No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1979-09-18 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SEPTEMBER 18 , 1979 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , September 18 , 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Vice - Chairman Montgomery May , Edward Mazza , Carolyn Grigorov , James Baker , Barbara Schultz , Liese Bronfenbrenner , Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) , Barbara Z . Restaino ( Planner ) , ABSENT and EXCUSED : Henry Aron , Bernard Stanton , ALSO PRESENT : Lagrand E . Chase , Randy Chase , Evan Monkemeyer , Councilman George Kugler , Susan E . Perry , Steve Schnoll ( WTKO ) . Vice - Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 35 p . m . Vice - Chairman May presented for the record the Clerk ' s Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings for the two Public Hearings to be held by the Planning Board , in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on September 10 , 1979 , and September 13 , 1979 , respectively . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED SUBDIVISION , 10 LOTS BACKLOT OF RIDGECREST ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 , 2 . LAGRAND E . CHASE . ( ADJOURNED FROM SEPTEMBER 4 , 1979 . ) Vice - Chairman May stated that Mr . Lagrand Chase spoke to -him 'before the meeting and requested that ., the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter be adjo rned in because of insufficient documentation , on his part . He aske �thate 'Public Hearing be tentatively set again for October 2 , 1979 ) but that he will inform the Secretary more specifically prior to that date . Vice - Chairman May declared the adjourned Public Hearing duly adjourned until a later date , The matter will be re - advertised at the appropriate time . REPORT OF THE TOWN ENGINEER Mr . Fabbroni reported that the main item is that construction on the Stone Quarry Road water project has started as of Friday , actually , with them starting to lay pipe on Monday . . He stated that the line is 7 , 000 feet in length and is expected to be substantially completed in one month and a half . Mr . Fabbroni reported on the sewer project ( 5 - area ) that has been . on - going for 1 - 1 / 2 years . He noted that they are seeding the areas that have washed out . Mr . May asked if the Burns Road pump station is operational ? Mr . Fabbroni replied that it was except for a circuitry problem , He stated that there is. a circuit breaker that is had in one of the other pump sta - _ _ tions . Mr . Fabbroni reported that one propertyls pins must ' be located , He noted that some re - seeding is still to be done . Mr . Fabbroni noted that there are some private problems between the Town and landowners . Mr ' . Fabbroni reported that the Town is planning on building the salt shed this fall at the Highway Facility . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the Town is planning small , sewer extensions AN ,, .Planning Board - 2 - September 18 , 1979 off Elm Street , Valley View and one short one off Slaterville Road . He pointed out that with that short extension all the houses in the Town on Slaterville Road will be served . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the Town has completed the work on the Snyder Hill Road storm sewer project . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Mrs . Restaino might want to go into parks . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the Town is getting into more drainage projects . He stated that we have some work we are doing and yet to do on Christopher Circle , Blackstone Avenue , and McIntyre Place . Mr . Fabbroni noted that on McIntyre Place we are going to fill in the rest of the ditch and that something has to be done with the shoulder . Mrs . Grigorov stated that the work done on Snyder Hill Road is excellent . She noted that some stuff was put on top of the drainage pipe , but there is a bare area . Mr . Fabbroni stated that there is in place straw and mulch and suggested that it just be left alone and it should take . Mrs . Restaino reported that she had spoken earlier in the month about the progress on the Parks ' project . She reported that we have finished up in Eastern Heights and we are proceeding with the Tareyton Drive Park , Mrs . Restaino stated that , at the request of Mr . May , she has had some maps made up showing the various parks in the Town . Mrs . Restaino distributed a map to each Board member . ., Mrs . Restaino reported that the Town has written a formal report to Cornell University on its proposal for the bikeway and has received posi - tive feed - back - from various interested parties , except Cornell . Mrs . Restaino reported that , in connection with the salt shed , we are also planning on landscaping the Town Highway Facility . She said that it should make the area much more attractive . Mrs . Restaino referred to the draft of the Zoning Ordinance revision , 94 pages , that the members were just handed , and stated that it is the finished product of over a year ' s work by the Codes and Ordinances Commit - tee . She noted that this is a draft only . She stated that each member ' s comments should be written on his / her draft copy and returned to Town Hall by Wednesday , October 10 , 1979 . She stated that the Committee will compile all the comments and corrections that the members and others make . Mr . May thanked Mrs . Restaino for the map showing the various Town parks , but commented that he did not see the Sandra Place vest pocket park on there . Mrs . Restaino stated that Sandra Place park is not something that the Town has had in its ' park projects for this year . Mr . Fabbroni stated that Sandra Place park has been a low priority all along . He noted that anything that is done there must be done in close consultation with the two property owners nearby . Mr . Fabbroni recalled that it had been decided not to open Sandra Place and the result is that the two houses face on what was to be the road . He commented that anything that is done would be , for all practical purposes , in the front lawn of those two houses . He added that it is quite likely that they would want nothing there . Mr . May said that he agreed but suggested that it should be seeded and a bikeway or walkway put in . Mr . Fabbroni noted that anything .Planning Board - 3 - September 18 , 1979 that would be done , would be done next year anyway as part of the budget . PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR 5 - LOT SUBDIVISION ON EAST KING ROAD , TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL N0 , 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 3 , A PORTION THEREOF , EVAN N . MONKEMEYER , Vice - Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted matter duly opened at 7 : 50 p . m . Mr . Evan Monkemeyer appeared before the Board and stated that the Board members had all received the copies of the Environmental Assessment Form and the preliminary subdivision map , as required . The Board members noted that they had been mailed the material with their Agenda . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that the parcel in question is located 500 to 1 , 000 feet east of the intersection of Danby Road and East King Road . out Mrs . Bronfenbrenner pointed / that Mr . Monkemeyer had mentioned only four houses in the EAF , and wondered if the other one is already there . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that it was . Mr . Monkemeyer explained the reasoning for having a 5 - lot subdivision , as opposed to a 4 - lot subdivision . He stated that the primary reason for the fifth lot being there is - because NYSEG requires a minimum of five lots for underground lighting . He stated that he would like to have everything underground like it is at Springwood . Mr . Monkemeyer described his plans . He stated that the houses will be somewhat similar to what is there now - - 1 , 200 to 1 , 500 sq . ft . - - with two - car attached garages . He said there will be a lot or a home designed • for a young family or an older family where the children have left . He noted that he has planned also for the fifth lot , a good 100 feet as the right of way . He stated that , in terms of good planning principles , he has supplied enough land area for a green belt effect , and also , in lieu of park space . He noted that the area he is talking about is probably less than 1 / 2 acre in size . Mr . Monkemeyer pointed out that to the east end of the property there is a small six foot strip which opens up to about twelve feet which he would reserve for drainage . This would catch the runoff from the uphill property . He noted that between each lot he will run a drainage trench . He stated that their property lines would have a separa- tion on the rear boundary such as a swale . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked if there were public sewer available ? Mr . Monkemeyer replied that there was not , however , there is public water . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner wondered if the lots were large enough for the Tomp - kins County Health Department regulations for lot size ? Mr . Fabbroni replied that the lots appear to be of sufficient since there is one public utility in place , and a lot need only be 100 feet . Mr . Mazza asked Mr . Monkemeyer how much land he owns up in the area . Mr . Monkemeyer replied that he owns about 27 or 28 acres to the rear . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that all of the homes that will be built will have an orientation to the south to pick up the impact of solar potential from the hill . He stated that he is offering to all buyers a solar option for hot water heating . He noted that the major roof areas all are oriented to the south . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that to the west of this property is another piece of land owned by his father , Herbert Monkemeyer , containing about 100 to 150 acres . Mr . Monkemeyer recalled for the Board that he had put forth to the Planning Board some time ago a proposal for the possibilities of a bike path going to Ithaca College . He stated that he was just throwing ; .Planning Board - 4 - September 18 , 1979 this out for the Board to think about for the future . Mr . Monkemeyer described a Homeowner ' s Warranty program in which he participates , noting that he is the only builder in the area participating in this program . Mr . Monkemeyer described the warranties , guarantees , etc . of the protection plan . IHe noted that this is a national program supplied by an insurance company and sponsored by the National Association of Home Builders . Vice - Chairman May stated that the Board would now turn to the matter of the Environmental Assessment Form , and asked for any comments from Mr . Fabbroni . Mr . Fabbroni stated that most of his comments are reflected in the Form that the Board has before them . He stated that he has been over it with Mr . Monkemeyer and his comments are reflected in it . He commented that it is fairly straight forward . He noted that the original intent was to subdivide the frontage on East King Road only , and the fifth lot came into the picture because of the underground utilities . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the yard lot swales are the main thing he would look for and they are sufficient . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the plan itself which he has presented is a complete type plan for a pre - liminary hearing . Mr . May noted that lot # 5 fronts on the proposed roadway . Mr . Monkemeyer confirmed this . Mr . May asked if the Board members had reviewed this Form . Everyone had . Mr . Mazza referred to the sign noted and asked if there is going to be a sign for each lot ? Mr . Monkemeyer replied that this sign is there already and will move as each house is being built . Mr . May asked if there were any further discussion on the EAF . There was none at this point . Mr . May asked for any questions from the public . There was none . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner referred to the ditches and asked if they turn into the King Road ditch ? Mr . Fabbroni stated that the front yard drainage goes into King Road ; for the back yards that will take shape as the area develops . He stated that at this point there is all empty land below , and the water could go north . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner wondered if this would complicate any other drainage problems ? Mr . Monkemeyer described the drainage flow all the way down , in detail , to the creek near Buttermilk Falls . He stated that his drainage plans will not complicate any drainage patterns . Mr . Mazza asked if there were going to be culvert built here ( indica - ting on map ) ? Mr . Monkemeyer replied that there was - - either 24 " or 30 " . Mr . Fabbroni stated that that is plenty for the beginning of the drainage course . Mr . Fabbroni stated that as time goes on and Mr . Monke - meyer develops farther down , he may ask him ( Monkemeyer ) to map out a whole drainage course . MOTION by Mr . Edward Mazza , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn Grigorov : Planning Board - 5 - September 18 , 1979 RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as lead agency in the review of the proposed 5 - lot Subdivision on East King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 3 , a portion thereof , approve and hereby does approve the Environmental Assessment Form as completed by Mr . Evan N . Monkemeyer , Skyrise . Associates , dated September 10 , 1979 ; and FURTHER RESOLVED , that pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act , Part 617 , this action is classified as Unlisted ; and FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , has deter - mined from the Environmental Assessment Form and all pertinent information that the above - mentioned action will not significantly impact the environ - ment and , therefore , will not require further environmental review . There being no further discussion , the Vice - Chairman called for a vote . Aye - May , Mazza , Grigorov , Baker , Schultz , Bronfenbrenner . Nay - None . The Vice - Chairman declared the MOTION to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mrs . Liese Bronfenbrenner , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Preliminary Subdivision Approval for 5 - lot Subdivision on East King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 3 , a portion thereof , as presented this date , September 18 , 1979 , by Mr . Evan N . Monkemeyer , Owner / Developer , according to Map entitled " A Portion of Lands of Evan Monkemeyer , Deeds Book 495 , Page 473 , Tax Map Parcel No . 43 - 1 - 3 . 3 , Map of Five Lot Sub - Division King Road East , Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , Scale 1 " = 60 ' , Developer - Skyrise Associates " , dated September 6 , 1979 , sealed by Clarence W . Brashear , Jr . , L . S . ; such Approval incorporating any suggestions that were made at this Public Hearing as to drainage and pending Tompkins County Health Department approval of the sewer system , There being no further discussion from the Board nor from the public , the Vice - Chairman called for a vote . Aye - May , Mazza , Grigorov , Baker , Schultz , Bronfenbrenner . Nay - None . The Vice - Chairman declared the MOTION to be carried unanimously . Mr . Monkemeyer respectfully requested that he be placed upon the Planning Board Agenda for Public Hearing to consider final subdivision approval on October 2 , 1979 . The Board agreed . Vice - Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the matter of the Monkemeyer 5 - lot subdivision , preliminary approval , duly closed at 8 : 30 p . m . REPORT OF THE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE , COUNCILWOMAN SHIRLEY RAFFENSPERGER . Mr . May announced that since Mrs . Raffensperger ' s report on the September 12 , 1979 , meeting of the County Planning Board would center entirely on the Route 13 Corridor proposals , and since Mr . Enichen of the Environmental Management Council was present to present the E . M . C . Route 13 Special Committee on the Route 13 Corridor Survey report , Mrs . Raffensperger respectfully requested that she be allowed to defer her report to that of Mr . Enichen . The Board was in total agreement that Planning Board - 6 - September 18 , 1979 it was not necessary for Mrs . Raffensperger to be present for this meeting _ of the Planning Board , PRESENTATION BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COUNCIL REGARDING PROPOSED ROUTE 13 REALIGNMENT . PLANNING BOARD TO CONSIDER ITS RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE TOWN BOARD , Mr . Don K . Enichen , Chairman of the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council Route 13 Special Committee , appeared before the Board . It was noted that the Route 13 Corridor Survey , as prepared by this Special Committee , had been distributed by the Secretary to each Planning Board member present , and to Councilman George Kugler in the audience . This Survey is attached to the Official Minutes of this meeting . Mr . Enichen described for the Board the Environmental Management Council , what it is ,. . . and its charge . He stated that the Council is an advisory board of the ' County Board of Representatives . He stated that it is charged with taking care of a number of State mandated requirements , such as inventory of historic sites , wetlands , etc . Mr . Enichen described in detail the Route 13 Corridor Survey as presented on September 13 , 1979 , to the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council general meeting , and as contained in the 11 - page report with map distributed to the Board . At the end of his presentation , Mr . Enichen asked if there were any questions or comments . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that she agreed with all the considerations of wildlife , but she also felt very strongly about human considerations . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that the impact of 11B - 1 " on Forest Home would be very detrimental to the hamlet . The Board members discussed access to Tompkins - Cortland Community College with Mr . Enichen . Mr . May asked if the Department of Transportation acknowledges a two - lane approach . Mr . Enichen stated that they did , adding that that was their original proposition of what was needed . Mr . May stated that at the present time , he thought that the members of the Board need to read the Report presented . Mr . May stated that the Board appreciated Mr . Enichen ' s efforts this evening in making it aware of what is going on in the Route 13 corridor matter . He stated that the matter may be placed on the Agenda for the next meeting . The members of the Planning Board concurred with Mr . May ' s statements . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , the September 18 , 1979 , meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board was duly adjourned at 9 : 00 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary . O ` ev 9e4by�e, � TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD � �, oa TUESDAY , SEPTEMBER 18 , 1979 A G E N D A 7 : 30 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for proposed Subdivision , 10 lots backlot of Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45- 1 - 2 . 2 . Lagrand E . Chase . ADJOURNED from September 4 , 19790 - 7 : 45 P . M . PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for 5 - lot Subdivision on East King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 3 , - a portion thereof . Evan N . Monkemeyer . * * 8 : 15 P . M . Report of the County Planning Board Representative . • Councilwoman Shirley Raffensperger , 8 : 25 P . M . Presentation by the Environmental Management Council regarding proposed Route 13 realignment . Planning Board to consider its recommendations to the Town Board a*494err 1Ge-_Gert B -d-�= . perros� ttives . 9 : 00 P . M . ADJOURNMENT Nancy M . Fuller Secretary NOTE : IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD CANNOT ATTEND , PLEASE NOTIFY ME IMMEDIATELY AT 273 - 1747 . Chairman Aron will be out of Town ; Vice - Chairman May will preside . * * Please note correction of Parcel Number delineation . , , AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING TOWN CLERK ' S OFFICE ITHACA , N . Ye I � Nancy M . Fuller � . being duly Deputy 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 , September 18 , . 1979 , in Town Hall , 126 East Selieca Street ( second floor ) ; Ithaca , NY , commencing at 7 : 30 p . m . , as per attached . Location of sign board used for posting : Front Entrance to Town Hall Date of Posting : September 10 , 1979 Date of Publication : September 13 , 1979 _ 4XX Nancy M . Fuller Deputy Town Clerk Town of Ithaca State of New York . County of Tompkins SS . Town of Ithaca Sworn to before me this 18th day of September , 19 79 . -- do NOTARY GERTRUDE H. BERGEN Notary Public, State of New Yo No. 55-527.8725 Qualified in Tompkins Go Term Expires March 30, 19 Thursday._Sentember 13 . 1979 ITHACA_-LOURNAL.25 � I Legal Notices l TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING 1 BOARD, NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS, TUESDAY, SEP• TEMBER 18, 1979 By direction of the Chairman of , the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Plan- ning Board of the Town of Ithaca on Tuesday, September 18, 1979, in Town Hall, 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ), Ithaca, N . Y., atthe following times and on the follow- ling matters; 7 : 30 P.M. Consideration of Final Subdivision Approval for proposed Subdivision, 10 lots backlot of TaxParcel Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 6-45-1 -2.2. Lagcand E . Chase. Adjourned from Septem- ber 4, 1979. 7 : 45 P.M. Consideration of Pre- liminary Subdivision Approval for 5-lot Subdivision on East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel . No. 6-43-1 -31, a portion thereof. Evan N . Monkemeyer . 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 t Town of Ithaca September 13, 1979 i TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TUESDAY , SEPTEMBER 18 , 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 , September 18 , 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 proposed Subdivision , 10 lots backlot of Ridgecrest Road , Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 45 - 1 - 2 . 2 . Lagrand E . Chase . Adjourned from September 4 , 1979 . i 7 : 45 P . M . Consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval for • 5 - lot Subdivision on East King Road , Town of Ithaca Tax 3 . 3 Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 5t , a portion thereof . Evan N . Monkemeyer , Said Planning Board will at said times 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 : September 10 , 1979 Publish : September 13 , 1979 IT Am.7 Two, p IT I WMA."dis IF 04Y ly _ It, SCI; �,� eSt l� V►" ItVA., �i mnr F0"1°•� ` `• ' enw•- uu ' ,.i clout a c.ruu ..(u.n IT 00 IT Ahl 1. It , 13 �. , � git it, Toilt I. It A `a 41 • - Corr Or ITMAC iL �i 4.iit "TralIt . IT, It %Ar I IMACIA Rb w. ,rTl � . J L. I r ruru nw . . arra a �� . i. Ilk rt ..11I '\ w R �e i .•• _ l_ it it NOR .40 8%91 ILO ITALIC PARK \l Li. ._. : —.. — la 1_ — - — .—. . .. — - -- Avid.. 4," on MORRIS* Alto III ® WN .. a .. LEGEND: It OF IT HACAl:t JL S047"1- it vi I di Ir It t It S I + i i J i 1 s ;yy t r of, 4 , , ' `AII .Tf1e� ;: Facts a s �!: It � � , r -! 4, { r 4t >y% ( yl If Lys VIP {i It �I 1 S E •S ( �1 - r I 4 'S� i rts" >fi t n • lIf � it � I a! i r it ;It wl It i it , A f . It I • � Yui � tr � . � 1 • , IV, , VfY ' Y Y i�,• k J" ' z 'f 1 � 11 � ! a „ . It 1Afit Mgr+ r . 1 l rtall 101. i r IV I tj V1 I 1'.. 1 11�, n ' �l L J+ 1 y4 ti �i y 4! a iY al ` rl _I , Ei f t r F .r L1I , , h{ R d I , "+f ' j., + prIr f i. It • . . + ' ' t I IIt • • - • • • • t r ti 1 r • It - • r +: a iiiiliii F° ' t " ^ C� 1I It" 17 wr It VIA r • : 1 L ^ ^r V py ., i; vIt Do I have any obligation to my What is a Home ? builder in return ? Wood and brick and glass ? A Just like everything else ! You can ' t ex- shingled roof to keep out the rain ? The pect perfect performance if you neglect great red maple outside the kitchen your home . We just can ' t be responsible if window ? What is a home ? It ' s all these you do , nor can we if you decide to use it things . . . and more . for non- residential purposes . Oh , a cautionary word . PLEASE . The It ' s the hidden elements too , the grading around your home has been care- things you can ' t see or touch like the fully planned to protect your foundation . Do studs within your walls and the wires maintain it properly . that make your lights work . How can I find HOW builders? And it is these unseen things that you Look for this symbol FIpW . HOW must accept on trust . Trust that your builders display it in their advertisements builder used professional skill and a bit and have HOW information in their models of loving care every step of the way . and sales offices . The Local HOW Council has a complete list of all participating We think you deserve more peace of builders . mind than that . You deserve the assur- We hope you ' ll ask for our protection . We ance that all the things you can ' t see think HOW offers the peace of mind and security you deserve . are just as soundly reliable as all the things you can see . You deserve a HOW home . R \l A: £ w ' l R• d. 10 YEARS OF HOME PROTECTION Just what is a HOW home? What happens if we can ' t agree? It ' s a home with a special , new type of You may request arbitration at any time warranty and insurance . That means the either during or after the conciliation very structure of your home is protected by discussions . a warranty - insurance package . Arbitration is administered by the American Arbitration Association , a non - How do I get this HOW protection ? profit organization with a national network of arbitrators knowledgeable in the home HOW coverage is built into the house . construction field . You cannot go out and buy it as you would The arbitrator acts like a judge . He hears usual insurance . You see , HOW homes are both sides and then makes a decision on built by registered , qualified builders ac- what should be done . You don ' t have to ac - cording to HOW ' s approved standards of cept the arbitrator' s decision , but your construction and rigorous performance builder is obligated to comply with his levels . ruling if you do accept it . A HOW builder delivers the first part of this 10-year protection to you right along What if I want to use my lawyer? with the title to your home . It ' s as much a part of the building as the walls . We then HOW ' s dispute- settlement service was send you your insurance policy about six designed to settle problems outside the weeks later. court system and at no cost to you . Of That ' s why we say HOW is the peace of course you may bring your lawyer to a con- mind you cannot buy . ciliation or arbitration meeting if you wish to have legal counsel . Is it possible to get a VA loan on a HOW house ? Yes . In fact , the Veterans Administration has even made some exceptions to its rules just for HOW homes in order to give more veterans a chance to buy the homes they want . Suppose you see a house you want and it is almost finished ? If it ' s a HOW Appel home , then it may still be eligible for VA S and&ds financing after the trim stage even though the builder did not submit preliminary plans w 1 or have it inspected by the VA . i {fix• � S'Y r e �. TI, What if my builder and I have a What does HOW protect for me? disagreement? HOW' s unbreakable promise is a written If you can ' t work things out , then write warranty from your builder plus an in- your builder and send your HOW Council a surance policy . Here ' s how it all works . copy . The HOW address and phone number are printed right on your warranty . Since The first year: The builder warrants most problems are communications prob- your HOW house to be free from lems , the Local Council will assist you in defects that arise from non - settling your differences . compliance with HOW ' s approved If you and your builder can ' t find any building standards . . . and from major common ground , HOW has a unique structural defects . (Sorry , swimming dispute- settlement service which uses con - pools , patios , detached garages and ciliation and arbitration * other non-attached portions are not covered . ) How does Conciliation work? The second year: Your builder con - If you and your builder have reached an tinues to warrant that your home will impasse , you should ask your Local Council be free from major structural defects to set up a conciliation meeting . At the and also that the plumbing , heating meeting you will sit down face to face with and cooling and electrical systems will your builder. An impartial third person perform according to the approved acting as a conciliator will be present to standards . . . unless , of course , a fix- keep the conversation on the track . Most ture , appliance or piece of equipment problems can be worked out during these itself is defective . meetings . • For the third through tenth years : Your home is directly insured against major structural defects by our national in - � � � . surance carrier, INA Underwriters In - p * Q � � surance Company . D - � p What is a major structural defect? It is actual damage to the load - bearing ��bltra�tilon portion of your home which affects its load 1 'ncIhd IOg bearing function and which vitally affects the use of your home for residential pur- poses . This includes damage from shifting AS f soil from causes other than earthquake or pflood . Examples of possible major structural . damage are : • Major weakening in the home ' s founda- tion caused by building on weak , compres- sible , or expansive soils or by building on poorly compacted soil . ' Arbitration is neither binding nor mandatory in Kansas and Massachusetts; • Failure of beams , joists , load - bearing Why is a HOW house different? walls , lintels , or other elements of the A HOW house is special . It is built ac- home ' s supporting structure . cording to HOW ' s approved national • Major structural problems in roofs , standards . These standards are outlined in such as failure of its structural members . the booklet that will be attached to your warranty . It will explain HOW standards — Are condominiums and townhouses we believe you should know what you are covered ? buying . Or ask your builder to show you a copy now . HOW then goes a step further Yes , indeed , they can be . But there are than a builder warranty and insurance . It some specific provisions governing them . adds another layer of protection — warranty HOW covers the individual unit just as if insurance . it were a single family home . Naturally , it also covers all of the commonly shared ele- Warranty insurance? ments such as the plumbing , heating , air- Yes , warranty insurance to back up the conditioning and electrical systems which builder' s warranty . If he can ' t or won ' t meet service each unit . his obligations , you ' re still protected . If You must remember, however, that HOW coverage starts on the common elements Your builder isn ' t around to make repairs on when the first unit in the building is sold . warrantable items , the insurance carrier will . . . and pick up the tab . If there are any claims on any of the com - monly shared elements , they must be made What happens if I sell my home? by a representative who has been appointed by the condominium association . But if you As we said , HOW coverage is built into have a claim that affects your unit only , you the structure . It automatically transfers to may use the association ' s representative or all owners as long as the home is used as a pursue it yourself . residence during the 10- year period . If you decide to sell your home before your HOW Who gets to be a HOW builder? protection expires , it will add to the value Belonging to HOW is the mark of a pro- of your home . fessional . Builders apply to Local HOW t . When do I get my policy? Councils . They then must meet HOW ' s pro- fessional standards before they can be ac- When you close on your home , you and cepted into the program . HOW screens its your builder sign the Warranty Agreement . builders in three important ways : for their Then both of you get a copy . You also technical competence ; for their financial receive the booklet outlining HOW' s ap- soundness ; for their customer service proved standards . Do read it and be sure records . you understand it . About six weeks after you move into your home you will receive a Does the Local Council check on its Certificate of Participation in the master in- members? surance policy, (or in some states two indi - vidual insurance policies) . Remember, un- Yes , indeed . The HOW builder must til you receive this policy, your HOW register every year with the Local Council coverage is not complete and in force . to make sure he continues to meet HOW ' s Keep your warranty and your insurance high standards . And the Council may in- documents in a safe place with the other spect his housing at any time . papers you receive at closing . They are im - portant . �7.7. - . � 2 Vic► u h o . . � � z1 ZZ ► p -CI w � S V) o f � 2 ol Q Q 77. LO d J LV � 1 X � � 0 un v Quo v LU Oz ° � Q � zz � zLU ov n. y- < ch r co � iu � . • SKYRISE ASSOCIATES v TO . TOWN OF ITHACA � �a� Evan N. Monkemeyer ` 123 King Road East ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM fthaca. New York 14850 607472 -3813 *To be completed and submitted by. the applicant . Comments may be written next to the question or on additional paper . I - Date � � 1 -79 GENERAL INFORMATION 1 . Applicant Phone Address _ �,� c� �� ,- r ;��. ,.r .� • I s � � Property owner r `r � u � -- Phone Address t = ✓ Y ,_ < . Zp . Ec.�c . rtla_c4, , t1 .Y , 2 . Location of Proposed Action (Write Address /Tax lot ; Attach USGS topographic map with affected lands outlined . ) �F3 A� N,:.} 3 . Proposed Action 4 . Activities and types . of operation resulting from the completion of the proposed action . IDENTIFICATION OF PROPOSED ACTION Site plan S USGS map 5 • State the time schedules ' for the proposed action : Planning LJ" "`' �`�� Construction Design , Documents Finished site work & grading ^^ �'- Preliminary site work 6 . Describe the proposed 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 . ' }j'�. �-Lhi'SL.E"�Z t'--, AcY�s',c�—•e= i�,� J,-�: � 'C-2y.�t Transportation of materials to site P / • pTF r 2S M P T2 c `-R- R -v G-� Disposal of waste: .imaterials Proposed chemical treatments , such as herbicides , dust control etc . R Special techniques to overcome. unusual conditions _ 7s Describe the type of proposed building and site materials to be used . Foundation ' Structure HVAC 'n4 f0 Energy sources Siding I , , Insulation Windows and Glass � �s�sc> aW- N Y`r � r, r -_ A r^ o t?c x T r_ �f .41; S Roofing _ Pavement Vegetative cover L.DT = f ?�odO 8 . Total area directly modified by proposed action acres . 24vao 9 • Total area covered by impervious surfaces : &OX eco / - 21+, ocO roofs OM sq & fto parking a acres roads ss acres • 11 a�cut� 10 . Gross building sizes ; present total sq . ft . no . ' of bldgs oNE no . of floors /bldg proposed total � Z ' sq . ft . - . no . of bldgs Fou !z no . of floors /bldg future total "o sq . ft . no . of bldgs - '210 no * of floors /bldg 22 11 . Number of proposed dwelling unit Number of proposed commercial units O Sizes of . units ! Soo = 1 z so Sizes of units 12 . Parking % • Existing TWO spaces proposed spaces Traffic generated/day - 10 CA PAX4 (Note : Indirect Contamination Source Permit may be . required * if_ 1000 spaces provided . 13 . Show proposed signs on site plan Size � 0 5 ''osq . ft . height above ground : topSL'-ft . ; bottom �%ft . _ Wording : Fay 5a � 5 �`C =S Assoc T:� �S , Ern �1 = titan. T?'- A� zAt YOM .!-. <::.:;O - 2.71 -L S Z)8 LY h w �, �. ��r,� T iJSc,� 2.�tG�r �rLoG '�'i-ear acs x=02 �: �• Y;_t c-b cam= M=rr.s.� �a e � lit . Shaw proposed lights and other poles on site plan . � J Height above ground � ft : Total lumens 15 . 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 . ) L6 . 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 L7 .ODescribe project history including controversy perceived by the developer , litigation , court decisions , etc . 2 _ COMMUNITY FACTORS AND IMPACTS Designated zoning of the site of the proposed action Z _ 30 19 . Zoning .changes or variances * being requested N� 20 . Check if the site of the proposed action is . within or next to the following Districts or Areas : rj _ Agricultural District Historic Preservation District Floodplain (HUD designated) Unique Natural Area Freshwater Wetland 21 . •Check which land uses describe the neighborhood character . ' Single-unit residential Recreation Multi-unit residential Agriculture Commercial Forestry Woodland Industrial Wildlife / Conservation Institutional Inactive Transportation Other 22 . Check which public services are being requ sted or provided . Sanitary Sewage Gas Water Electricity Storm drainage Telephone (Note : Permits may required from municipality -for hook-up . ) Check which transportation facilities will serve the site of the proposed action_ . State Highway Sidewalks 0 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 Show on the site plan . _ 25 . Name affected buildings or districts known to be historically or archeologically important or which are listed on the Register of Historic Buildings . Show an the site plan . NATURAL FACTORS AND 11�PACTS 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 Vg Greater than ten feet 27 . If bedrock depth is less than ten feet - check type of bedrock existing at. site of . pr osed" 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 O hummocks with small . ponds hillside glens and gorges valley bottom 290 Name the soils as identified in the Soil Survey of Tompkins Count which are found on the part of the site proposed to be modified . Initials may be used . 30 . Briefly describe the nature and extent of proposed modification of existing slopes or soils or drainage �ttA * S 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 33 . Will any /naterials or effluent be discharged into a stream or groundwaters ? If so , designate on the site plan the streams which will be .aff ectad . O (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 VJ Terrestrial plants up to two feet high . Ferns , grasses , sedges , rushes Aquatic plants Crops 350 Are any vegetative management techniques currently being practiced on the site of the proposed action ? 36 . Will any trees of shrubs be removed by the proposed action ? If so , designate on the site plan the area that is to be affected . 37 - Are there any plans for revegetation ? If so , briefly explain . RYc GeAx� s APrelz- vv,� /,/` Gg -SS 38 . To your laiowledge , . 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 . V Will activity cause a change in or affect visual character of natural or cultural. landscape features ? Yes N To your knowledge , are there any significant wildlife habitats , migration routes or breeding areas located an or near the site that might be affected by - the proposed action? 410To 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 . T 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 . Al Ashes Dust Fumes Odors � �� Smoke c c c s oz1T -�i� Other emissions , „A �, �r�, its l C or T . C . Health De t . may be . re uired . ) ( ote : Air Quality Petmits from P ' 3' q 14 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 �n B _ Ca-►,3'1-F.Ac rz3Q.S 45 . Number of uses` during construction u { � Maximum number of epees present at the site at one time ._��� � _ 46 . Number of employees during activities after completion - 47 . ompletion 47 . If resulting activities are for -either industrial or commercial use , state the employment shifts and number of employees in each shift . Shift `Mdpl Shift . Empl Shift Empl - Shift Empl 48 . If the resulting activities are for - residential use , state the number of planned residents . Permanent `� Seasonal 1�9 . Briefly describe the nature and amount of indirect growth anticipated as a result - ro ed action or resulting activities . MMzLs � � `� of the p pos -7"-T's6! 50 . Existdng community or business or facilities or residential structures requiring relocation . 5 51 . If the focus of resulting activities is for residential use , check if residence is intended for : Olow income segment high income segment families medium income segment H students elderly . 52 . Will proposed activity substantially change the following socio-economic population distribution? 8 income ethnic background race B age 53 . State the current full assessed value : Site ¢ Buildings ;ET'A-55L55Lr7L> 5k • State the -Troba le full assessed value after completion of theroposed action . Site `� � � �'��' • Buildings Comments . 55 . In your judgement , will the proposed action resultina significant environmental impact during construction and / or during use after completion? 3/4 �, c ru— ZITS O 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 thc - advise ' on the types of actions *which require particular permits . ) Federal Permits . - 0 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System . EPA, Region II , NYC Activities in navigable waters . Corps of Engineers , Buffalo Other State Permits I - WON 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 . No Indirect Air Contamination Source : DEC-EQ Unit , Syracuse ,JD Mining : DEC-Mineral Resources Bureau , Albany- Pesticide lbany Pesticide Purchase , Use ( 7 permits ) . DEC , Pesticides Bureau , Albany 1110 Process , Exhaust , Ventilation. System Const . or Operation : DEC-EQ , Syracuse Public Water Supply : DEC , Envir . Analysis , Albany (T . C . Health Dept . review) n SPDES : DEC , Envir . Quality Unit , Syracuse - (T . C . Health Dept . review) 1J6 Stationary Combustion Installation : DEC-EQ Unit , .. Syracuse Wetlands /Adjacent Areas Alterations : - DEC-EQ IIait , Cortland . Other M County of Tompkins Me Driveways , culverts : Highway Dept . Hazardous Wastes : Health Dept . Institutional Use : Health Dept . Mass Gatherings : Health Dept . ,Kj Offensive Materials ( Scavenger Wastes ) : Health Dept . /10 Public Utility Line Extension : Health Dept . Restaurant User Health Dept . CJD Restricted Burning : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) Sanitary Facilities for Realty Subdivisions : Health Dept . (DEC EQ review) N Septic Tank Cleaner / Industrial Waste Collection : Health Dept . ( DEC-EQ review) '! Sewage Disposal System : Health Dept . . p1Q Solid Waste Mgmt . Facility : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) NO SPDES (Pollution Discharge) : Health Dept . (DEC-EQ Unit review) on Swimming Use : Health Dept . ) Temporary Residence (Boarding House , Camp , Day Care , Hotel , Motel , Mobile k� Home Park: Health Dept . Water Supply (Public) : Health Dept . Wetlands /Alterations : Wetlands Commission / County Clerk (L Other Town of Ithaca Blasting E Public Util-ity Connection Building Permit #D Signs '!e'- Street Opening G-5 - Subdivision Extraction of Natural Materials U5 Streets and Drainage hip Land Use Variance ) Wetlands Alteration � f) 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 NEPk is required , name agency SignatureOf pplicant Signature of Reviewer q' " JAZ Title Date / Agency Address Date Reviewed •, r rl . x Jq of _- _ __ - _' / f •eC-- -- � ' 1 ___ _ _ __ __ _... -- - �p � /� C� 1/�r`--_ _ _ --- - - _ ._ ._ _ ._ ._ _ __-__ ___ _ .. _ . . . _�t' �_ .-__ __. _ _rte,. cc ti a �. t Woo 109, - r ` y` v _ 2 ...- . _ ..�i:.� •` - �: «� - y ..i.,� � �,� is; �'°C�G "9' ,,,% � ej � s MvN' 07 . f 4=5 v .4 .v .M0 `b MF �� � O . 72. 3 -` f� c/2j6 ry 90 oFE 4) Z ZFOC> e 4/ 95, T R x 0fl A;, P009 Cwt /✓ 1f 3 - / - 3 . 3 . ,,, , / Vl Ln G © G 4 1j04 120 _ --- - - -- _ 00 � s \tyi1 E %; ID �`• � 34r3lz . Ssq, >< r,... 1 3 �' , � � � . ,�- Sr . �- T. � � I it I 1 J Y � .fes „'- : _.Y ._. 1_ � \ �• ! � �. } i • - - -' — — p I now- i '1 f� -. -A .. ' - _ -- i -._.-- __. _'a_ ^�l�_/✓� 4l� ech ,sE Aelp CO ; JGoA - ( :f VlS I MA V C aL T� #too .� co b C .4 ;PRELIMINARY o c i^r . 3es.J,4/.5y v 76' �1+ + -i- _ -_ ., F t ROUTE 13 CC7RIL.'0R c2LTRVEY By T . C . ' EC Route L . Special Committee Don K . Rnichen , Chaim.en Dooley Kiefer Robert Sc " wrt Ing c? . Barbara � . `r�' hite Presented at ' the Tompkins County Environrrentel ITanagerr. ent Council general meeting on Septe . ber 13 , 1979 . IN ROLUCTION 1t the April general. meeting of the E.nvironrental . Maieiage - n: ent Council , the County Planning: Departi': ent through Commis - sioner Frank Liguori presented and advocated : the "B- 1 " corridor for a realigned Route 13 . The II�. C ' s prompt review and recomirendation was reouested by the Commissioner and a sneclel cora: Tittee was formed to study the tonic and report beck to the full council . The cornr: ittee studied the route by . use of aerial photo - �a: renhs and by walking major portions of the r. roposed corridor - 1 d ret with farm.. ers whose active farmland would be taken by " I - 1 . " : t the i°_ ay meeting , Council endorsed the . committee ' s rccGr: .�. end �. tion , which , in summary , stated that the "B- 1 " ^ orosal ! ras rot . in the best interests of the county from r:: gricultural , environmental , economic , or transportation safety aspects and thet further study of more southerly Plternetives should be underteken . . This report presents . the r :� s �zlts of . that, requested study . CBJC `IIVr S OF THE . HIGHWAY PROJECT - 'i; ob sective of the Route 13 Improvement Pro ject has rc . airi ? v bcsically unchanged since 1970 when it was first , ro osed e. s an Appalachian Economic Deve l_ opment Highway . h Draft E:nvironrr. enta. l_ Impact tatemert was presented in 1973 ;; c daring community debate , no consensus was attained . . In 1 ^ 75 , a two - county task force with representatives from. Cortland anal Tompkins Counties was created for the purpose . r reachin , n consensus on how Route 13 should be improved . 71k. e obj ectives identified in 1970 with respect to ty ' s portion of Route. 13 are . ( 1 ) improve t 'r. e tri fz is safety of the road segDn ent from: hTYSEG to the 'Tt 1. age of Ir - dtr. , ( c ) reduce or eliminate the congestion lcng; t? . i : eL ent , a.rd ( -z ) irrprove ease and comfort of `. revel betl ; crr. ? t ! aca end Cortland . These objectives are : ublect to tt_ e constraints inposed by rrinirlA zing the nega - Av e i ,. pect to ctive agricultural lands , unique natural areas enc existing' hores and businesse ., . Pdditionaliy , constraints for r, inimizirig . cost tire to rJrOj' ect cor. :nletion and hes emphasized environ- : : er: tal considerations . iVr: L '.' i' I Id F a'h ". I TUB". TION iE y' % 2' oi: _ E' i7: ari tJhe rnt Ifri") � ! i''. Y 'zEG to the v� .i. t- ! �; ` E3 of I °r ,}' rier. iS caused by a Cor. bwl ctiCn Of r, eBVy traf - fiC 0 ?" C Dei ncril ' CGnll' Uter ) , E 7) "` Or Of cccceSs . ; 0ts , y n: c.vir_g vehicles , turiiir_g rover, end the re -jI traffic pattern . The geer': etry of the roec . crt:.tate ;; - edcitional problem in a few specific spots . The - it, !,ratiori has deteriorated ! n the rust decade with the ro Ncth . cf housing developments and comr_- ute traffic on y , 7 c _ r ; • 1 L; ic' t: rotti. z ir, tE z s6ctin ' Route from the > tath c . : `;i ' ' PEE, of Dryden and ^ urroundirr ' s . Additional caof: rutint : traffic is generated by the Tri student ? nd staff , ro -- _ilr tions . Tre rr. P or traffic generators for this segn . ent of Route 13 besides TC3 . arc the 11111ege of DrydE' n , ars' ; ;YSE + Vi11 ^ =- e of Freeville Cornell ' 'niaargi + 'IT ny Ttth ^ nno yaU % note r . source ^ .f triffic 1z inter- regior .� l travel _ on Routes . _, it : �. ... 0. ."according to an August , 1979 , . SRC sPPLC iel ccv, ittee . s _arvey of 176 granter Dryden Village area relents , the s. ary a eIj, e of Route 13 i-ra6 toward Ithaca for Jork or shop.l:, ir• Appr. oximately half of tlmese tr ` velers : departed P, :ate 1 , ^ t Route 366 travelirc- toyfrard Cornell Universa t . y or III wntolv� n Ithaca. . Safety and traffic congestion were upper - rrc. ^..• t in the eines of the loci ugrars of this segrrent of Route : 1 � , :^wo - thirds of these users : tated they wo :ilrl . not. wo more than t ,rj. lE: ricrth of TC3 ' s entren ^. e to utilize anew highway ctorric ^ r , No current origin ! destineLien: dnta disaggregated by local vs, . inter= regional traffic and automobile val . truce- traffic gyres avcqilable for evaluation . Accident data on Route 177 4raz not available in time for committee review . Corridor selection is .defined to be a four lane taking with ^or! Struct 'Ion limited to two lanes : The width of the right - cf - weV would vary from .120 ' to 200 ' depending on land ownership and construction . needs . The decision to overpass ' or dead end a crossroad is made by evaluating school bus . rcutes . , . traffic counts , construction costs , and cojr.munity needs , Ir_ surer ary , the segment from NYSAEG to the Village of Dryden is a priri: ary corridor for local con:.irruting and is Terceived to be dangerous and congested , Continued growth will exacerbate the problem . N . Y . S . D . O . T . has recognized this and has constructed two left turn lanes and repaved the road surface . f ALTERTIVli T. EVALUATIOAT ( see maps b - ccrr _ aar _ begins on existing Route I bewween the a. irccrt .c.I: �:� :.inr_ shaw Road and travels nor• thea. s. t to an inter - section . with. . Route 38 at the .lest Dryden Road . It then , cuts a. cross the north edge of the Village of Freeville and continues east , staying north of George Junior Republic or d. intersects with the I-: cLear_ Road north of the Village of Dryden. before re ioir. in� the rresent route at Simms Rill Road . '.B.- V . Advantages . . 1 . : Offers more direct route for inter - regional truck and car traffic . . 2 : . Potentially reduces traffic ( particularly heavy truck ) on Route 38 from Freeville to Dryden . 3e Protides better regional access for Groton . B . 1 " Di sadv ^ ntages l . : Inhibits direct access to Route . 366 � t N'YSEG , . contra = butes - to increased cross - town traffic in Forest Ho^ e er. d northeast Town of Ithaca residential neighborhoods , or encourages increased traffic through Freeville and Etna to reach Route 366 and NTYSEG due to location of western terminus . 2 . Requires taking down approximately one half - dozen houses on Hill Street north . of Freeville . 3 . Intersects a uniaue natural area , . the Freeville Fir . Tree Swamp , and runs along the perimeter , of another . . unique natural area , the Woodwerdia Bog . ( '.Phe pro.- tection of these areas is one of the charges of . the EIW" C . ) 4 : Bisects . three active , family - owned farms in good agricultural land and an agricultural district . The . economic viability of these farms would be seriously jeopardized by this corridor . A half - dozen other fares would be bisected by this corridor , decreasing active farmlanc for nearly one - third of the route ' s diste r, cee 5 . Discoureges usage by Village of Dryden residents and } TC3 cor, : r: uters due to the northerly location of eastern terminus . . 6 . This corridor would not be likely to reduce the high volume of coir:muter traffic on Route 13 and therefore does not address the cajor objective of safety and tr ^ ffic congestion . 4 . ' Const ituents Taj a . corridor htgs ^ dvnr: tages for the . Vi1 lage . of Freeville ; : ea "AE e d� unior Republic , and the . Dryden. High school . in . that it provides a. , rotentia1 by -Paas for heavy :truck trafficon the section_ of Route 38 ' that goes ;past their . respective locations : The Tompkins County . Denartr.: e :: t of Planning . sought ^nc received _. . port for - 1 froir these three constituents . Thi corridor is advlentaveous for the inter - regional travelsr , with respect to local Route 13 traffic , this corridor does nc;.t serge the Village . of Dryden . and will not. help Free .% i ]. le el the Cortland - bound traffic taking _ the " shortcut " through the village . _ :such of the traffic destined for Cortland begins on Route 7660 This traffic , having ir. issed the .we , tern t, errrimzs for " B - 1 " , will either , take the rtna � :: cheer. route or will ago throu .. IN Freeville to use the Route . interchange on "B - 1 : " passes . through three family =owned farms and ' several. rented fprins . Trie:geparties have identified the potential foz daa: age to t ,� eir : operations and e �-presaed their willirgne` ss to o »rose "B - 1 " -�� ith the aid of the Farm Bureau ' and a _. ri ultur4.1 _ . . crLaVo ! . : The Tovrr of Ithaca has expressed strong concern . over " Hs- 1 ' s " western .term: inus and . its probable impact on the Community Corners . in Cayuga Heights , on Forest home , and on northeast residential neighborhoods . The town_ prefers a. t; estern terminus location which provides direct access to Route 366 at NYSE &G . The Tompkins County Department of Planning did not seek consensus from the Town of Ithaca . In sun-ma. ry , local agricultural and neighborhood interests are traffic sacrificed to remove heavy truck traic from" Foute 38 and fc cilitrAe inter - regional traffic . Safety and , congestion of local traffic on existing Route 13 is unaffected except . for potential ' . reduction of traffic volun . e . " A- 1 " Corridor : This corridor , developed by the E C special :coni: ittee ; leaves Route 13 at the eastern Route . 366 intersection , travels northeast , then east along: the northern side of the Lehigh Ve. 11ey : Railroad right - of - way , passee southof the high school , crosses Route 38 east of the Dryden High School , and rejeins . she . reeen + route at the TO entrance . r_ Ada.r: tage8 :. 1 . Takes advantage of the present facility fora greater distance , . thereby potentially lowering costs . ". 2 . Provides access to both Route 13 around . Ithace . and Route 366 into Ithaca at the western terminus . . 3 . Takes the least amount of active fa. rmaand : ( two small owner - operated fields and one rented field . in com - r_ : ercial zoning ) for nett: corridor . Land taking is mostly of marginal use lard . ® 4 . Proxy cc convenient a � trP `'cr TCSr: :: * rle 'tillage Vf. Drvden at eastern terminuo . This poter_ tiall ,y reGuces the local traffic or, existing Route 13 , thereby improving safety ^nd reducing corgest-ion . 5 . Removes inter- regional traffic from Village of Dryden. ar: d existing Route l3 . . 5 . Reduces through traffic in Freeville by improving direct access to Cortland . r7 Ira) 'safety at the TC7) intersection by . reducing . grade on hill and eliminating stop light . for Route . p . 1.3 traffic. Lisadv.antages a . Locates a ' perceived obstacle and se e :ty hazard bet ween the Village of Dryden , and its junior - senior high school . ?. Does not address Route 38 truck traffic . 7 . : Does not serve Groton . 4 . Tines active agricultural lands . _ T ^ Oocsted adjacent to the Virgil Creek flood plain for a s.Igr: ificant por i. on of its ler th . .Constituents This route would advantageous 'for users from TC3 . and Dryden Village . and . would eliminate use by the Etna =?�1cLean " shortcut " traffic , The George Junior Republic and affected farmers. consider land takings along . their property lines The Farm Bureau is supportive of this . corridor . acceptable . The .. .Etna. Corr: n, Th Association feels it bypasses Etna suffi - ciently . to leave it unaffected . The, Town of Ithaca supports the location of the western terminus . Many Village of . Dryden residents perceive this asP, hazard between the village. and + he hi ;. 1, school . _Corridor TTrac . corridor is. the sage as " A - 1 t' except it gees north of Dryden . High School . It leaves the " A - 1 " corridor at GeorGe Read , proceeds northeast across the corner of George Junior Repub7_ ic , turns east along the northern property line of the two farms on P.oute 38 , crosses the . sehool. property .. in . r : re ::� presently rented to a neighboring farmer , and rejoins the _ nresent rot.1te at the same point as "A - 1 . " : " r - 2 " Advantages '; 1 Offers all of the advontages listed under " - 1 " 4 - exce , it takes more a. ctiye . Pgrl. clt .0 al land . than_ (� p it 2 . , Eliminates the concern of Dryden Villege residents about . a.. new road in front of .. the: " hIEh school , , by using school property not . presently & used for school activities . . . Impants Virgil Creek flood plain less *.than* " A = l " corridor . _a, - 2 " Disadvantages 1 . 4 : Imposes a perceived disruption or tranquil envi .ror, r. ent necessary to achieve inQtit { tioiial. i^ blcict veG of George Junior. Republic , : 2 . Does not . address Route 38 truck tre. ffie . ; . . Does not . serve Groton . 4.. Trr " more of active agricultural lends than " A - 1 . " ,Ip .COr? St . tuents : . This .alternative is similar in most respects to "A - 1 except for the area near the school . This " . route is re'spon J� Sive to+ the concerns of the Village of Dry den , . but ` r.eauIre9 Gacrge " Junior Republic to sacrifice some of . their cropland in order to facilitate this " route . . The George Junior Republic presently finds the sacrifice unacceptable . 'Theaffected affected famers " feel the land along their property line is marginally productive and they could accent the Land : taking necessary for this corrih dor . The . lend traversed on scoolproperty is not. rres. ently utilized for school purposes . Uograo { r. x1stin Route 3 : ire"is e '_ terrative refers " to a . project which would ir. odi"fy t :-. e existin route with climbing lanes ar: d turning " lanes s : here necessary , but does not propose a : four . la. ne facility . It calls for the addition of turning lanes at Etna Lane, Kirk Road , Ringwood Road with Tweitman ' s " restricted to one access point opposite Ringwood Road , Yellow, Barn Road , and George P.oad ; andclimbing lanes in both directions at Willow Gler. Cemetery and a climbing lane on the hill outside of the Dryden VillaSe . The choice of which side of the road . is to be exbanded ca:r be done in such a manner that two to four structures are taken . 7 tt v Y. _ H:�. { ` + rr. Route ;� r Q v a n t 8 S r .. c. n6-- L s tines ate 1 . . g .L Pct � :� t 7 . 1y. least exp ensive of x; 11 PItern.2tives :. Deal's, directly with the elements of ` the *. resent fa. c .ility .which create traffic danger and congestion and , . therefore , is the most responsive to the pro - . sect objectives . 3 ,. Potentially least amount of time needed for imple - mentation . 1+. . Take the - least amount of active agricultur �: l land of a :L1 alternative . 5 . Hai no ; impact on . sensitive environmental . araa. s , ego stream beds , wetlands , and unioue natural areas . b . ` Takes the least amount of new prcperty by utilizirig existing . roadway and existing er_gineering fe Mures . T.� Srading . Existing Route 13 °i Disadvantages . 1 . Does . not provide for a future four lane facility Does notreduceabundance of access routes to the level of a limited access highway . �• . Removes m the majority of the reaining sugar aples alor. . he roadside . " lh rrading .x '. stin�; Route 13 " Constituents This . alterna.. tive takes the minimal amount_ of , agricultural lana and is ,. therefore , acceptable to agricultural interests . Local users of the existing facility have identified . , a need , for fecil_ ity improvements and would directly benefit from . . . their implementation . In discussions with the . varioua - con - stituencies , little opposition to this alternative was identified . Several constituencies felt that imp roveir: ents included in this alternative must be undertaken regardless of the new coxridor choice . Additionally , several ouestioned the necessity of e new corridor and supported upgrading as a more aprroprIetely scaled solution . Adiacent landowners along the existing facility were not surveyed . The proposed expansion of road width in selected areas . would require removal of two garages , two residences , and a number of mature sugar maple trees . Historically , projects of this scale are constructed more rapidly and less ex TjenelTiely than relocated facilities * ITIO1grL. . C-01 ID RLT.I0NS In dc :as , ions with the Vi in of Freevylle , George z unnior Republic , and the Dryden School Board , , s rein- problem Ir d .1. = tin ct frorr.. Route i ' ' becau:e apn �� rer_ t na ; . rely , heavy trucl: trrffIc on Route 38 has grown in volume to a very undesireable a. evel . . The interest shown iii "B - 1 " by - these groups was due - > rir : arily to its affects on this Route 38 truck problem ' or. d not the effects ' on Route 13 , No alternative considered is ca.t ble of solving both the Route 13 problerr end the Route E nroblerr . 1nother proposal in the rlannings. ta` ea , which: will have s :; betar_tial it n � ct on the heavy _ tr^ack vo1ur:^ e of the Route 13 fII: It�' , . is the rulti - county Solid Weste Energy . Recovery- ( U', ER ) PIe.nt . . . The preliminary environmental assessment incicate ^ th !nt 18 ton trector - treiler .t.rucl_ s from Tioga County will use Route 1c to Dryden , Route 13 to NYSE31 . and Rout e 366 tc the . 5A°» R Plant , site on Route 366 at Cornell . Tractor - triler trucks from - Cortland would loin the sahr* e route on Rau : e: 1 ' in Dryden . TioE, , estimated volume• of daily truck trnM e .was a minimum of 8 . end a rr. axirr: urr, of 18 while Cortland ` s . es t ' ir < ted volume ranged from 8 to 16 . .' These trucks would r: cre readily use 1A - 11 , "A - 2 " , or " Upgraded Route 13 " te. reach t }. eir "destiny tion than use " B - 1 " because the northern. corridor 1pr_ger . and does ' not provide direct access . to Route 3CK. The pro . ectec' * tilmetable for the SWER Plant is for it to be cl eretionel within the next five years . Agri cu I. t ura.l la,.nd in thera I� path . of the p'ropo .� ed ccr r .� do .: is in ex ' st. irg . or . 1980 -proposed State designated a . ricu , turel cistricts . The purpose of . these districts is to rrotect : t 'r. e continued egricultural use of the land . Thelaw provides t ' t . the iv . Y . S . D . O . T . must investigate all. alternative corridors to the tr:icin �, of . active farmland within a district . . : If . alter . natives Ogre identified which impact lees on active faralatid than e propcscul impe4cting agricultural . district lends , the D . O . T . crust ' u := e that lower impact alternative. or . Justify the hi ;� her impact alternative on . other grounds . The process rr: ay • involve inlur_ ction . and litigation if agricultural. distrlet . consti .,,uencies Pre not satisfied with the D . O . T . ' a ' actions . At this titre , . . the farr.: ers affected by "B = 1 " . with the Farr., B1_: 1reau are preparing to invoke the process provided by the :4, rjcu- ltural district laws . Under this law , the D . O . T . is c 'cligated to use the least agricultural lands , A . e : "A " cr%. r. ridors , : or provide sufficient ,justification for teking . substantially more agricultural land . A number of . recent Actions could affect `. future traffic volume . Routine . raffic protections indicate continual growth of traffic ir. the Poute 13 corridor . These . pro jeetions do not consider recent developments in countywide public . trans - portaticn systers . The county is currently encouraging • ca. r . pooling and "park and ride " systems and is investigating - - ` exp", ^ nsion of bus service to ^ 1l communities vithin the county . _ . Sx TC3 as :_. <^ ctivea _y r_ ursuing a—bus - -servic= e _ between.. the Dryden _ - - - cen:pus .1nd r: a � cr ponuletion centers . Ali of these actions 'Noald reduce traffic volume . The continued ercectat. ion . of ` uel shortages and rising costs reinforces this trend . it is inconsistent for the county to support these prograr, s and .31 new - facility , which encourc: pes greaterfuel consumption . The decision on . a Route 1 � Improvement Project by . TompkinsCounty r= ust be compatible w -Ith decisions made An , ad l ecent counties . O e have been told that Cortland . County . is on record .indicating that Route 13 from the City of Cortland to Tor:.nkins County will remain en _ upgr �� ded two , lane f. acility without nrovision for further expansion to four lanes . i CUI: SION The tradeoft� s. entailed by selecting each alternative are elreudy. tabulated for each corridor as advar: tages a=.nd dis - advantages . There are other tradeoffs wh ' ch . relate not to s Decific altern .fives , 100 r then to general read design and decision criteria . ThIs section attempts to develo p an and erstEnd irg of tre funcar: ertal tradeoffs involveu in a cor:mitn ant to act . r' Ivironmental considerations constitute both broad and specific bases for decision r�: a ': ing . Concern for natural resources must be balanced +•: ith that . of survival of small farms and preservation of neighborhoods . In . general , environmental damage potential increases on . this pro j . ct . as the corridor is shifted toward lower elevations and into , t• lood plains or wetlands , eg . Fs. 11 Creek , VirCi1 Cr• cek , ana Ll1e r 'reeville r °lr Tree bwanp . aoine aai'• ik; uluura. i land lies in flood p.iain. s , nut mosmc .ilea on gently sloping upland, Mains . P' arginal lard often occurs at the interface between tLese two land forirs and is recognized by its scrub brl.lQh or r; - ture cover . Specific . uninue natural r• e_ nurces are found randomly distribut. ed wherever geological fortunes create a special habitat . These .unique areas may include glacial glades , deep glens , or upland bogs , eg . the Y000dwardia and Eanes Bogs . The "B =1 " corridor rnakes little concession to either tradeoff in that it passes through both upland agricultural - land , residential areas ( Rill Street , Freeville ) and r: atural resource areas . Alternatives " A - 1 " and LA - 2 " were s ;� ecifically sited in :, anginal land between the flood plain . Gnd upland . agricultural land and away from residential developments . Along the existing Route 13 , it is feasible to ex-oend the road right - of - way while causing little new it: p �.� ct on natural resources , agricultural land , or neighbor - hoods . Y - 10 - Con •cidsrntion for the a`; rIcu1ture1 district laws > compels the . dec .Isio-n rr ,� kers to recognize . the greater irrevocable soci ? 1 zr:.n.d economic ' mnacts of lard tok4. na on agr' cultural !� hor. _ . ste =: ds , :•rhl ch ` oes beyond the siz;ple .economic vel ; of cor. denned. lend . In considering good farm lands , olar: ershIn of the land is relevant There is a hierarchy of impacts , hich are the least severe o . Ge.orge Juniors . Rer) ubl1c farm land and rm. ost severe . or_ the smallest f , P: ily - ownedfarm. In reetir_g tirith representatives of George ` Junior Republic , they asserted that the Republic . business is children , not f' armirg . This must be contrasted with the information from the Fars; Bureau , . which portrays the plighu of thedisplaced. . - farra: family * who . does not receive adegaate condermna:'tionay - r- eats to cover the increased costs of faxming less . contiguous fields . . Corridor selection and route design will depend on the decision gra. ers perception of route usage . ITnfo. rtunately , no useable data is available to determine the relative pro - portion of local users to Inter = re` ional ' users on Route 17 . evaluation of traffic generators along . the existing fecility would imply that the local use is sisrni .fic < nt and ehould be e ,:.phasAzed in the design criteria . Inter - regional traffic is likely to require facilities and route alignment different f r o M those for -ored.ominantly local traffic . : : ore northerly routes . en.phasl � e inter - regional traffic while southerly routes emphasize local use traffic . Decisions which select substar_ tial new. corridors : Create different traffic patterns and the resultant - impacts extend beyond the physical .limits , of the engineering design . . A new . corridor location . mlight be st.ifficiently distant from the existing route so this t the present traffic patterns Ere unchanged while the new corridor generates new traffic patterns . The corridor location decis-ion can help or ' hinder certain economic problems . A route which bypas.sds downtown Dryden Is thought by some to generate an unacceptablenegatiye ircpact on Dryden . reta. il businesses . Others assert that the lessening. ofvillege traffic ..caused. by the probable loss of inter - regional traffic will enhance freedom of movement on village streets and encourage shopping . Others assert that. the " AY' corridors will generate additional shopping trips along North Street . Trere is no data to surport these views _ and the pro - blble . impacts of all corridors on economic activity is highly questionable . Certain undesireable characteristics of corridor .loca - . tions can be alleviated by including , snecific design fea.ture's . . Safety questions raised by ' ' A - 1 ' s " proximity to the Dryden hi_gh School could be dealt with by a corr. bination of fences , side = walks along the Freeville Road ( Route 38 ) between Lewis Street ? nd t- he Lryd. en High ' . School , and pedestrian paths to the school along the old railroad right - of - way from the village . In C � h r sit ' lE: t rJn `? , r, eonl � Cr c ?: ; r iS needinr; acceSC tO bvt � t irpsCjo .. lr, �� C, � , � _ � . � ' • i. ded �_indernaSseS rade Of Orr ;: er Cc n - b 2 C ., _ C111 �14? I' tS : Or �.u:' e rC2d under�� c � � eDs _: :.: ch as t e.re Tlc^. t? :3 over ,Sprirng House Road . and Route 38 . C(DNCLUSiION : Fa ch alternative offers adv � r. t Ees arid ' disadvants:�; es . '" hebe ^ t cec ' sien must rini : i ze ner cntive agricultural , ecor:omic , ervironr: 2ntrell . , an social iirp. acts . . Given these cor. Side.r<:: ticn.s t'.: e . c. o :�rr. ittee reaffirr^ s its initial staterr. er_ t ' 'R - l " is not the best :� oluticn to tY: e Pcute 13 proble?r , r `Tf the >. eed to r, : �-',• e a.r_ irrevoc ^ ble commitment to a suture fo .� r . dere. highway is iutiti .L n0 the srecial cormittee ur. eauivoca.11y . reco Mends ti ; e f': " corridors . The cowmittee further concludes that a : four lane . fzcility not. :: race . s :� ry cn. the basis of present tre f' flc volume , and . natterns and projected social and econcr� ic trends -in. county . T 'r_ e Srecial Corer ittee finds u �. ti riding eai4tir_ ftoute 17 as described 'aerE: in to be the r: o ^ t apnro � riate solution .. fiecor r: : endations ? . . Unrrrade existing Route 13 without a four 1 .ane taking' . 2 , Immediately impler. ent policies and procedures : to curtail. any. further infringement of existing Route 13 . :Corridor , 3 . `.: Underta. ke further research to obtain ori ? inldest. ination deta on users of Route 13 facility and determine . the . percentages of inter - regional and local traffic . 4 , If- it is determined that four lanes are indeed necessary , then one of the " p:" corridors. should be selected . , . . If " A " is selected , a s_necial environmental task farce should be assiE- ned to "wa.tch dog " the protect to -orotect. environmentally sensitive lands in.mediately adjacent to the corridor . orct IIIr y.� �. XZ MALLORYV �� ( . nn�1 ^� � � Vu / _� ;I II a T 1 r sIG ti-e 7=11 > III SII } SO RD HILL '- II ` p II -ROAD _ tom .. "* �nll - . . �J �4V:/ ,� . II n Yr ::; 4. Z' ;;:: i s C,0 '• cr Ii W II I 11 RAILROAr < LEY EFIi (� 11 ` it 10 Ale ItAA I % T... . � I J i / •� X25. — � - 1 ff WCOD r / h'rIAIF D� kA " .. " Q I " � s � I II � I / � W (�•' _ �' ` 1. i � 4: �Ij l W II ii, i - II A II ' i ti 1 • ' . co uj �: . ONOtf r -p . M HSNV, II d0 avo H .? Z DOD(` I RD - Ct i- J 71 r=-'�. II OH . { fV I '4 •1 '1 '11I(1 �