By way of discussion , Mr . Aron stated that he would like very much to see the addition , as he has moved , of the words " land contract or lease " in any recommendation . to the Town Board , Mr . Aron stated that he recog - nizes an undue burden on any developer and the savings to a buyer but that he feels those words really must be included to protect the Town ' s funds . Mr . May . asked Mr . Fabbroni if . . he _ had any - problem with the five years . • Mr . Fabbroni replied , not really . Mr . Mazza commented that if Mr . Fabbroni is correct in his observation , it does not impinge upon the Town . Mr . Fabbroni replied the observation of three years may be biased by the formula itself . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Bronfenbrenner , May , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker , Mazza . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . ( Secretary ' s Note : Let the record show that Mr . Bernard Stanton had to leave the meeting during this discussion because of a prior committment . He excused himself at 8 : 40 p . m . Mr . Stanton expressed his approval of the foregoing Motion to the Planning Board Secretary by telephone on July 11 , 1979 : ) The Chair declared the Public Hearing duly closed at 8 : 45 p . m . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED SUBDIVISION BACKLOT OF RIDGECREST ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 . 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 . 2 . LAGRAND E . CHASE . The Chair declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 8 : 45 p . m . and presented for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing on July 3 , 1979 , and July 6 , 1979 , respectively . The EAF , long form , was presented . Mr . Aron stated that he would like to report to the public that three members of the Planning Board , Mrs . Planning Board - 8 - July 10 , 1979 Bronfenbrenner , Mrs . Schultz , and himself , last Saturday , July 7th , at 10 : 00 a . m . , walked this land with the plan and the Environmental Assessment Form in hand . He asked Mrs . Bronfenbrenner to report on the Committee ' s findings . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner reported that the Committee walked this whole wooded piece of land which is very beautiful . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed out that some of those present may not know that this is a different pro - posal from what Mr . Chase presented before - he is proposing a 10 - lot subdivision instead of 80 lots . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that the proposal is comprised of large lots on 30 acres of land . She reported that they did find some evidence of moisture just about where the clearing for the road ended . She ' asked Mr . Chase if that is where the turn - around is planned ? Mr . Chase replied that actually it goes behind that and that it is noted on the plan . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner continued and stated that the Committee talked to some neighbors in the area . She stated that they discussed some drainage problems in the water tower area - - standing water , particularly in the spring though , it is running water , at least according to the neighbors . Mr . Chase stated that what they are planning to do will not make any more drainage problem that what is there . Mrs . Schultz stated that she had no further comments to add . Mr . Aron stated that he would like to add that he found out what poison ivy looks like . Mr . Lagrand Chase now appeared before the Board and stated that much to the relief of the neighborhood , he has abandoned the idea of such an extensive subdivision . and is proposing these acreage parcels as shown on the subdivision plan . He indicated a cul de sac and its placement on the land . Mr . Chase stated that the . . ten acreage . parcels range in size from approximately 2 acres to 6 acres . and will make very nice acreage home sites for people who do not want just a postage stamp lot . Mr . Chase stated that he felt this plan was a good use for the property which , as Mrs . Bronfenbrenner has said , is very beautiful . Mr . Chase said that he has found many people who would like to have a little more room and added that this is difficult to do with water and sewer . He noted that anything more than this number of lots with water and sewer and looping is economically unfeasible with costs today . Mr . Chase asked that his engineer and surveyor , Mr . Thomas G . Miller , speak to the Board in reference to drainage matters and the engineering aspects of the proposal . Mr . Miller stated that two culverts are proposed - - an 18 " along the roadside ditch and then in the low wooded spot a culvert at that point also . Mr . Miller stated that the drainage way is not clearly defined in this area so as to provide for a good building lot and they are proposing a swale and putting it back generally the way it is at the present time . Mr . Miller pointed out that the sewer line is very difficult , there being a 4 / 10% minimum slope at one point above the existing ground . Mr . Miller stated that they have made provision for future access to the north which is owned by Mr . Chase . Mr . Aron asked if Mr . Chase intended to come back with a subdivision proposal on the land that he owns . farther on down to the north ? Mr . Chase said that he did not envision that for some time , however , that was ,. the . proposal . .,when .. - they . thought they . . needed access to King Road . Mr . Chase said that he would not contemplate any development of that northern parcel until that is feasible . Mr . Fred Brown , speaking from the floor , asked how wade the road is going to be ? ' Planning Board - 9 - July 10 , 1979 Mr . Chase described the proposed road as being a 20 ' road with 4 ' shoulders and ditches ; two -way , the same as Ridgecrest Road . Mr . Brown asked if Mr . Chase is going to build houses or just sell lots ? Mr . Chase replied that he really could not answer that as yet . He stated that he is asking for approval for the lots - - he might sell and he might build . Mrs . Brown confirmed with Mr . Chase that he is proposing 10 lots . She asked what is the most number of apartments that can be built on one lot . Mr . Fabbroni replied that two - family homes may be constructed on each of the ten lots with the second unit required to be one - half of the primary unit . Mrs . Brown wondered if it could be supposed that someone bought one of those large lots and then went into subdividing their own lot . Mr . Fabbroni stated that it is possible for some of the lots , if on a future road , to be subdivided at some point in time , but , there must be road frontage . Mrs . Brown expressed concern over possible water or drainage problems , stating that she walked the creek that goes from the Town of Danby , around the water tower and runs back into the Town of Danby . Mr . Chase stated that he really did not think that Mrs . Brown should have any- .=-fears of future _:de_ve-l-opment , pointing out also that with this proposal they are pretty much committing the 30 acres to 10 parcels . Mr . Evan Monkemeyer , speaking from the floor , stated that he thought it was a very good plan that Mr . Chase proposes here and that the Planning Board would be wise to approve it - - it is good for South Hill . Mr . May wondered about the number of lots the frontages of which are less than 100 ' . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the lots are 100 ' wide at the setback and according to the Zoning Ordinance it is up to the discretion of the Board on those lots at the end of a cul de sac . He added that these lots in particular widen out quite fast . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed out that the lots are also large enough to function without water and sewer . Mr . Stanton asked how Mr . Chase would propose to mark out the lots . Mr . Chase replied that he would leave that for his engineer . He added that they could be staked out most any time but the front stakes are a little difficult during road construction . in Mr . Aron asked about filling / at the wooded spot . Mr . Fabbroni noted that the plan indicates about 6 ' of fill . Mr . Mazza asked Mr . Fabbroni if he saw any problems with drainage , noting that there is water there and it has to go someplace . Mr . Fabbroni stated that in the back of proposed lots #8 and # 9 , it would be well to show as • part of the scheme the drainage going back to the proposed future road , noting that the natural lay of this land goes this way anyway . He suggested coming _ •,along ; the __. Iot : _ line with the swale and swinging back to the west . Manhole #2 was discussed . Mr . Mazza asked if there were any possible way to get a greater sewer grade than 4 / 10% . Mr . Miller stated that he will try his best to get more Planning Board - 10 - July 10 , 1979 than the 4 / 10% which is the minimum required by the State . Chairman Aron asked if there were any further questions . There were none . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing duly closed at 9 : 10 p . m . Chairman Aron stated that the Board has heard Mr . Chase ' s presentation and the public statements and asked what the pleasure of the Board is . Mr . Mazza stated that he would like the record to show that he did not receive a copy of the Environmental Assessment Form as required by the June 26 , 1979 ) resolution of the Planning Board . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aran ., seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Public Hearing in the matter of the Chase Subdivision proposal for Ridgecrest Road be and hereby is re - opened . There followed a ..brief discussion , whereupon the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Bronfenbrenner , May , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker , Mazza . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . The Board discussed the matter of sufficient copies of the EAF with Mr . Chase . MOTION by Mrs . Liese Bronfenbrenner , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Public Hearing in the matter of consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for Proposed Subdivision backlot of Ridge - crest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 . 2 , Lagrand E . Chase , Owner / Developer , be and hereby is adjourned to Tuesday , July 17 , 1979 , at 8 : 00 p . m . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , Bronfenbrenner , May , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker , Mazza . Nay - None . The MOTION TO ADJOURN was declared to be carried unanimously . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , the Chair declared the July 10 , 1979 , meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 9 : 25 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary . TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD TUESDAY , JULY 10 , 1979 A G E N D A 7 : 30 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for Inlet Valley Land Co - Op , Inc . , 171 Calkins Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , approxi - mately 97 acres . Jerry Weisburd . 8 : 00 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of revision of the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer Benefit Formula adopted November 18 , 1971 , amended December 13 , 1977 , with respect to an approved subdivision where a developer has constructed an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector serving part or all of the subdivision . 8 : 15 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for Proposed Subdivision Backlot of Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45 -- 1 - 2 . 2 . Lagrand E . Chase . 9 : 00 P . M . ADJOURNMENT Nancy M . Fuller Secretary NOTE : IF. ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD CANNOT ATTEND , PLEASE CALL ME IMMEDIATELY AT 273 - 1747 . • t-. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING TOWN CLERK ' S OFFICE . ITHACA , N . Y. I , Edward L . Bergen �. being duly sworn , say that I am the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , that the following notice has been duly posted on the sign board of the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca and that the notice has been duly published in the local newspaper : ( Ithaca Journal ) Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Planning Board of the Town of •Ithaca on Tuesday , July 10 , . 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , commencing at 7 : 30 p . mo . , as per attached . Location of sign board used for posting : Front Entrance to Town Hall Date of Posting : July 3 , 1979 Date of Publication : July 5 , 1979 , _ July 6 , 1979 Edwar Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca State of New York County of Tompkins SS . Town of Ithaca Sworn to before me this 10th day of July . , 19 79 NOTARY i GERTl2UDE He BERGEN N&Ary public, State of New Y k No. 55-5278725 Qualified in Tompkins Coun Germ Expires March 30, 19 14 1THACA JOURNAL Friday , July 6, 1979 j 1 Legal Notices — TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING . q - BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING I TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1979 By direction of the Chairman of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will , be held by the Plan- ning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, July 10, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street ( sec- ond floor ), Ithaca, N . Y., at the following time and on the following • matter : 8 : 15 P.M' Consideration of Pre- liminary Subdivision Approval for Proposed Subdivision Backlot of Ridgecrest Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-45. 1 -2.2. Lagrand E . Chase. Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all per- , sons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons. may appear by agent or in person. Edward . L. Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca July 6, 1979 , -- - • ; r Thursday , July 5 , 1979 ITHACA JOURN'AL_ 27- 1 ' . . .'legal Notices TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING ;J BOARD ' NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1979 By direction of the Chairman the Planning ; Board, NOTICE , IS. HEREBY - GIVEN ' that. . 'Public hearings "will lie held b'y the Plan''-fi ning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, July 10, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street ( sec- ond floor ) , Ithaca, N . Y, at the following times and on .the follow- ing matters: 7 : 30 P.M. Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for Inlet Val- Iey , Land Co-op, Inc., 171 Calkins Rdad Town 'of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.: s. Jerry � eisburapproximately 97 ; acres. Jerry Weisburd. 8 : 00 , P.M. Consideration of re- vision of the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer. Benefit Formula adopted November 18, 1971 , amended December 13, 1977, with respect To an approved Subdivision where developer has constructed ' an .approved water distribution main and/or a sanitary sewer col- lector serving part or all of the subdivision . Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all per- sons in support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or in person. Edward L. Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca July 5, 1979 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS • TUESDAY , JULY 10 , 1979 By direction of the Chairman of the Planning Board , NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday , July 10 , 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , at the following times and on the following matters : 7 : 30 P . M . Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for Inlet Valley Land Co - Op , Inc . , 171 Calkins Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , approximately 97 acres . Jerry Weisburd . 8 : 00 P . M . Consideration of revision of the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer Benefit Formula adopted November 18 , 19711 amended December 13 , 1977 , with respect to an approved Ssubdivision where a developer has constructed an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector serving part or all of the subdivision . Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in support or such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person . Edward L . Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca Dated : July 2 , 1979 Publish : July 5 , 1979 i TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TUESDAY , JULY 101 1979 By direction of the Chairman of the Planning Board , NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a Public Hearing will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday , July 10 , 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , at the following time and on the following matter : 8 : 15 P . M . Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for Proposed Subdivision Backlot of Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 . 2 . Lagrand E . Chase . Said Planning Board will at said time and said place hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person . • Edward L . Bergen Town Clerk Town of Ithaca Dated : July 3 , 1979. Publish : July 6 , 1979 - • MEMORANDUM TO : Henry Aron , Chairman , Planning Board Members , Planning Board Lawrence P . Fabbroni , Town Engineer FROM : James V . Buyoucos , Town Attorney RE : INLET VALLEY LAND CO - OPERATIVE , INC . DATE : July 10 , 1979 I have made a preliminary review of the By - Laws . Frankly , I am not in a position to render an opinion because I do not know by what standards I am required to evaluate the By - Laws . What is the specific interest of the Town in the By - Laws ? What interest - does the Town wish to promote and what interest does the Town wish to protect ? What control , if any , does the Town wish to have in a co - operative real estate venture of this type ? It is not enough to ask me to tell you whether or not the By - Laws are legal . That question is broad and in the context of Planning Board action not quite as relevant as the previous questions I have set forth above . It may be that this is a case where the members of the Planning Board should read the By - Laws themselves . • What , in effect , you are approving is a subdivision of land . It may be that any one person who wishes to become a part of the Co - Operative may find no objections to entering into that sort of co - operative venture . It may be others might find objections . This is a matter of right and taste for each person who seeks to acquire an interest in - the Co - Operative ' s lands . The function of the Planning Board , it seems to me , might be to look into the By - Laws and determine whether or not any conditions with respect to the approval of the subdivision required by law or specially imposed by the Planning Board ( if it should approve the subdivision ) would require a revision or addition to the By - Laws or would require some participation by the Town in the affairs of the Co - Operative . This appears to be an imaginative concept on the part of the developers . It may be that this is the sort of venture which would be appealing to many people in the community . It departs from the accepted standard of property ownership with which the Town Planning Board and the Town Board are familiar ; the procedures of control and supervision developed over the years relate primarily to individual outright ownership of each separate parcel of land . In the case of this venture , each " owner " does not own the land but owns stock in a co - operative based on his holding a proprietary lease to a parcel of land in the Co - Op . The Town Engineer , Building Inspector and Zoning Officer should consider his enforcing and supervisory functions in the light of co - operative ownership . It is important that he make a recommendation that he sees no particular problem in this respect . When you have considered the above , I might consider the inclu- sion of provisions in the By - Laws which would relate to the enforce - ability of claims and provisions of law against individual holders of 7 / 10 / 79 • Memo - - J . V . B . to Aron , Plan ' . Bd . , Fabbroni - 2 - proprietary leases and those claims which might affect the entire Co - Operative . For example , there might be provisions by which one person is designated as the agent to receive process in any action or proceeding . This might be very important in the event there was a violation of law or regulation which it is the duty of the Town to enforce . I am not in a position to give final approval of the By - Laws at this time . It might be worthwhile discussing the matter with the Planning Board , and you , and certainly Mr . Fabbroni . From my limited point of view , I cannot recommend that you give final approval . If you should wish to do so , however , you should make any such approval subject to the specific condition that the By - Laws have been approved by the Planning Board after consultation with the Town Attorney . In other words , the final approval would not be final and complete because it would still be ' subject to approval of the By - Laws . I am sorry that I have not been able to attend to this matter prior to this , however , as you know , I have had some other matters relating to the Planning Board and the Town of Ithaca which have taken an inordinate amountlof time . As soon as we have agreed as to what standards I must use in giving an approval or disapproval , then I do not think that it will take much longer . On the other hand , I was not apprised of the progress of the application nor was I aware that the matter was coming up for approval until I saw the Agenda . This memo is intended for you , the Planning Board and Mr . Fabbroni , and is not to be considered a " public " document at this time . JVB / nf Dictated , but not read . 7 / 10 / 79 1 / g \ o I { �I to , o4k, \ —1 t to ,/ ,' // , - sI /1 F11 Vir / 17s 1 w \ / 1 . y oo� or ooP ' - _ Ira••. — _ ./— ~��/ �G � j\ 'r5 t1i� \000, _ - - - "- - oo, , ' , �` :��� \ — _ — , , 01 i rho \ , — 000 — \ \+z w - - _ r \ � ` \ \ \ � � ` \ � _ ♦ \ t�T `'oo. too - � \� ` z� 4r fJ•r. \ � ` . ` • - - \� � �`-�, ' • .ems OW at IW f.\Y • pawate \ . \ / - - • x \\ ` � `\ \ � // bw.•..ir \ Fr'y. l✓.0 \ \ 1 \ \ , - •. , \ .cru ✓s ,r, \. t Vim`-. � \\ I\ � i �1 . \. � ��1y-L�• . N.R. \ ' i - !" •> . \ M Ie_a '� _ \ - \ ` \��• Pr� _ _ 1 1 Y �Z \ \ L60 \ .\ too so I fit- Y r '• / 1 /�( � I 1 ' / I 1 ��."tT , Z I .- I Kram • / �. to ?G2 �L . / / / / ' , / / 1 /� 1 1 1 1 , ' il 1. 1 may: o o u Moe / t / / \� / 1 J dIJ 1 ''/� L. SGS Y1 O �'"i•l- .. ' / � 9 �u/J �iL1 -• •s.sr• - .. / / l I G 1 1 I r 1N� / tofy .d/•gfl/rry f0 /\ 1� / c..... / u 11 mood, e of �M ./i... 7p' .\ �/- l /-��. I ' / I ' — / \ / 1 ' \ \ coop=y,..�_ ._ -1 - 1 1 37J+1 rI • j _ _ ./� I �. � r : df1.eS^; ' /? e /. o3 R I S� I r o I I , \ \\���r T'yS/000 /�' fie ov jor to to \ \ \ \ . . . — p\ � . / t / - \ \ e N Nk0 // i SrdL e � \ ` \ \ iNo / / Y' / 3 /r /x / /' r \�, • � / /o v - , / to to too I . , • \ . > / � , �; /fes f.'•`i / / / / '� \ — . 1. 4— to \ \ I I \ , Of to No No v -Sc, JNo % \ FINAL. PLAT ot6of ect r � � INLET VALLEY LAND COOPERATIVE INC. ♦�\\ ,s w. to. �9r OWNER : J�ROLD M. WEISBURO µ �s � .'P4.lfo e 4P " 1� /1» oma ! !U/ PART OF LOT 79 TOWN OF ITHACA �NP 6yr•J pY.�Ll T6� ON �L/L/' /0j /979 OQ � ha 94� TOMPKINS COUNTY NEW YORK 06 F'YslD LAND Ro RO V V E L L. 111 MM htl ANO ASSOCIATES PC. C•rtLl ■ r. Iws wn 7%6004 T7:f A.. 4 98. S49A� a •II L ISt. .r 6tS lit 0 , 700 _ _ _ — - - _ _ _ � � – � ♦ \` \ ` ` ` � \ \ R ` ` Yl \ ` \ .�` ` \Q ` � � \ ` � `` � ` \ \ \ � ` ` – _ � ` ` ;R ik oe 17 0 00of f ow 447.70 • 1 f•r� 9�•/r cn �I ..al I 1 11 .. . s /e• a�• I 1 \ \ `' P ' - / , L A4(0(0 �P b10 1 1 1 i I /t, ^• I \ ,, A - CID IN R JA APPROVED 8Y 1DMPKINS OOl/NTY HEALTH DEPT. � I 1 1 � \ .• l 3J .oe• 1 I• 7 \ N19�ia la ••,✓ F RMCI�Il Mc MIN*"ora l✓/c-i Y..rn/,.✓ �T L 529 1 s . .� Pi.rc.u7,. ✓ T'7 P 99 v/..� , v Ji A../..� w...a Jww JJ✓✓ Oc7. 77 /975. @ APPROVED BY TOWN OF ITHACA I✓c���j arR PLANNING BOARD S. Is c .a / L 7 -�+b.wl Ili..sa✓ ..+e ,✓/,�eedea..r<. APPROVED BY ,.'� t /r�j.✓• F..ao I✓f✓ ,.✓O �UR��fI CI.OtN.. . QL/ AMO �w1�7 �4/ JEROMRp, OWNER Lir jti.n.r r. n/ ✓r�fRro s7/ C.✓/<.c7. v Pie•••� 7` Co✓aJ�✓.7.w. VAN W OERT I' ROAD T✓N /�iP „u�/!c7 Jp A✓/ s/�7� c�fi,l� .c✓ u a �, SPENCER. NY A T Ir C�✓Pfi17s, anT.f.�c7 e� /'7a! W/at J..6 N. l<I✓..YM✓o ^•VRfW ..�! AAlIi O✓ µ AY w•Jr+ L-t.,✓M. CHAIRMAN DATE 8..Im^,Vj a/e,.wo✓ .I,w. s aad. .•v -.✓ .Qu u.•.iv .5/w71n.l• r : r- R Froject ff 17 TOWN OF ITHACA i.. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR 7`10 o be completed and submitted by the applicant . Comments may be written next to the question or on additional paper . Date A //-1 4 l 7 GENERAL IN FO RMAT ION 1 . . ApplicantV✓�%i.5f-7,_ iy n Phone �' `� ' Address V.=l �t �.�� / =:z Property owner �'`/ Phone � /�- •71.,/7 /' i SLS. %/ 17 .� Address 2 , . Location of Proposed Action (Write. Address / Tax lot ; Attach USGStopographic map with affected lands outlined . ) 77 ZoeA�3a Proposed Action Z _ " _ �• Activities and types . of operation resulting from the completion of the proposed action . �� ��fy ✓✓ ,., J /L7 f. /� s� 1A , / C=, ,..J: _� /•-' C-/�. -L ,.fir --5- � ""� (� c1 dh ; : IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED ACTION Site plan b USGS map . 5 . State the time schedules ' forthe proposed action * r Planning `j ' ' �� , /`�/�� Construction Design , Documents= Finished site work S grading Preliminary site work 6 . Describe the proposeci construction techniques to be used if building or site development is involved . Shaw locations and routes to be used on the site plan . Grading and excavation including equipment vehicles and explosives to be used . 1 ' i�/-9 L ' `� i i�l���? %/!a L GYM 'S •j/.�G/C %/O / '� ,!_`-�/ � %G L /�(. �� "/ ' /� LY _ N � /mac c [ ,ii1r7 Transportation of of materials to site / Disposal of waste : .materials / ro.posed chemical treatments , such as herbicides , dust control etc , * r Special techniques to overcome un -isual conditions A/ ',n j , 7. Describe the type of proposed building and site materials to be used . • Foundation Structure HVAC E . . nergy sources �L�-7; < -�4 . . Siding Insulation ?t .2 L.��- � � <<•-�, _, Windows and Glass Roofing -/A / Pavement - �J •u;_ _ �� _._.t . Vegetative cover .-Z) 8 . Total area directly modified by proposed action -'� Z acres . 91 . Total area covered by impervious surfaces : roofs �` �' � sq . ft . parking~' acres roads -� acres la: Gross building sizes : present total / 5L ' . sq . ft . no . of bldgs no . of floors /bldg proposed total / ` ems e` sq . ft . no . of bldgs no . of floors /bldg . future total 44<; c sq . ft . no . of bldgs no . of floors /bldg L 11 . Number of proposed dwelling units Number of proposed commercial units Sizes of units — � ��> � t= � �� !� Sizes of units LL'.. .. Parking : , 50 Qt T E*isting spaces proposed- spaces Traffic generated / daye (Note : Indirect Contamination Source Permit may be - requ' ire' d if . 1000 spaces provided . L3 . Show proposed signs on site plan Size ® sq . ft . height above ground : top ft . ; bottom ft . Wording , Show proposed lights and other poles on site plan . Height above ground _ ft . Total lumens 5 . Name potentially hazardous materials , such as toxic substances , flammables or - explosives to be used or disposed during or after proposed action Purpose of materials (Note : Permits are required from DEC and T . C . Health Dept . ) 6 . If the resulting activities are either commercial or industrial use , write the materials to be transferred to / from the site , their frequency , and the mode of transportation . Imported materials frequency mode Exported materials frequency mode 7 . qescribe project history including controversy perceived bydeveloper ,the litigation , court decisions , etc . 2 COMMUNITY FACTORS AND IMPACTS l Designated zoning of the site of the proposed action ��' y G 7L/2a l 19 . Zoning changes or variances being requested 20 . Check if the site of the proposed action is . within or next to the following Districts or Areas : Agricultural District Historic Preservation District Floodplain ( HUD designated) El Unique Natural Area Freshwater Wetland 21 . Check which land uses describe the neighborhood character . Single -unit residential Recreation Multi-unit residential y Agriculture Commercial Forestry Woodland Industrial Wildlife / Conservation Institutional Inactive Transportation Other 22. 0 Check which public :services are being requested or provided . Sanitary Sewage Gas Water ✓ Electricity Storm drainage Telephone (Note : Permits may - be required from municipality for hook. up . ) 23 . Check which transportation facilities will serve the site_ of the proposed action . State Highway Sidewalks On-street parking County Highway One-way traffic Off street parking , — Town Highway Two-way traffic Bus systems City / Village Street Traffic lights 24 . , Number of existing buildings affected by the proposed action f Show on the site plan . 25 . Name affected buildings or districts known to be historically or archeoogically important or which are listed on the Register of Historic Buildings . Na ^ic Show on the site plan . NATURAL FACTORS AND IMPACTS 26 , Depth to bedrock at site of proposed action . ( Check more than one if necessary) Up to four feet depth Four feet to ten feet .� Greater than ten feet If bedrock depth is less than ten feet check type of bedrock existing at site of proposed action Shale Thinly bedded shale and siltstone Siltstone or sandstone Limestone 3 28 . Check types of topographic features which describe or are found on the site , level or gently rolling plains hilltop hummocks with small ponds ri hillside ✓ glens and gorges valley bottom 29 . Name the soils as identified in the Soil Survey of Tompkins County which are If ound ori the part of the site proposed to be modified . Initials may be used . 5 1 � 4 30 . Briefly describe the nature and extent of proposed modification of existing slopes or soils or drainage . iZ c / 1 7 / /),?Z Yes No 31_: Will any wetlands or adjacent areas be modified by the proposed action ? If so , designate on the site plan the wetlands which will be affected . (Note : "Wetlands " . permit from administering agency required for alteration . ) 32 . - Will any - streams be modified by the proposed action ? If so , designate on the site plan which streams will be modified , (Note : " Dam" or " Disturbance " permit from DEC is required for modifications . ) waste 3q . Will any /materials or effluent be discharged into a stream or groundwaters ? If so , designate on the site plan the streams which will be atf ected , (Note : SPDES permit from DEC is required for discharges . ) 34 . Do any of the following types of vegetation exist on the site of the proposed action ? Stands of mature trees greater than 30 feet tall . ✓ Young tree species less than 30 feet tall , Shrubs „- Terrestrial plants up to two feet high Ferns , grasses , sedges , rushes Aquatic plants Crops 35 • Are any vegetative management techniques currently being practiced on the site of the proposed action ? 36 . � Will any trees or shrubs be removed by the proposed action ? If so . designate on the site plan the area that is to be affected . 370 � Are there any plans for revegetation ? If so , briefly explain . 380 To your knowledge , . are there any rare , endangered or unusual vegetative species which are located on or near the site of the proposed action ? If so , how are � they distributed ? 39 • Will activity rause a change in or affect visual character of natural or cultural landscape features ? 1 . 4 Yes No 4 .0 ' To your knowledge , are there any significant wildlife habitats , migration routes or breeding areas located on or near the site that might be affected by • the proposed action ? 41 . �� To your knowledge , are there any rare , endangered , endemic or unusual wild - life species which are located on the site of the proposed action ? If so , how are they distributed ? 42 , To your knowledge are there any known unique natural features on or near the site of the proposed action ? If so , briefly explain . 43 . Will any of the following emissions be produced by the proposed action or its resulting activities ? If so , describe the cause . ✓ Ashes :J' v, Dust l Fumes Odors Smoke % - i� = i� i< - ,� Other emissions (Note : Air Quality Permits from DEC or T . C . Health Dept . may be required . ) l Will there be changes to existing noise or vibration - levels due to the • proposed action or its resulting activities ? If so , describe the cause , SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS AND IMPACTS 45 . Number of employees during construction - maximum onstruction Maximum number of employees present at the site at one time . 46 . Number of employees during activities after completion 47 . If resulting activities are for either industrial or commercial use , state the employment shifts and number of employees in each shift . Shift Emmpl Shift Empl Shift Empl Shift Empl 48 . If the resulting activities are for residential use , state the number of planned residents . Permanent Seasonal 49 . Briefly describe the nature and amount of indirect growth anticipated as a result of the proposed/ action or resulting activities . , ,0 <' rro /T r ' /, j SC .fti� G2:Y . SCS Sro l) AI7 :� / 0 50 . Existing community or business or facilities or residential structures requiring relocation 5 If the focus of resulting activities is for residential use , check if residence is • intended fore lova income segment high income segment families medium income segment g students elderly 52 . Will proposed activity+ substantially change the following socio-economic population distribution ? Dincome ethnic background race. 8 age 53 • State the current full assessed value : Site Buildings 54 • State the probable full assessed value after completion of the proposed action . Site Buildings Comments . 55 • In your judgement , will the proposed action result in a significant environmental impact during construction and / or . during use after completion ? / Yb Governmental Agencies . 56 . Check the levels of government ana name the agencies having jurisdiction over the proposed action . Indicate the required permits by stating "yes " or "no " • if permit has been approved . ( The following pages of the advise on the types of actions which require particular permits . ) Feder4tl Permits National Pollution Discharge Elimination System . EPA , Region II , NYC Activities in navigable waters . Corps of Engineers , Buffalo Other State Permits Certificate of Compatibility - and Public Need : PSC , DEC Albany (public Utilities ) Dam / Impoundment Construction or Repair : DEC - Envir . Quality Unit , Cortland Disturbance of Stream Bed / Fill of Navigable Waters : DEC -EQ . Unit , Cortland Incinerator Construction or Operation : DEC - EQ Unit , Syracuse Indirect Air Contamination Source : DEC -EQ Unit , Syracuse Mining : DEC-Mineral Resources Bureau , Albany Pesticide Purchase , Use ( 7 permits ) : DEC , Pesticides Bureau , Albany Process , Exhaust , Ventilation. System • Const . or Operation : DEC -EQ , Syracuse Public Water Supply : DEC , Envir . Analysis , Albany ( T . C . Health Dept . review) SPDESe. DEC , Envir . Quality Unit , Syracuse ( T . C . Health Dept . review) Stationary Combustion Installation : DEC -EQ Unit , Syracuse Wetlands /Adjacent Areas Alterations : DEC-EQ Unit , Cortland Other .�----- 6 ,County of Tompkins Driveways , culverts : Highway Dept . Hazardous Wastes . Health Dept . Institutional Use : Health Dept , Mass Gatherings : Health Dept . Offensive Materials ( Scavenger Wastes ) % Health Dept . Public Utility Line Extension : Health Dept . * Restaurant Use : Health Dept . Restricted Burning : Health Dept . ( DEC -EQ Unit review) Sanitary Facilities for Realty Subdivisions : Health Dept . ( DEC-EQ . review) Septic Tank Cleaner / Industrial Waste Collection : Health Dept . ( DEC-EQ review )- Sewage Disposal System : Health Dept . Solid Waste Mgmt . Facility : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) SPDES (Pollution Discharge ) : Health Dept . ( DEC -EQ Unit review ) Swimming Use : Health Dept , Temporary Residence ( Boarding House , Camp , Day Care , Hotel , Motel , Mobile Home Park : Health Dept . Water Supply (Public ) : Health Dept . Wetlands /Alterations : Wetlands Commission / County Clerk Other Town of Ithaca Blasting Public Utility Connection ,i Building Permit Signs ' Street Opening ✓ Subdivision Extraction of Natural Materials Streets and Drainage Land Use Variance Wetlands Alteration Mobile Home Park Zoning Variance - Multiple Residence Other Planned Unit Development 57 • Sources of Public funds ( if any) for proposed action 58 . If federal review under NEPA- is required , name agency Signature / of Applicant Signature of Reviewer Date ji Title Agency Address Date Reviewed 7 /7. ning Board - 6 = May 15 , 1979 Mr . Keller stated that the monument will go right in the middle of Ms . Schmitt ' s driveway , Mr . Fabbroni. concurred that the monument should go , according to • what has been surveyed , right in the middle of Ms . SchmitttIs driveway and be paved over ; it can be driven flush ; the monument would be a 4 " pipe . Mr . Fabbroni felt that it could be worked out amenably ,; noting that it is not preferred_ to have a buried monument , but in this case it would be acceptable . There followed a discussion between Attorney Luster , Ms . Schmitt and Mr . Gates which the Chair ruled out of order . Mr . Jonson noted one more thing that he has put on the maps and that is on the two lots at the end of the cul de sac he has shown proposed house elevations. Chairman Aron declared that in view of the fact that it is now 8 : 15 p . m . and- there was another public hearing scheduled for 8 : 00 p . m . , this public hearing would be closed for approximately 30 minutes in order that the Board may take up the next matter after which the Ivar Jonson matter would be taken up again . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR INLET VALLEY LAND CO- OP , INC . , 171 CALKINS ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , APPROXIMATELY 97 ACRES , JERRY WEISBURD . Chairman Aron declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter • duly opened at 8 : 20 p . m . , and accepted for the record the - Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on May 8 , 1979 , and May 10 , 1979 , respectively . Mr . Jerry Weisburd appeared before the Board with Mr . Dennis Lowes , of Rowell Associates , Surveyors , Planners , Engineers , in Cortland . Mr . Weisburd stated that his proposal for a subdivision involves 98 . 5 acres of land located in an Agriculatural Zone in the Town of Ithaca with frontage, on Calkins Road . He said it is situated right at the bend of Calkins Road on the slope facing the valley . Mr . Weisburd presented a large wooden . scale model of . the land showing in relief the topography , the trees and the existing farmhouse . Mr . Weisburd had four pages of drawings - - final plat , general plans , general specifications for water and general specifi cations for sewer . Mr . Weisburd stated that what he is proposing is an extremely low density type of development which leaves most of the land as open , un - touched recreational and farm land in perpetuity which includes , among other things , an- apple orchard . Mr . Weisburd stated that within the space of 98 acres they are proposing nine proprietary leaseholds or . dwelling units . The first four would be along the southern boundary and would be each 3 to 4 acres ; an additional four on the ridge adjacent to the Glen , also 3 to 4 acres ; and one more , which does not show on the wooden model , but is indicated on the map and has frontage on Calkins Road . He stated that the leaseholds would comprise about 30 acres and • the remaining land would be common land . f� Mr . #Weisburd no one additional change from the informal discussion I with the Board held on April 3 , 1979 , and that . is that they . are proposing to _locate an additional separate leasehold which will be a private school . finning Board - 7 - May L :) ly '( y / He stated that the Hickory Hollow School in Newfield is looking for a new home and they are negotiating with them right now for relocating and building a school house on this parcel . . Mr . Weisburd stated - that , in terms of the Co - Op , it is ' a non - profit corporation and it has been formed and they now own the land and are in the process of approving the corporation through New York State . He said that the members own all the stock . He stated that each stockholder gets a proprietary lease with exclusive right to the leasehold until - they sell the stock . Mr . Weisburd stated that the road will be a private road which will be fully constructed and maintained by the Co - Op . Mr . Weisburd stated that they are getting ready to go the Health Department , Mr . Aron asked if there were any questions from the public ? There were none . Mr . Aron asked if there were any questions from the Board ? Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that she could see that they have a road servicing the lower lots , and she asked about servicing the upper lots . Mr . Weisburd described the service to lot # 8 , to lots # 1 and #2 , branching off to service lots # 3 and #4 , and then a part branching off to the west servicing the remaining lots. . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner noted that if these are private roads they do j not have to be 50 ' or 60 ' widths . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Mr . Weisburd ' s attorney presented to him on Friday the By - Laws of the Inlet Valley Land Co - Operative , Inc . Mr . Fabbroni stated that these by - laws must be reviewed by the Town Attorney for their completeness ; this is required by the Subdivision Regulations . Mr . Fabbroni said - that he expects that the Town Attorney will go over these in detail . ' Mr . Fabbroni spoke to one item having to do with the Town of Ithaca regulations for road , answering Mrs . Bronfenbrenner ' s question , in . that the maintenance of the road . is borne equally by all the leaseholds . Mr . Fabbroni stated that if the developer intends to make the road part of the corporation agreement or by - laws whereby everyone shares in the private maintenance of the roads with . . no . idea of _ ever . giving them to the Town , the Town would review the roads with much different criteria than if he were going to deed them to the Town at some time . Mr . Lowes described the roads in detail . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the Planning Board will review such a road in two different lights depen- ding on the answer to who will own and maintain them in the future . Mr . Weisburd stated that it is absolutely positive that the roads . will ' be private and maintained by the Co - Op forever . i Mrs : Bronfenbrenner wondered about a cul de sac for a turn - around Wor emergency vehicles . Mr . Fabbroni felt that it was kind of meaningless for the kind of road we are looking at - - first of all the road is way in excess of 500 ' and it is steep . Mrs '. Bronfenbrenner asked about fire protection and ambulances getting I • . tinning Board - 8 - . May . 15 , 1979 to the area . Mr . Lowes stated that the slope would be a 1076 maximum . Mr . Weisburd stated that they should be well within the limits of the Town specifications for maximum grade . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that they will still need a turn - around . Mr . Weisburd agreed and stated that they will be able to put that in . Town Councilman Gust Freeman stated that obviously the developers have not been to the banks about the possibility of mortgages on a private road . Mr . Weisburd wondered why he said obviously . Mr . Freeman replied that banks will not give mortgages on private roads . Mr . Weisburd said that this is not true ; they have been to the banks . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the ' Town Attorney will want the rights of the leaseholders to access to their properties spelled out clearly . Mr . Fabbroni said that the preliminary map showed over a 10% slope , but the map , or survey , shows it better . Mr . Fabbroni said that this is prefer - = able to the farm .road that is there now . Mr . Baker agreed . Mr'. Fabbroni commented while the discussion is on the road , with that type of grade more information :need be shown on how runoff is controlled . i Mr . Lowes explained to Mr . Fabbroni and the Board that this is underway . Mr . Lowes described the drainage referring to the map . Mr . May noted that they are proposing 9 leaseholds plus the school , therefore , there will be 10 . Mr . Weisburd agreed . • Mr . Weisburd stated that they have people interested in the old farmhouse . He said that they have offered them membership in the Co - Op but they are leaning away from that . He stated that he did not know if that would be a problem or not ; right now the Co - Op owns the entire parcel . He said he would like to leave that as an option for them ; hopefully when they come back with the Health Department approval and other decisions they will have that worked out . Councilman Freeman wondered what would happen if at some time in the future one of these gentlemen wishes to sell his stock ? Mr . Fabbroni explained that the Town Attorney will - attend to that kind of question in his review . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the developer will have to submit a long form Environmental Assessment Statement with this project . Mr . Lowes stated that the form is completed and he presented it to Mr . Fabbroni . Mr . Fabbroni wished to know what the developer was proposing , if anything , for the old dam that is in the creek , Woodcock Creek , and also to what extent they may be considering using the gravel areas on the site ? • Mr . Weisburd stated that they will have more of an answer to the second question at the time of the next meeting - - they are afraid that they might damage the property too much if they do any gravel extraction . He asked if , on the first question , Mr . Fabbroni wanted to know about the dam in r.elations . to the school ? Mr . Fabbroni stated that it was the schoolito which he was referring and noted that there may have to be some , anning Board - 9 - May 15 , 1979 A - ^ sort of sophisticated pressure system insofar as fire protection for the school goes . Mr . Weisburd stated that the school would be of frame construction with direct access to the outside ; there would probably not � e pressurized sprinkler systems . Mr . Weisburd stated that they are keeping in mind the reservoir for a source of water for the farmland . i Mr . Fabbroni stated that most of his other questions have to do with some things that he would pursue with Mr . Weisburd in the by - laws in the course of an office meeting , if that is alright with the Board ; there are some questions that can be cleared up before discussions with Mr . - Buyoucos . Mr . Fabbroni asked if the developer were planning on individual wells ? Mr . Weisburd stated that they were . Mr . Fabbroni pointed out to the developer that he must be aware of the Health Department regulations with regard to SPEDES permits , etc . , which will be a requirement of any final approval . r Mr . Stanton commented that this proposal seems to him * to be a much better use of land in an agricultural zone that the typical division of agricultural land . He noted that one of the Planning Board members is a full - time farmer , and he wondered if he agreed . Mr . Baker stated that he agreed that this was a good proposal for the land in question . There . being no further discussion , the Chair declared the Public Hearing in the matter of the consideration of preliminary subdivision approval for the Inlet Valley Land Co - Op on approximately 98 acres duly closed at 8 : 45 p . m . �. Mr . May commented that this looks like a nice project . MOTION by Mrs . Liese Bronfenbrenner , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca grant and hereby does grant preliminary subdivision approval for Inlet. Valley Land Co - Operative Inc . , 171 Calkins Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 33 - 1 - 4 , approximately 98 . 5 acres , as presented on May 15 , 1979 , on map entitled , " Final Plat , Inlet Valley Land Cooperative Inc . , Owner : Jerold M . Weisburd ; Part of Lot 79 , Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , Project No . 1938 , " drawn by Rowell and Associates P . C . , 111 West Road , Cortland , N . Y . 13045 , subject to the review and approval of the By - Laws of said Cooperative by the Town Attorney and subject to the approval of the Town Engineer of drainage and roadway plans . By way of discussion , Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed out Appendix A of the Subdivision Regulations referring to Section 277 ( Approval of Plats ; Additional Requisites ) and in particular the final paragraph thereof which stated that the Planning Board may waive certain provisions . The Board agreed that it will address those matters at the time of final discussion . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Aron , May , Bronfenbrenner , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker. , Stanton . Nay - None . ®:abstain - Mazza . Mr . . Mazza stated that he abstained due to a possible conflict of interest . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MEMORANDUM TO : Noel Desch , Supervisor Town of Ithaca FROM : Henry Aron , Chairman Planning Board RE : Proposed Benefit Formula R)J1 DATE : July 17 , ' 1979 As the Planning Board Secretary has already informed you by telephone , the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , at its regular meeting of July 10 , 1979 , unanimously approved the following resolution and recommended that the Town Board so amend the Town of Ithaca Benefit Formula . RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca . recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board that the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer Benefit Formula adopted November 18 , 1971 , lamended December 13 , 1977 , be further amended by adding the following paragraph to said Water and Sewer Benefit Formula , as amended : " In an approved subdivision where a developer has constructed an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector • serving part or all of the subdivision , the benefit on that portion of the subdivision served shall be determined by the standard provisions herein as if the utility improvements did not exist for a period of five ( 5 ) years after construction of same has been approved except that the sale , land contract or lease of any lot in any manner or the issuance of a permit to build on a lot to anyone will make such lot ( s ) subject -to the standard provisions herein and all the remaining land will be subject to standard provisions herein at the end of the five ( 5 ) years . The developer .must certify his ownership annually to the Town Clerk between September 1 and October 1 . " The entire membership of the Planning Board was present for this discussion and after considerable discussion of the pros and cons and the receipt of input from several developers present , and further , after discussion of the above - noted Motion before them , the Board lent its full support to this proposal for Benefit Formula Revision . As Chairman of the Planning Board and on its behalf I am urging that the Town Board give favorable consideration to the enactment of this proposed amendment to the Town of Ithaca Water and Sewer Benefit Formula , as amended . Thank you . • . PROPOSED BENEFIT FORMULA REVISION - - - - - - ,CANS Bk� Vk'4oPlyJkW - - , r ; . 1 1 TFR CoNS7?QvCTSurMiry I iT IS gCCjCP7`fi0 I i ° 1 MO, FoN OFY�X 0 /�E� SECS4CA /YO1IS of NO NM O'rI4 TO B t/ Y � 1 1 ; 1 i � 1 i Dk-Vk-40PkR GE7 _z PkVMirl PAYS PER 4oT y�AR $ L "7' 6ui4D ON A 4oT 6AXIS 0 PSk S PAYS ArR 4c07% eASiS CW 407-5 4WA YJ PeFOO SAW s�so46r w Ct(oT i I • 1 I I I ' 10 1 } I i In an approved subdivision where a developer has constructed W .an approved water distribution main and / or a sanitary sewer collector serving part or all of the subdivision , the benefit ± on that portion of the subdivision served shall be determined by the standard provisions be4L n a elf the utility improvements did not exist for a period oft ( 3 ) years after construct C of LANd �okTI�A�T o, _ i_�q s sae has been approved except th. t lvthe salel of any lot in any manner or the issuance of a permit to build on a lot to anyone will make such lot ( s ) subject to the standard provisions herein and all the remaining land will be subject to standard provisions herein at the end of the thAyears . The developer must certify his ownership annually to the Torn Clerk between September 1 and October 1 . June . 11 , - 1979 . . 1 AO ca : � . Y .. .� + . ii . .4� J. It . .o : � � . . ' .a`., . a y4 TOWN OF ITHACA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM To be completed 'and submitted by the applicant . Comments may be written next to the question or on additional paper . Date GENERAL INFORMATION 1 . AP! Plicant Lagrand E . Chase Co . , Inc . Phone ( 607 ) 257 - 1777 _ Address 180 Pleasant Grove Road , Ithaca , New York 14850 Property owner Nellie F . Chase Estate Phone Address c / o Lagrand E . Chase Co . , Inc . , Ithaca , New York Location of Proposed Action (Write Address / Tax lots Attach USGS topographic map With affected lands outlined . ) Ri. dgecrest Road , Tax Map ## 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 . 2 3 . Proposed Action Homesites 4 . ctivities and types . of operation resulting from the completion of the proposed tion . , Residential Activities IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED ACTION Site plan b USGS map ' • 5 , ' State the time schedules@forthe proposed action : • Present Construction ;.b1 ' 9 Planning Design , Documents Present. Finished site work b grading Preliminary site work Summer 1979 Fall 1979 6 . Describe the proposed construction techniques routes toused beiusedionitheositesite plan . development is involved . SI locations _ Grading and excavation including equipment vehicles and explosives to be usede Conventional Transportation of materials to site Conventional � isposa.l of vaste: .iaat_ erialIs Conventional Proposed chemical treatments , such as herbicides , dust control etc . Conventional Special techniques to overcome, u_-cuspal conditions Describe the type of proposed building and site materials to be usede dation ructure HVAC Energy sources Siding Insulation Windows and Glass Roofing Pavement Vegetative cover Total area directly modified by proposed action 1 + acres . Total area covered by impervious surfaces . roofs Unknown sq , ft . parking acres roads 1- acres Gross building sizes : Unknown present total _ sq . ft . no . ' of bldgs no , of floors /bldg proposed total sq . ft . . no . of bldgs no , of floors /bldg .—___--_ future total sq . ft . no * of bldgs no . of floors /bldg _ Number of proposed-dwelling units 19_ Number of proposed commercial units - - Sizes of . units".jlnknnwn ;3 Sizes of units Q'istifig spaces proposed spaces Traffic generated / d .q Unk'o ~ (Note : Indirect Contamination Source Permit may be . required � if_ 1000 spaces - provided: ' Show proposed signs on site plan Size sq . fte height above ground : top ft . ; bottom ft . Wording : Shaw proposed lights and other poles on site plan . Height above ground ft . Total lumens Name potentially hazardous materials , such as toxic. substances , flammables or explosives to be used or disposed during or after proposed action Purpose of materials (Note : Permits are required from DEC and T . C . Health Dept . .) If the resulting activities are either commercial or industrial use , write the materials to be transferred to / from the site , their frequency , and the mode of transportation . Imported materials frequency - mode � orted materials frequency mode Describe project history including controversy perceived by the developer , litigation , * court decisions , etc . None 2 COMMUNITY FACTORS AND IMPACTS he proposed action R- 15 esignated zoning of the site of t . a . � . Zoning changes or variances being requested _None - • Check if the site . of the proposed action is . vithin or next to the following Districts or Areas : Historic Preservation District Agricultural District Floodplain ( HUD designated) Unique Natural Area Freshwater Wetland Check which land uses describe , the neighborhood character . � X Single -unit residential Recreation Multi-unit residential Agriculture Commercial Forestry Woodland Wildlife / Conservation Industrial Institutional Inactive Other Transportation 2 . Check which public services are being requested or provided . X Sanitary Sewage Electricity X Water N Storm drainage Telephone Note : Permits may required from municipality for hook-up . ) Check which trans ortation facilities vi11 serve the site of the proposed action . 3 . p On -street parking State Highway Sidewalks County Highway One-way traffic Off street parking Town Highway Two-way traffic Bus system Xs City / Village Street Traffic lights / !4 . Number of existing buildings affected by the proposed action : - Show on the site plan . Name affected buildings or districts known to be historically or rngscheologically 5 important or which are listed on the Register of Historic BuiShow on the site plan . NATURAL FACTORS AND IMPACTS 26 . Depth to bedrock at site of proposed action . ( Check more than one if necessary) Up to four feet depth X Four feet to ten feet Greater than ten feet 27 If bedrock depth is less than ten feet - check type of bedrock existing at site of •proposed action Sh alc Thinly bedded shale and siltstone Siltstone or sandstone _ _ _ . _ - • Limestone 3 , g • Check types of topographic features which describe or are found on the site . • level or gently rolling plains hilltop hummocks with small . ponds hillside glens and gorges valley bottom 9 • Name the soils as identified in the Soil Survey of Tompkins County which are found on the part /of the site proposed to be modified . Initials may be used . D . Briefly describe the nature and extent of proposed modification of existing slopes or soils or drainage loco culYtr� lo �� .'mss ?//�.� u ��e -1 ny✓�� s �� r � �c✓�'� �� a Yes No Will any wetlands or adjacent areas be modified by the proposed action ? If so , designate on the site planthe wetlands which will be affected . (Note : "Wetlands ". . permit from administering agency required for alteration . ) 2 • Will any - streams be modified by -the proposed action? If so , designate on the site plan which • streams will be modified . (Note : " Dam" or " Disturbance" permit from -DEC is required for modifications . ) waste 3 • X Will any /materials or effluent be discharged into a -stream or groundwaters ? If so , designate on the site plan the streams which will be .aff ected . (Note : SPDES permit from DEC is required for discharges . ) ' 4 • Do any of the following types of vegetation exist on the site of the proposed action? Stands of mature trees greater than 30 feet tall . X Young tree . species less than 30 feet tall-. X Shrubs X Terrestrial plants up to two feet high X1 A Ferns , grasses , sedges , rushes Aquatic plants Crops ;5 • 1 Are any vegetative management techniques currently being practiced on the site of the proposed action ? 106 • 1 X I Will any trees or shrubs be removed by the proposed action ? If so . ' designate on the site plan the area that is to be affected . 107 • lJJ Are there any plans for revegetation ? If so , briefly explain . Lawn seeding �g • 1--� To your knowledge , . are there any rare , endangered or unusual vegetative species which are located on or near the site of the proposed • action? If so , how are ' they distributed ? 39 • 'T T1 Will activity cause a change in or affect visual character of natural or cultural landscape features ? 4 Yes No To your knowledge , are there any � gnrfne� tar thewildlife thatimight begaffected ration *= routes or breeding areas located by • the proposed action ? Z , To your knowledge , are there any rare , endangered , endemic or unusual wild- life species which are located on the. site of the proposed action? If so , how are they distributed ? �_ . To your knowledge are there any known unique natural features on or near the site of the proposed action? If so , briefly , explain . a will any of the following emissions be produced by the proposed action or 3 its resulting activities ? If so , describe the cause . Ashes Dust - Fumes X Odors X Smoke X Other emissions (Note : Air Quality Permits from DEC or T . C . Health Dept . , may be required . ) 4 Will there be changes to existing noise or vibration levels due to the proposed action or its resulting activities ? If so , describe the cause % SOCIO-ECONOMIC FACTORS AND IMPACTS 5 • Number of employees during construction . 5=� � Maximum number of employees present at the site at one time ^1D+ 6 . . Number of employees* during activities after completion 7 . _ If resulting activities are for either industrial each or commercial use , state the employment shifts and number of employees in Shift E7# 1 Shift Empl Shift Empl Shift Empl 8 . If the resulting activities are for residential use , state the number of planned residents . Permanent In F . mi l i n e Seasonal 19 . Briefly describe the nature and amount of indirect growth anticipated as a result of the proposed action or resulting activities . Ten Famil ' Ps 50 . Existing counity or business or facilities or residential structures requiring • relocation . - 5 . 51f the focus of resulting activities is for residential use , check if residence is ntended for : ( ��'� families 0 lou income . segment high income segment students elderly . X medium income segmen Rt g u 1 osed activitysubstantially change the following socio-economic population 52 . Will pro P distribution? ethnic background income 8 race age 53 • State the ; ' urrent full assessed value : Buildings ' 24 400 . 00 Sita the proposed action . 51t. State the probable full assessed value after completion of y Site Buildings - Comments . In our judgement , will the proposed action result - in a s completion ? environmental 55 • y impact during construction and / or during us Governmental Agencies . None Is having jurisdiction over the 56 . Check the levels of government and name the agenciestatinn Indicate the required permits by g "yes " or "no" ' if permit proposed action . es of thy " - has been approved . ( The . following p ages advise on the types of actions •which require particular permits . Federal Permits �pA � Region ZZ , NYC National Pollution Discharge EliminatBoofSystem . Engineers , Buffalo Activities in navigable waters . Corp Other State Permits Certificate of Compatibility - and Public Need : PSC , Albany i� ;iCortlianaies , Dam / Impoundment Construction or Repair : DEC - En Quality Unit Cortland Disturbance of Stream Bed / Fill of Navigable Waters : DEC -EQ , s Incinerator Construction or Operation : DEC - EQ Unit , Syracuse Indirect Air Contamination Source : DEC-EQ Unit , Syracuse Hining : DEC -Mineral ResourcesBureaus Albany Pesticides BureauAlbany Pesticide Purchase , Use ( 7 p 0 ' ess Syracuse Process , Exhaust , Ventilation System Const . or Operation : DECC-DQpt . Yzeview) x Public Water Supply : _ DEC , Envir . Analysis , Albany (T . SPDES : DEC , Envir . Quality Unit , Syracuse (T . C . Health Dept . review) Stationary Combustion Installation : DEC-EQ Unit , Syracuse - Wetlands /Adjacent Areas Alterations : - DEC-EQ Unite - CoXtland . Other 6 County of Tompkins None Driveways , culverts : Highway Dept . - Hazardous Wastes : Health Dept . Institutional Use : Health Dept . Mass Gatherings : Health Dept . t . Offensive Materials ( Scavenger Wastes ) : Health Dept . Public Utility Line Extension : Health Dept . • t Restaurant Use : Health De P - ' Restricted Burning : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) ( DEC-EQ review) Sanitary Facilities for Realty Subdivisions : Health Dept . Septic Tank Cleaner / Industrial Waste Collection : Health Dept . ( DEC-EQ review) Sewage Disposal System : Health Dept . Solid Waste Mgmt . Facility : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) SPDES (Pollution Discharge) : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) Swimming Use : Health Dept . Temporary Residence ( Boarding House , Camp , Day Care , Hotel , Motel , Mobile Park Health Dept . Water Supply (Public) : Health Dept . Wetlands /Alterations : Wetlands Commission / County Clerk Other — . Town of Ithaca Public Utility Connection Blasting Building Permit Signs Street Opening X Subdivision Extraction of Natural Materials Streets and Drainage Land Use Variance Wetlands Alteration Mobile Home Park Zoning Variance Multiple Residence Other Planned Unit Development . Sources of Public funds ( if any) for proposed action . If federal review under NEPk is required , name agency JSignature of Reviewer gnature of App icant . - Title to Agency Address Date Reviewed p,•ee Blow SWANSON (RO3 ,`177f 111 I 1� 4 3IS / 302 . D • Ml.a ' ` .. • '' (J a It f • Ott T a 1 • ` . E'^ ' . ._.. •Mae _ h1, '^ 1 f • I ..r ...1. MEA N 7 - 5 1` . ., -) ) 06 — — ; P"/•%•, aT�� Qof ' 5 O 3 } I , I. .6 �M. 10 Alm4 / _ 00 � _._ � e•••�a• I ,� * •a SLQPC Y4 F ! R FOOT ( IYi It 11" MIN. 2 1 I F I • ,�,I / - \ 1 I SLOPE 3U yRAI• V{" PlR FOOT 1 ` 1 FILL. tECT10RI � CUT SEGTIO ►.1 ON �1 y I , „M., O 5TAWDARD ROAD CQ055 SECTION 1 _ 0 1 a Z i s ,ei•• Q 1 a t �• a ' ���• f 40 .•46 0 OF � �. •,....e .,�? P to =9� pTN� Pa 040 L LILL o e O OIW BIW . t«u •O 4 � a - • _ \ Eby - Y • dp Z O \J • '� - 4 5 O'_ Z c . a � � 680 ito 3 41 i Be O\Of one PS T FE E 2ORN . 2 - Q O .� RE ir $. AT WOOD . une e••a'M . MEA STAKE PP S 1 -231W - *WSJA f 2 E A � `t + ' 10 % SOT a TOWN HACA — . 15 6 44A 1296 z�a IMINER VLOI 0183 . ...• i , . � � �1G . R01 � 49 M - 14 0 F (PO ex 29 .MIa RE SOv?H O . nn'• , w11. 0/ !S6'J , . • OQ 1/ CROSS (�0 to .,.•►• Qf �p� 1 ' PERE I (110 s6119'J� ^ 0 ..Ma..N 81t 1W PE PF. 20• P _ _ M�a a J_- e`e'..` } AS. 4jf 10.9 T0TI� Q (app BR wN a , ' 4 • 'i BUN ItOLD.) t1 R•0� SRASI! 64� y7O/ 237 : . . ILSIOR1t lR OJ 474/ 296 I BROCKWAY (R.0.1 SHAR 471/ 142 C3 ' 530/ 31sc3DC111 S,37/ �I POOL 0.2 Q ••o,,,,a� R � Qp 044 3 • NOTES • . , _ . . . . • - DATUM OF ELEVATIONS O S a APPROXIMATE U. S.0 . 5. - ' BM IB BASE OF TOWN OF ITHACA WATER TANK a 1416.00 ' 7/5/19 ARY LaYovT COORDINATES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE N.Y•8. PLANE • COORDINATES D I• GROPlev" ER CO. , INC. ASSUMED AT INTERSECTION EAST KING ROAD AND RIDGECREST ROAD N 675.580.00 e E 527, 050.00 . a ..• . .�_ • 100 OGR BOWNDARY MAP AREA WITHIN PARCEL a 29.1 ACRES RASE , . pQ OF L DS GECREST A TOWN OF TTNA TOMPKINSall S MAY 319 1979 1 1 1 I I T G . MILLER P. wneurwa ENGINEERS AND SURVEYO 9 ITHACA , NEW YORK 3 � F � 1 a1.•°• S y 8a g SWANSON ( R. 0.1 Q \ L « 315 / 502 1 ; , e g 0 all. 1 � N 7°- 5 1008.91 w°.. MEAS, - - � E� - stl s - - ry --- -- --- - --Aft c 10 � j" ---� � \ \ � 11,•.1 , __"+{- .+,a __ ., - __►.�-_._.___ ._ __a....�-__ _. ..p...,o_ '�.,,.,..:- „,,m__ _ p”, MO)O - AV �� \ � � � � I ! � •tttMt « • r ! \k PC lift 15 In In y z 2 v I \ I fro FILL SECTfCly C c . O I .Q O • I O t `O © �F F CµAgE f �'• ,I,o•.o % P Q �O aa�9F OTHER EAN05 0 1 Loco • \ 1 :(� 04 $ wm F �CA �O70, gno J atmm P° 1 t I0IW 140? 2 O U F 9 1 t I W . IU1.e \ I G </CDtL - 9i "s .; oy Z O \ -r 1 N <1) e �O E 1 O \ ��1 // ♦ 9 a to _ \\\\ \ Z W W �+ _-.�- :-- 1 i \ \ \\ k� • .r » s.rr. a. 6 .wT60t 3 I1 •• O \ � l 80 s� \ + « 3 iv1 N '• . \ } On „ PSL \.JNt .. 0 Q -• / �. Ov F 1 = 1 e o g 2 . - +o illi Jl 00 '� ' \y • \ \ . NOR ! _ +i '1 m ' 04fir. at or ab 14000 61 i o: a O. v" 9 „ , # . Olt 1x .rtu.t , ^ a �F, I it ('O ' l PS- T FE E C / ORN . 1410. 7 � \ tt,poaa ta•pOa _ _ S. AT WOOD PZ - _ x'. :... / _ 7 PE MEAnnnn tE' STAKE W - 1 g Nt,.t s _ , u,•., 7E S i - 23 a (� In O - - . - o ap 't TOWN 0 HACA _ G\ '15' _ — - ( ^, _ + 10 C I IOT A O ; 3 Vs ^ �t I ^.,: ' $PWYq4mo.) 65 •nism 0 VTH N. / 01 4 / 296 MIN4g9/ g" i BM - 14 .0 / Q Q OAV 561/ 929 nnnnnnn, WILCO% (R•0' « M Q So • (R.0) 500/ 583 I E 1 9 p R Oa CRO1�IE933 I e •o• • ' ' _ s S. • �` � ' I 1 ITS pE yp3/ 1037 I E N 81'! 1 W gF. 1 29� a D = N ° 11 tl•.a'. C ' O ,ItH. t �� S $a tog 3 IT ta.o I PF. 201 p c PF- > f?F ` D- o ... - waw• 11 ' G10.J/1' TUT , � I \ \ a gR WN 'N , 0.1 VAIENTINO 37 0] / 3 1 BURGESS296 I g GRASSO (R 570 / 2 , i1AlLSTORK (R Ol 474/ 296 BROCKWAY (R.O.) gHARP (R.0) 552/ 9 N ��; H 530/ 318 557/ 785l42 QI t El I c i FFF1 z / -- " Y � a 1 I . . I , 0 1 • s , , - , ._ a- 2 tai• -f - y + • .. ill1 I G+' i� O13TTBJ D , fox _P "c z M.,. R o f r! t f . I CD , 70cl .t,wot 1P60Sair{ ' Y I I J n n u ' ° NOTES ° * 'u �oi� o " onw ; . � 1z + Z DATUM OF ELEVATIONS • APPROXIMATE V. S. G . S. 4 ?; � �;: n 1-____._ + Q n y, - +Y n m F_ v , LT wG GROUND Q n. n h BM IS BASE OF TOWN OF lTHACA WATER TANK 1416.00 " - — SSG-SS �'x 7 < sF COORDINATES SHOWN ARE APPROXIMATE N.Y.S. PLANE . COORDINATES " -� - '-- -�� J U L 511979 PRELIMINARYL AY LI: 50 ASSUMED AT INTERSECTION EAST KING ROAD AND RIDGECREST ROAD - - - _ - /_ R • - . DITCH 5 0 5 _ y / L. MOW. N 875 . 580.00 , E 527. 050. 00 . — -- --- HI w8( BC711 AREA WITHIN PARCEL • 29.1 ACRES oI ! jo. a7=_-. - --- - - 50• 25• o so 100' TOPOGRAP C M LAGRAND — - - 7S 0 =-_ -- NARY AIS -- _ __. __ I . _ . _. 75 ... 4E'�F NEW n_. � PORTIOP� OF _ • LbANDS*f OF4 CHASE :" RIDGECREST ROAD > t TOWN OF ITHACA TOMPKINS COUNTY, N . 9D 0 +60 - - - _. ; .. _ . 1 +70 . 2«y, _ :� - _ ,+ , a+oc e. :r , . ., � .a , _ �,� _ . ' MAY 31 , 1979 SCALE I"• 5 1 _• a � r��Fli.E n(' III 1 /, T. G . MILLER PC . } FR t�Q I > RONL: ANNA__ Y =.tq '_ �E •oc«arNa,. 1ENGINEERS AND SURVEYORS t ITHACA , NEW YORK