HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1980-11-18 rMWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOVEMBER 18 , 1980
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday , November 18 , 1980 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ,
Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Vices Chairman Montgomery May , Barbara Schultz , James Baker ,
Liese Bronfenbrenner , Edward Mazza , Carolyn Grigorov ,
Barbara Z . Restaino ( Town Planner ) , Nancy M . Fuller
( Secretary ) ,
ALSO PRESENT : Town Councilwoman Shirley Raffensperger , Town
Councilman George Kugler , Edgar Raffensperger , Urie
Bronfenbrenner , Armand Adams , Esq . , Philip S . Winn ,
Esq . , Paul Tavelli , Esq . , Murray Lewis , Esq . , Megan
Stevens ( WICB - TV ) .
Vice Chairman4May opened the meeting at 7 : 43 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
November 10 , 1980 and November 13 , 1980 , respectively , together with
the Secretary ' s Affidavit of Service by Mail of said Notice upon the
• various neighbors of the property under discussion , upon the Tompkins
County Commissioner of Planning , and upon the applicant on November
11 , 1980 .
PUBLIC HEARING_ : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR
LANDS OF JOHN MARION , PINE TREE ROAD , FORMER PARCEL N0 , 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 , NOW
6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 12 , 22 . 114v 22 . 13 , AND 22 . 2 .
Vice Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly oj'3ened and read aloud from the Notice of Public Hearing as
posted and published and as noted above . Vice Chairman May stated
that the reasons for this hearing is to specifically look at the lands
in this parcel which have been sold , as well as lands which are
desirous of being sold in a subdivision approval process .
Attorney Armand Adams displayed for the Board members the area of
interest as depicted on the Town ' s 1980 aerial photograph and
indicated the backlands and the Zwerman lands . Attorney Adams stated
that they were talking about a strip of land between two roads , Pine
Tree Road and Slaterville Road , and noted that the only part left was
about 21 acres . Attorney Adams stated that , in anticipation of the
questions raised last time , he wrote to Mr . Marion to get a history of
this transaction , and asked permission to read his reply which came
from his [ Mar .-ion ' s ] home in Florida .
" Nov . 12 , 1980
. . .
In regard to your letter of Nov . 5 , I will try to answer some of your
questions or problems as best I can .
1
Planning Board. - 2 - November 18 , 1980
• The sale of lots to Trumbull [ sic . , " Turnbull " ] , Tavelli and
Carmichael left 220 ft . from the back of their lots to my west line .
I did leave an access road next to the Trumbull [ sic . ] lot to this
back land . At no time did I consider it as a road to Blatchley land
or any other place , except as an access road to this parcel . I was
never informed that the town had any intention of building a street
there . A few years later these people approached me - through Forest
City Realty and Mr . Keller to buy this strip . I could figure no use
for this 220 f6t , strip so I sold it to them with the access road .
I received a letter from Noel Desch that I could not sell , or offer
for sale , lots without a subdivision . I did form a subdivision with 6
lots which was in effect for 10 years . After 10 years and not a
buyer , at a cost to me of nearly $ 1000 per lot , I decided to cancel
the subdivision and try a different approach . The result was that I
sold plots instead of lots - one to Paul Zwerman which made him very
happy and the one pending to Prof . Biesdorf which takes the remaining
lots on the north side of Slaterville Rd . for this area - 58 - 22 .
The overflow for the pond is at the North East corner of the pond and
comes down across the east edge of the Zwerman plot . There is no
drainage into the pond other than from approximately 100 ft , of land
between the pond and Pine Tree Road . The spring was sold to Mr .
Trumbull [ sic . ] so does not feed the pond any longer .
In answer toe third question referring to lot 22 inside : - This is
about 400 ft . footage on Pine Tree Rd . and goes down to approximately
10 or 12 ft . below the pond . A plan for handling this has to be
• worked out with a buyer when one comes along . I will contact you when
this happens to see what we can work out .
I cannot understand the Engineer ' s thinking about the water in the
pond . None of the 57 - 1 - 11 water gets across Pine Tree Road until it
crosses partly on the Biesdorf land and partly down to and across
Route 79 by my home . The spring which fed the pond was sold to Mr .
Trumbull [ sic . ] and no longer comes to the pond . The only water which
comes into the pond is the drainage from the approximately 100 ft . of
land ' between the pond and Pine Tree Rd . and rain water . The only
water to drain from the pond , if it indeed gets full , would be no more
rain if the pond were not there . I think it would be best to forget
the drainage pipe inside the pond since it is almost imposible to keep
it open . The overflow , approximately 10 - 12 ft . wide is on the upper
eastern end and if the water should get to it , it would flow out on
almost level land sloping down to Route 79 . If it seemed advisable to
fill the pond in and eliminate it , I could drain it with the hydrant
down on Slaterville Rd . which has , I believe , a 3 inch stream . I
built this pond in approx . 1945 in a boggy place to keep my cows out
of the mud and to have a large amount of water available . I put in
the hydrant for fire protection as there was no water on Slaterville
Rd . at that time . The pond was laid out and built by Soil
Conservation Service by Rod Fellows and Russell Lane . Cornell leared
a great deal from this pond and held many classes there .
You asked if the pond has ever overflowed . When the Spring was
feeding it , it: did . The Spring no longer feeds it .
In answer to your last question - I have no plans for parcels 3 and 4
• on the Fellows map as of now . If the Board has questions for me , I
would be glad to attend a meeting in the Spring , if they wish .
We hope this answers your questions . Don ' t hesitate to write or call
r
Planning Board - 3 - November 18 , 1980
us if you need to .
Yours truly ,
( sgd . ) John L . Marion "
Attorney Adams noted , in regard to the street , Mr . Marion ' s
comment stating that he never knew about a Town road . Attorney Adams
presented to the Board , for the record , [ Exhibit 1 ] , a copy of a map
that he had sent to Mr . Marion which he had returned , having marked
upon it the pond pipe line and the normal overflow . Attorney Adams
noted that the two- inch pipe shown is the one that goes down to a
hydrant on Slaterville Road . Attorney Adams stated that the pond is
purely a drainage area . Attorney Adams stated that Mr . Marion has no
plans to sell that particular area , adding that it does not affect any
parcels that any person has .
Attorney Adams read from a letter which he wrote to Mr . Marion ,
dated November 5 , 1980 , as follows : if Planning Board is also
concerned about future sales of the Parcels " 3 " and " 4 " on the Fellows
map . I told them you were not in the " development business " and would
sell these parcels in bulk , to one or two persons and not to
individual lot: owners . I assured them that any sales of land in these
parcels , if not for the whole parcels , would be presented to the Town
Engineer ( and / or Planning Board ) for prior approval . " [ The entirety
of Attorney Adams ' letter is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . 1 Attorney
Adams stated that , with reference to the remaining lands , they will
• have to come , adding that no one knows now , whether the pond is filled
in or not , that it is , or is not , an integral part of the drainage .
Attorney Adam : proceeded to describe the ditches existing .
Vice Chairman May noted that this was a Public Hearing and asked
if anyone from the public wished to speak . No one spoke .
Vice Chairman May asked if Mrs . Restaino had any comments or any
comments to report from Mr . Fabbroni , Mrs . Restaino stated that the
comments from Mr . Fabronni with respect to the pond filling or changes
in drainage have to do with his concern that this runs along a stretch
of shale and acts as a catch basin for a lot of drainage in the area
and the house :) below would possibly have wet basements . Mrs . Restaino
stated that , actually , there is no way to tell what changes would
occur if this pond were filled . Mrs . Restaino stated that , in
addition , Mr . Fabbroni thinks the lots are too small , in that , if
" this " particular piece of land were taken as 10 % for open space or
park , it would leave the subdivision lots in the future too small .
Mrs . Restaino proceeded to tack up an old Town map and indicated the
Zwerman land , which is to the southwest of the pond , and stated that
" this " [ indicating ] is the parcel that Mr . Fabbroni was concerned
about , that is , " this " remaining parcel with the pond , the concern
being that the pond would take up too much of the land , it being a
half - acre pond . Mrs . Restaino stated that Mr . Fabbroni ' s suggestion
was that the pond be covered by an easement agreement and that the
Town would maintain it and that it would still remain part of any of
• the parcels if it were subdivided in the future , therefore , leaving
parcels of sufficient size , if subdivided in the future , and the Town
could maintain the pond . Mrs . Restaino stated that Mr . Fabbroni was
Planning Board - 4 - November 18 , 1980
quite concerned that the pond be left as it is , adding that Mr .
Fabbroni said that it could use some cleaning and looking after and
this would serve both properties if some sort of agreement , like an
easement agreement , were set up .
Attorney Adams stated that he could not speak for Mr . Marion on
this , adding that it has not come up , however , it sounded very
feasible to him [ Adams ] . Attorney Adams stated that he did not think
he [ Marion ] would want to go to great expense to fill it up , adding
that it is only about 11 feet deep . Attorney Adams stated that he
thought the easement idea was very good , but he could not say that
they would , at that time , come back and either have the easement at
that time or not , adding that whatever has been said sounds feasible
to him so long as it is not going to take away the right of a person
to use the land .
Mrs . Grigorov commented that the pond is used for skating now .
Vice Chairman May stated that he would have very serious concerns
about it not :being protected , adding that it is something that it is
easy to say that it is not draining any land or protecting any land ,
but , it obviously is serving a property and has to be protected . Vice
Chairman May stated that the difficulty is how to protect it if it
becomes approved property , adding that it is the Board ' s prerogative
to hold the subdivision in order to protect it . Attorney Adams
• wondered if Vice Chairman May meant the whole area and not " these " two
lots , adding that that could be ten to fifteen years , and further
adding that he did not think the Board has any legal right to do that .
Attorney Adams stated that it should not hold up these other things on
the basis of that . Mr . Mazza pointed out that it is part of the
subdivision . Attorney Adams responded that he would like to discuss
this subdivision matter , adding that he agreed that there should be
the Planning Board but he did not think the Board has such a right ,
and further adding that yours says " new street " and it is right in the
letter . Attorney Adams stated that it should not be that way -- it is
not right , adding that a subdivision is just limited to where there
are new streets and you should have this right , but under present law
you do not have that right . Attorney Adams stated that he talked to
Supervisor Desch today and he agreed that you should not have the
right to do that . Attorney Adams stated that he cannot see that the
Board has the authority to limit a subdivision which would create two
lots until you get an easement . Attorney Adams stated that he
[ Marion ] might be willing to deed the thing to the Town as a park ,
musing that that might be the best thing , and adding that that could
only be done in the Spring of 1981 , but it should not affect Biesdorf .
Vice Chairman May noted that it would affect Zwerman , adding that
he has bought it and that is the reason for the language in the Deed .
Vice Chairman May wondered why Attorney Adams thought it would be so
long , with Attorney Adams responding that he [ Marion ] is in Florida
and it would be three months to get Town Attorney Buyoucos to go on
• this . Attorney Adams suggested that , if the Town could get them a
proposal in writing in the next week or so , he would submit it to Mr .
Marion . Attorney Adams stated that no one wants to fill in this pond ,
Planning Board - 5 - November 18 , 1980
• adding that the spring does not feed the pond ; the hydrant is there ,
water and sewer are up there now . Attorney Adams stated that he would
object to any delay on this particular subdivision .
Mr . Mazza wondered if the Board were to grant preliminary
subdivision approval contingent upon easements , would Attorney Winn
advise him [ Biesdorf ] to buy it . Attorney Winn responded that he
certainly would not , adding that that would be crazy to advise him to
buy something that the Planning Board may or may not grant beyond
preliminary subdivision approval . Attorney Winn stated that
" subdivision " means the division of land into two or more lots / plots
. . . in such a way as to create one or more new streets . " An exchange
between Attorney Winn and Mr . Mazza followed with respect to the
issuance of a building permit . Vice Chairman May reread the
subdivision regulations and Attorney Adams stated that it is a matter
of opinion , adding that , certainly , it is vague . Mr . Mazza noted that
that is the way this Board has been operating for years . Attorney
Adams noted that Mr . Fabbroni asked for a subdivison plan and
considered it as such , and stated that the remaining lands have
nothing to do with this and the remaining lands and are not affected
on any environmental aspect whatsoever . Attorney Adams stated that at
that time they will come back to the Board for approval , adding that
they may never do anything with it . Attorney Adams stated that Mr .
Marion may very well consider an easement , but he did not think the
Town will get any easement within six months . Attorney Adams
• reiterated that he had talked to Mr . Desch about the subdivision
regulations . .Attorney Adams stated that he was saying that what they
are asking for now is the approval of these two lots because they
asked for a building permit for these two lots and Mr . Fabbroni and
Mr . Cartee indicated that there should be a subdivision , and he did
not oppose that , but he did not think the Board can tie up these two
lots for an economic gain for the Town . Vice Chairman May noted the
other lot and stated that there is no economic gain for the Town .
Attorney Adams stated that Zwerman is the only one that can be hurt by
all this .
Town Councilwoman Raffensperger stated that it was her
understanding of this concern that there is the potential that the
remaining lands , other than these two lots that are the concern of Mr .
Marion , may not , because of drainage , be approved by the Planning
Board for lots . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that it seemed to her that
Mr . Adams understands this very well . Mrs . Raffensperger suggested
that approval , perhaps , could be considered as long as this goes into
a resolution and it is clear that it may be that the remaining lands
may never be subdivided , adding that it must -be clear that that pond
may not be filled in and is important to the area , as she thought it
has been in past , and will effect Zwerman and possibly other
properties in the area .
Vice Chairman May stated that the Town does not have some way of
requiring maintenance , adding that he was not sure that that pond will
• be there in ten or twelve years from now without some maintenance
being performed . Vice Chairman May stated that his only concern is to
protect it and he was not sure how , musing , if we can protect the pond
Planning Board - 6 - November 18 , 1980
• and still approve these two lots , that is fine , but he was not sure
how to do that , other than , perhaps , Mr . Marion giving it to the Town .
Attorney Adams stated that he was made aware of this today by Mrs .
Restaino , but he has not had the opportunity to obtain expertise in
the matter of topography and drainage . Mrs . Grigorov wondered if it
would not be possible to have this remaining area be one parcel ,
adding that :) he did not like the selling off of lots piecemeal .
Attorney Adams offered that that might be possible . Mrs . Grigorov
suggested that then , there could be pond restrictions on that
particular parcel . Attorney Adams stated that he had no problem with
that .
Vice Chairman May closed the Public Hearing at 8 : 20 p . m .
Discussion followed . Vice Chairman May asked Mrs . Restaino to speak
to the Short EAF dated October 20 , 1980 . [ Exhibit 3 . 1 Mrs . Restaino
stated that the original form , if No . 3 is true and correct , is okay ,
noting that it is answered " no " with respect to " Will project alter or
have a large effect on an existing body of water ? " . Attorney Adams
stated that this division has no effect on any body of water
whatsoever .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as lead
agency in the review of the proposed subdivision of lands of John
Marion , Pine Tree Road , former parcel no . 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 , now 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 12 ,
6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 11 , 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 13 , 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 2 , and specifically regarding
point no . 3 on the Short Environmental Assessment Form , there will be
no effect on this body of water as part of any resolution made
concerning this subdivision , approve and hereby does approve the Short
Environmental Assessment Form as completed , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that pursuant to the State Environmental
Quality Revieur Act , Part 617 , this action is classified as Unlisted ,
and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , has
determined from the Environmental Assessment Form and all pertinent
information that the above -mentioned action will not significantly
impact the environment and , therefore , will not require further
environmental review .
There being no further discussion , the Vice Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Schultz , Baker , Bronfenbrenner , Mazza , Grigorov .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Edward Mazza :
• RESOLVED , there being no substantive change from the Subdivision
Plan described on Exhibit " C " , Survey for John Marion , dated September
Planning Board - 7 - November 18 , 1980
• 16 , 1980 , signed and sealed by George Schlecht , Professional
Engineer / Professional Land Surveyor , and described on Exhibit " A " ,
Survey Map of a Portion of Lands of John L . Marion Showing Three Lots
to be Conveyed. , dated July 22 , 1979 , signed and sealed by Clarence W .
Brashear , Licensed Land Surveyor , presented at Public Hearing to the
Town of Ithaca Planning Board on November 4 , 1980 , and presented at
Public Hearing to said Board on November 18 , 1980 , that the Town of
Ithaca Planning Board grant and hereby does grant Final Subdivision
Approval for lands of John Marion , Pine Tree Road , Former Parcel No .
6 - 58 - 2 - 22 , Now 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 12 , 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 1101 6 - 58 - 2 - 229131 and
6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 2 , with the exception that the remaining lands of Marion ,
including the farm pond , in Parcel No 6 - 58 - 2 - 22 . 2 , aside from the two
lots shown on Exbhibit " C " , heretofore cited , comprised of 0 . 5 acres
and 1 . 0 acres each , and proposed to be sold to Biesdorf , are to remain
in an undeveloped state , with the additional requirement that the farm
pond be maintained to act as a viable catch basin for waters presently
being drained to said pond , or , that these remaining lands be granted
to the Town of Ithaca .
There being no further discussion , the Vice Chair called for a
vote ,
Aye - May , Schultz , Baker , Bronfenbrenner , Mazza , Grigorov .
Nay - None .
• [ See Exhibit 4 . 1
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Vice Chairman May declared the matter of the Subdivision of the
lands of John Marion on Pine Tree Road duly closed at 8 : 55 p . m .
NEW BUSINESS - •- INFORMATIONAL DISCUSSION OF PETITION TO AMEND THE TOWN
OF ITHACA ZONING ORDINANCE TO CREATE A NEW ZONE TO PERMIT WITHOUT
APPLICATION T0, THE BOARD OF APPEALS THE USE OF SINGLE FAMILY OR
MULTIPLE FAMILY RESIDENCES FOR ROOMING HOUSES , WITH THE PREMISES
SOUGHT TO BE REZONED BEING IN THE VICINITY OF ITHACA COLLEGE . RICHARD
& PHYLLIS SULLIVAN ; ROBERT J . HINES , ESQ . , AS ATTORNEY ,
Neither Mr . and Mrs . Sullivan nor their Attorney , Robert • J .
Hines , were present . It was agreed that discussion of this matter
would take place at the December 2 , 1980 meeting of the Board .
REPORT OF COUNTY PLANNING BOARD CHAIRPERSON - - TOWN COUNCILWOMAN
SHIRLEY RAFFENSPERGER ,
Councilwoman Raffensperger stated that she had four meetings to
report on , noting that she has not reported on the October 8 , 1980
meeting of the County Planning Board where the primary business was a
report from the Office for the Aging on the process by which they
formulate their three - year plan for services to the elderly . Mrs .
• Raffensperger reported that there was a mutual exchange of concerns
and ' prio"rities for services to the elderly with the primary emphasis
being the emerging problems of housing for the elderly . Mrs .
Planning Board - 8 - November 18 , 1980
• Raffensperger stated that , in the age group of 65 to 75 , 65 % own their
own home , however , in only a few years , the elderly will probably not
be able to maintain themselves in these single family homes and the
already scarce housing will probably become more scarce . Mrs .
Raffensperger stated that the City and Town of Ithaca have over 60 % of
the aging in the County and probably the Town and the City will have
to come up with some definite plans in the next five years - - land use
plans - - for cooperation in the grants , etc . Mrs . Raffensperger
stated that she had some more on housing which came from other
meetings .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported , with respect to Bikeways , that the
County Planning Department had applied for grants for bikeways in the
northeast section of the Town of Ithaca , Village of Lansing , and
Village of Cayuga Heights , adding that the individual municipalities
have approved this application and the County Planning Board also
recommended that application to the Board of Representatives .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported that she attended the 42nd Annual
Planning and Zoning Institute on October 26 - 28 , 1980 , at the Nevele in
Ellenville , New York , adding that Mr . Aron was unable to attend . Mrs .
Raffensperger stated that she will , next year before this meeting
comes up again , urge the Town Board to send more representatives to
this Institute as she was very impressed by the program and the
quality of the discussions . Mrs . Raffensperger reported that she has
• been appointed as a Region 6 Director for the New York Planning
Federation and that she will be going to Albany in early December at
which time they will tell her what she is supposed to do .
Turning to the November 12 , 1980 meeting of the County Planning
Board , Mrs . Raffensperger reported that there was considerable
discussion of the truck traffic study which began ' with a petition of
concern over Route 79 truck traffic . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that
the Town Board referred that inquiry to the County Planning Board and
the County Planning staff is now conducting a study involving a survey
over six or seven months as to where they are going to and coming from
and actually. stopping them . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that there has
also been increased use of weighing stations on Route 79 and spoke of
portable weighing stations and even weighing at night . Mrs .
Raffensperger stated that there was a lot of discussion with a lot of
it not necessarily going to solve the problem , but being speed , noise ,
and what it is about trucks that is so disruptive . Mrs . Raffensperger
stated that there has been encouragement to the County Planning staff
to extend the scope of their study , not just to origin and
destination , but to other matters also .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported that the Morse Chain construction was
discussed at both the October 8th and the November 12th meetings , and
the County Planning Department has been designated as the lead agency
for this Type 1 Action and for other actions . Mrs . Raffensperger
stated that tYtis is working very well and Morse Chain is the first
test of another muncipality ' s large construction project , adding that
' it has ' been determined that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement
would be prepared , given the nature of the type of development .
Planning Board - 9 - November 18 , 1980
. Mrs . Raff: ensperger reported that the Warren Road reconstruction
was discussed and the County is progressing to the final design stage
for the improvement which is that Warren Road will be three lanes with
one turning lane in the middle .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported that solid waste burning out at the
old hospital was discussed and the County has set aside monies for a
feasibility study of such a steam generating power plant there , with
engineering firms being interviewed and a target construction date of
not later than 1985 .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported that the Economic Advisory Board has
adopted a resolution encouraging local municipalities to assist
developers in packaging plans for construction of multi - family housing
in Tompkins County , and noted that in the area of comprehensive
resource development that is one of the planning priorities in the
Tompkins County Community Resource Development brochure . Mrs .
Raffensperger noted that it is in the area of housing in Tompkins
County that perhaps more community involvement needs to be mobilized
with more education about it . Mrs . Raffensperger offered that there
is going to bn. increased requirements that municipalities allow more
more multiple housing , adding that the County Planning office has
inventoried suitable sites , a goodly number of which are in the Town
of Ithaca . Mrs . Raffensperger urged that the members of the Planning
Board either look at , or obtain a copy of , the large map on this
subject on the bulletin board at the County Planning Office , 128 East
Buffalo Street .
Referring again to the Morse Chain SEQR actions , Mrs .
Raffensperger noted that the Village of Lansing and the Town of
Lansing had provisions in their Zoning Ordinances with respect to
run - off when giving any kind of permission to construct large
commercial or industrial facilities . Vice Chairman May commented that
that was an order from the Village of Lansing and the Town of Lansing .
Mrs . Raffensperger reported on a parks and recreation for
suburban areas: meeting she had attended at which the importance that
many of these towns put on the use of the 10 % land conveyed for parks
was discussed and , if not done , the use of the " in lieu of " money .
Mrs . Raffensperger commented that many towns are regretting not having
done this on a regular basis , that is , taking the " in lieu of " as cash
payment and using it for parks in another area , adding that this is an
important priority .
Vice Chairman May thanked Mrs . Raffensperger for her excellent
report .
ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE TOWN PLANNER , BARBARA Z . RESTAINO
Mrs . Restaino stated that she wished to inform the Board that she
ap
will the leaving the Town of Ithaca on December 31 , 1980 . Mrs .
• Restaino stated that she will be attending the Maxwell School at
Syracuse ' ' University as a full - time student in the Master ' s Degree
Program in Public Administration , Mrs . Restaino stated that she will
Planning Board - 10 - November 18 , 1980
• still be living in her home in Ithaca .
Mrs . Restaino stated that it had been a pleasure for her to work
with the Town and with Boards such as this . Mrs . Restaino stated that
she had learned a tremendous amount from the Town and from her staff
associations .
Vice Chairman May stated that the Town , and certainly the
Planning Board , appreciate having had her here . Vice Chairman May
stated that Mrs . Restaino will be missed .
CONSIDERATION OF REAPPOINTMENT OF EDWARD A . MAZZA TO THE PLANNING
BOARD ,
Vice Chairman May stated that Mr . Mazza ' s term expires on
December 31 , 1980 , and that both he and the other Board members would
like to request , and sincerely hope , that Mr . Mazza will consider
another term with the Board . Mr . Mazza responded that he would be
happy to continue as a member of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mrs . Barbara Schultz :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is pleased to
recommend and hereby does with pleasure recommend to the Town Board
the reappointment of Mr . Edward A . Mazza to another seven -year term on
• the Planning Board , effective January 1 , 1981 , at the expiration of
his present term December 31 , 1980 .
There being no further discussion , the Vice Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Schultz , Baker , Mazza , Grigorov .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
[ Secretary ' s Note : Mrs . Bronfenbrenner had left the meeting at 9 : 00
p . m . ]
ADJOURNMENT
Upon Motion , Vice Chairman May declared the November 18 , 1980
meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board . duly adjourned at 9 : 17
p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board .
•
N ...
al
TV
op O
I Ip .1
. w R r • . n . � .�
CI • N �, . i ,� � 1 w' D
DD
.j
// r' ri � ��;,, Tl. f �: • 1 � � 1111
60
MOP
1 � \
'7 O, 1
v' , 1
134
'
495 000 ,42
;Q
� � . N5 3 �� i '�
r t . � 1.
,. i,
h
.>;` • . , o ,� of c hx �� �
/0#M.
,
t _. p G �►
- -:. . . .. .._. "' .. . .«�•'c x i s� w hew -
1
�xy/ o � T z
ADAMS & 'Alla✓ ISP. N ARMAND 1. AUANM
111CNHV W. THEItlICN
A 'I"Pl)IlNH: l' �l AND COUNSELORS LAW
THE CIANTON 110UNE. H1IITE 801 NAIJ•H W. NAa11
I03 WEIiT SENEGA STREET
TEIJCYHUNE 1007 ) 1179.84411
ITHACA, NEW YORK 14850
November 5 , 1980
Mr . John L . Marion
B- 10 Palm Grove
Ellenton , FL 33532
Re : Marion - Biesdorf T- 3366
Dear John :
i
I met last night ( 11 / 4/ 80 ) with the Ithaca Town Planning Board to ask
approval of the " plan " for sale of the Biesdorf parcel . As you know , the
town considers it a subdivision of the whole of the Parcel 22 ( # 1 on enclosed map ) .
They reason that :
1 . The sale to Turnbull , Tavelli , etc . constituted more than one sale
because :
a ) the three purchasers eventually divided up the property ( added to
their back and side yards ) and ;
b ) the previously designed 60 foot street was sold as a part of it ; and
as this street Gras previously planned as an approach to and from the Blatchley
parcel on the north and Pine Tree Road , you had no " right " to abandon the town
street plan (by abandoning your former subdivision) without town approval .
2 . The sale to Zwerman was the fourth sale ( considering # 1 above as three
instead of one ) and required Town Planning Board approval for that reason , but
especially because it is the drain- off area for the pond and ;
3 . The Biesdorf sale is the fifth sale from this one parcel , and they need
to know what is to happen with the rest of Lot 22 ( inside ) .
For these reasons no decision was reached last night . Instead , the matter
was adjourned for another hearing to be held on November 18th .
The real concern of the Planning Board is to what will happen to the unsold ,
center portion of Lot 22 , where the pond is. . I told them that would depend on
who bought it , whether more than one person and for what use . Their problem is
drainage . The Town Engineer reasons that the pond is the reservoir for all the
® surface water from the area across Pine Tree Road , easterly to the Eastern Heights
subdivision ( draining all of Rod Fellow ' s parcel 3 ( Tax Parcel 57 " 1 - 11 , 43 : 68
EXHIBIT 2
Mr . John L . Marion
Re : Marion - Biesdorf T- 3366
• November 5 , 19, 80
Page 2
acres ) , and that in times of heavy rain the -water if it could not collect in the
pond , might drain off and flood the houses on the Slaterville Road , resulting in
a possible legal action against the town for damages .
I think this argument is " far- fetched" , but we need to answer it . I am
reasonably sure there will be approval of the sales of the Turnbull - Tavelli
and the Zwerman parcel , but we do need to prove that there will be no "environmental
damage " to anybody as a result of the three ( or more ) sales . The Board will have
in mind particularly what happens to the remaining pond lot .
I do not want you to get excited or upset about the matter . I have perhaps ,
exaggerated the situation . I do want you to write me about the pond . Is it
surface or spring- fed , or both ? I understand it is natural and not man-made and
that it was there when your father owned the land . Is that correct ?
i
Has the pond ever over- flowed its banks ? If so , on whose land did the water
go ?
Is there either an underground pipe or a surface ditch for the excess water
to run off ?
In the deed to Zwerman we provided :
"The Grantor reserves the exclusive right
to the water from a pond lying northwest
of the conveyed premises , now piped to a
hydrant on the conveyed premises , which
said latter pipe and hydrant may be removed
by the Grantees at their election ; and the
right to permit the overflow from said pond
across the northeasterly portion -of the
conveyed premises " .
On the enclosed copy of a portion of the McCurdy map , can you show
approximately where the pipe and hydrant is , and where the lowest part of the
Zwerman parcel (at the northeast ) is , over which the surface water might flow
IF the pond overflows , or if there were no pond ( reservoir ) .
Unless the pond is a "bubbling , spring- fed " pond ( or the terminus of an
underground stream) , with its own water supply , I think that all surface water
from the whole hillside would either sink in the ground or go down the roadside
ditch along Pine Tree Road and empty into the Slaterville Road roadside ditches ,
would it not ?
I know you do not plan to do it , but what do you think would happen if the
pond were filled in by the next owner ? Would there be any flooding over Zwerman ?
How big is the pipe .( and hydrant ) which drains the. pond ? Could on open
ditch there drain the surface or other water from the pond ?
EXHIBIT 2
Mr . John L . Marion
Re : Marion - Biesdorf T- 3366
• November 5 , 1980
Page 2
You have known this area all your life . Has the pond ever over- flowed ?
Approximately how far is the 'pond away from Zwerman or the Slaterville Road ?
The Planning Board is also concerned about future sales of the Parcels
113 " and " 4 " on the Fellows map . I told them you were not in the " development
business " and would sell these parcels in bulk , to one or two persons and not
to individual lot owners . I assured them that any sales of land in these
parcels , if not for the whole parcels , would be presented to the Town Engineer
( and /or Planning Board ) for prior approval .
Let me hear from you before the 18th .
Yours trul e
Armand L . Adams
ALA / sep
enclosures
EXHIBIT 2
SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
INSTRUCTIONS :
( a ) in order to answer the questions in this short EAF it is assumed that the preparer
will use currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of
the action . It is not expected that additional studies , research or other investigations
will be undertaken .
( b ) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be significant and a
completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary .
( c ) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that this project is not
significant .
( d ) Environmental Assessment
1 . Will project result in a large physical change to
the project site or physically alter more than
10 acres of land ? Yes ` No
2 . Will there be a major change to any unique or
unusual land form found on the site ? Yes No
3 • Will project alter or have a large effect on an
existing body of water ? Yes x No
4 . Will project have a potentially large impact on
• groundwater quality ? Yes No
5 . Will project significantly affect drainage flow on
adjacent sites ? Yes No
6 . Will project affect any threatened or endangered
plant or animal species ? Yes OrX No
7 . Will project result in a major adverse effect on
air quality ? Yes No
8 . Will project have a major effect on visual
character of the community or scenic views or
vistas known to be important to the community ? Yes No
9 . Will project adversely impact any site or
structure of historic , pre - historic , or paleonto-
logical importance or any site designated as a
critical environmental area by a local agency ? Yes X No
10 . Will project have a major effect on existing or
future recreational opportunities ? Yes No
11 . Will project result in major traffic problems or
cause a major effect to existing transportation Y
systems ;! Yes / \ No
12 . Will project regularly cause objectionable odors ,
noise , glare , vibration , or electrical disturbance Y
as a result of the project ' s operation ? Yes /\ No
Short Environmental Assessment Form Page Two
13 . Will project have any impact on public health
. or safety ? Yes X No
14 . Will project affect the existing community by
directly causing a growth in permanent population
of more than 5 per cent over a one - year period or
have a major negative effect on the character of
the community or neighborhood ? Yes X No
15 . Is there public controversy concerning the
project ? Yes x No
Signature of Applicant %!'G Signature of_-Ke i eer
Date Title
n. .
Agency
Date Re iewed
Reviewer ' s Recommendations :
44
0
Determination by Town of Ithaca Board :
Negative Declaration - determination of non - significance .
Action may be of significant environmental impact -
EAF required .
Baur, C i iso
Date
TOWN OF ITHACA COUI4TY OF TOMPKINS STATE OF NEW YORK V
• EKf 5 ]'/NQF P/ N
. }--( CUL VERT •
'TL !/ r, L / TY POLE
- - G - - C7AS L /NE' eAOAOA »X4WEJ
O 5ET ROD
—•$— sEWER LIVE (APPR0X /1y^ 7'j5)
` - -F✓- WATER L/NE (.4PPAWX /MATE=)
I \
PJ4 UL j SAAA z WERM.I N REM�1//V l/V4 4t A/D3 O� AAAA
577 43(0 T1 A
-7 4vW MAR /O N X (/� VG3
IS Of �E0 E
S` � y3- � • r° P• -
�\` <J
1000 . .0 P' oOta 4L�
99. i043
8• r.
�•zRie' ryE lotfp
00
p� \
„Op
we
z
k� � cam' �\ u/ , • L .. . �--` .
0
Z M. PdGi/EL ' `l
-` L498/.0�37 I
NOTE: ANY REVISIONS TO THIS MAP MUST COMPLY WITH SECTION 7209,
SUBDIVISION 2 OF THE N:W YORK STATE EDUCATION LAW.
DATE DRAWN
n ,
SURVEYED 7-�O gy �J. r' SCALE I = `iC) NO.NO. �n /C 7
% �'.,� I HEREBY CERTIFY I AM A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL LAND GEORG4 SCHLECHT C
�fi.% ss SURVEYOR OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK AND THAT THIS YROFE';SIONAL INGINEIR ,\ O
A x MAP CORRECTLY REPRESENTS A SURVEY MADE UNDER MY iRORSSIONAL EAS SUlIVEYOR
SUPERVISION. MAIN OFFICE
e o/ ' q YELLOW RARN ROAD
Des9 ' l�- fin ! EREEvn1e N Y. am �Xfi/Q/ T y4
�07•AII•F&37
14
_ u •• Y
31
Its
13 11125
111
24 1 ° _ sm to 110 .
T4K NAP Ef1QOR . . .s 1 10 •. tt as • • 4
`� ••
17 ' Z3 P uI $wort ar.a 54
� 1
• . \ ..ra0 s.r..c, seoe.c. LANE
le 22 • u . .oma
31. 1 1 8 wa X1111 ,,,,.c, , ,, ago
. 20 W
940 4C. CAL. • q C 1 & � 20(' right of way is
2,
r u•
• 20 �'I a 20
29 % 22 . 21 19
* &C cc ' 1 as) asc )
o
.. •
lls
OR l )) I
I is 1 446. 60 IC CAL
20.1
\� \ .. , 1`7 .. . ��
< � dLsn
I . 16
27 ' I iAID
,S 0f • '
\\ 23 �J a e a).
• is �\ x ` ' a
631
SIT
\ O ., �,�� 4660
\ 1 , Kc.L �� 14 so
LA is, " i
30
Mao \ 4�
\ 6040
o \ �
ek
'2
ssac c4L
—n? F-A L
r
Scale I11 z 40cm)
NORTH EAST APPRAISALS AND MANAGEMENT COMPANY. INC.
ITHACA. NEW YORK
ExH � 13 / 7 �
r a.
• ♦ t
r f E 0771@tL
oc
Al c or t'c •t rta,✓ ,rl� �2i c /J , OGTQO,y/ f'Lc�
/Y/AP of A�.oer ,•✓INNO / viA/
i�, i;►a 41 c•r,Q.o~4904 c
aew rc .ve re. p
` = etc / 9Z '
`\ :C 4010 G 2 04c.vstl f L.v cnr
l4 . p ) I
% 0
q 46 Ca ,QMIcNea[ .
(n . o )
� iG• / Q. B '7 e ' �
ot
I LIZ
Z d = V B3 - -
� � ° o � i va4v8ou •
c. ♦ � o v ( 12 • p l b
oI � �� /. 0 7AC•IF s ! �
3 AP
t4 �.
i A?&MA /i✓G LAMAS op M4q .P/o*%1 E ;
R
i
J
Of NfK AOf • N ,
♦ r �f� E 14 JO O R r / o e/ O F L ND
01,01 N .[ . M A R i o /coo,
• • '` .S/Yc7ivia6 T/,/,t�EE t or, s TPBe Cd✓vr,'EP
�o t• •:- T.
: , ' � �%Nf PF E W
,COAD i O .4/
of trv.�c.4 '
I d.!�j. � ..1!,��.•J� TG�•,' .I�,ti /Ns C Gi/�.y y/ n/Ew J/c .cr sr.�• 7E
• �.y4 �a4.v' ..i' ! , C �7LF . j4r BO 4 svL/ 2 L, / 079
EXH/L•�/ T 'f �3.,1�1� aa•ldc.:�- '79)
77 • m.
SCHEDULE A � , .
Alm
b y a f®
_ 76
2 A►
ow ^ A
4% 10
D A » O do
' Z °
rl
0 0 � •� � ao b � w
rani °
Z ° �Iat', tib � 4 I M
,i it a Z M
tj
AP tA
—f• �� * w . 00 m1
I
l `C N b
G c� V
t
o o Z .a, 6/s o eOb
F /y
Irba
0