Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1982-09-07 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD SEPTEMBER 7 , 1982 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , September 7 , 1982 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , N . Y . , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , Barbara Schultz , James Baker , Virginia Langhans , David Klein , Bernard Stanton , Edward Mazza , Carolyn Grigorov , Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) , Peter M . Lovi ( Town Planner ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) . ALSO PRESENT * Dan Peterson , 110 Dey Street , Ithaca City Lisa Best , WHCU Carol Boyd , WTKO Scott Patrowicz Bryan Clark Michael McCaffrey Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 35 p . m . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JUNE 151 ., ,198 .2 . 0 MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mrs . Barbara Schultz : RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of June 15 , 1982 be and hereby are approved as written . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May , Schultz , Baker , Langhans , Klein , Stanton , Mazza , Grigorov . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . APPROVAL OF MINUTES - JULY 6 , 1982 MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker : RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of July 6 , 1982 be and hereby are approved as written . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Ma : , Baker , Langhans , Stanton , Grigorov . Planning Board 2 September 7 , 1982 • Nay - None . Abstain - Schultz , Mazza , Klein . The MOTION was declared to be carried . REPORT OF THE TOWN BUILDING INSPECTOR , LEWIS D . CARTEE The Building Inspector ' s Report of Building Permits Issued for the months of July and August 1982 had been received by the Planning Board members with their Agendae . Such Reports show : 1 . 10 permits issued in the month of July 1982 for $ 73 , 950 . 00 in improvements , as compared with 12 permits issued in July of 198.1 for $ 315 , 950 . 00 in improvements . 2 . 6 permits issued in the month of August 1982 for $ 59 , 200 . 00 in improvements , as compared with 11 permits issued in August of 1981 for $ 181 , 300 . 00 in improvements . REPORT OF THE TOWN ENGINEER , LAWRENCE P . FABBRONI Mr . Fabbroni reported that the agreement has been finalized with Cornell University to enter Fall Creek and , hopefully , the Army will get their orders to go in there this week . He indicated that the Town will go in any way hoping that everything falls in together . Mr . Fabbroni reported that , at the same time , the Town is preparing the bed for the bikeway connection between East Ithaca and the Railroad track , noting that the gravel from the project in Fall Creek is going in there . Mr . Fabbroni commented that there is three years ' worth of gravel in there , if we took it all out . He stated that the Town will use the gravel for bikeway construction and construction of the running track around DeWitt Middle School . He commented that if the Army does not help , the Town will tELke out the gravel . Mr . Fabbroni reported that over the summer the Lisa Lane walkway and park and landscaping was completed , adding that it was quite a. job because of the more or less sandy quick- type soil . He described a bank that eroded and quite an extensive tie job both above and below a trail so as to hold soil into that bank . Mr . Fabbroni described a lot of construction in terms of having adequate foundation and anchoring far enough into that bank so that it would not heave . Mr . Fabbroni noted that there was one CETA. crew there for the bulk of the summer . Mr . Fabbroni reported that another crew surveyed Burns Road tentative relocation , noting that the County is working on that too . He reported that they chose one alignment to study and found an old - timer who is about 78 years old said that that road had once been in that general location and when the City built the upper reservoir they relocated it . He stated that since then there has been dumping and that sort of thing , however , as his Planning Board 3 September 7 , 1982 crew was surveying , sure enough , the old right of way was there pretty well mapped out . Mr . Fabbroni commented that it was silly and smart all at one time . Mr . Fabbroni reported that Larry Stanton , along with a few other summer youth workers , has kept up with maintenance of parks . He stated that with one other helper we should keep up with the parks . Mr . Fabbroni noted that Larry Stanton is working with a consolidated crew on play structures . Mr . Fabbroni reported that work on the Northview Road West play structure has started and is about ready for footers . Mr . Fabbroni reported that we did not really want to start on Stone Quarry Road while Aurora Street was closed and , as the paper work came through , we do expect to start soon . Mr . Fabbroni reported on the status of the completion of the connection -to the retention pond at DeWitt Middle School and the completion of the running track around the school . Mr . Fabbroni reported that we have all spent a lot of time answering inquiries about Commonland over the past two months . He stated that , hopefully , some of the answers will come from the Minutes you just approved since most of the questions are related • to the June 15th meeting . He stated that other questions have come up , namely , concerns brought to the Planning Board by the Conservation Advisory Council of the City and other correspondence that we have received from the City with regard to some of those issues from the City water and sewer division . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the staff is doing independent study and research to get the facts and the City responses . Mr . Fabbroni stated that it is all very time consuming and now time is being spent with the developer ' s engineer in terms of final details of the plans he will present , plus the Covenants and Home Owner ' s Agreement we have been over and forwarded with comment to Mr . May , forwarded to the Town Attorney for review of certain aspects such as feE� simple . Mr . Fabbroni stated that that has , at various timers , taken up a lot of our time . Mr . May commented that he thought the scheduled date is October 5th for the next meeting . Mr . Fabbroni agreed , adding if we receive some additional submittals . He stated that we have most of the submittals the Board asked for three weeks in advance , we still have to receive the revised EAF you asked for . Mr . Fabbroni reported that the Ithaca-Dryden Transit is in operation , commenting that we did not have a whole lot to do with it . He stated that it complements the service to and from the Northeast and fills in the gaps by Pyramid , for example , as well as Day Hall and from the Northeast . Mr . Stanton said he was curious about the Slaterville Road people stil ]L asking questions about Commonland . Mr . Fabbroni Planning Board 4 September 7 , 1982 stated that they mostly have to do with what is in the Minutes , Mr . May commented that he had been contacted . Mr . Klein wondered if he had understood that the developer is going to masonry foundations . Mr . Fabbroni stated that that was right . Mr . Stanton commented that that would mean higher prices . Mr . May commented that he had seen an ad in the paper , adding that it was not an offering , mentioning $ 30 , 000 to $ 50 , 000 . Chairman May thanked Mr . Fabbroni for his report . REPORT OF THE TOWN PLANNER , PETER M . LOVI Mr . Lovi noted that the Board members had each received in the mail a copy of the 9 / 2 / 82 Draft Interim Land Use Plan for the Town of Ithaca , adding that this is an Agenda item . Mr . Lovi reported that he has also finished a draft of the subdivision regulations , however , he thought the comprehensive plan item was quite enough to review at this juncture and was planning to submit the sub regs later in October . He noted that that would tie in nicely with the seminar being presented by Messrs . Boos and Coon of the NYS Department of State on October 19th , Mr . Lovi reported that he has spent a lot of time on Commonland fighting brush fires . He stated that he has discussed suggestions and comments that people have had with them . Mr . Lovi reported that the CETA program is winding to a close . He noted that the Lisa Lane work and the Burns Road survey are at an end . Mr . Lovi stated that it was a very interesting group of students and workers this year , adding that next year there would be even better use of them . Mr . Lovi reported that the computer has been very useful in many ways , citing the June 15th Minutes as an example . Chairman May thanked Mr . Lovi for his report . REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD , CAROLYN GRIGOROV . Mrs . Grigorov stated that the Planning Board does not meet in the summer , so she has no report . She noted that the Board members had received in the mail with their Agendae a copy of the last meeting of the CPB - June 9 , 1982 , the next meeting being tomorrow nicht , September 8 , 1982 . SUMMATION OF PARK SITE PLANNING ALTERNATIVES FOR EASTERN HEIGHTS PARK BY ASCE CORNELL STUDENT CHAPTER , Mr . Scott Patrowicz , Civil Engineering student , of the American Society of Civil Engineers , Cornell University Student • Chapter , greeted the Board members and introduced Bryan Clark , Civil Engineering student , and Michael McCaffrey , Agricultural student and their geo - technician . Planning Board 5 September 7 , 1982 • Mr . Patrowicz had affixed seven very large and colorful drawings to the walls of the Board room as prepared for Eastern Heights Park , Town of Ithaca , New York , ASCE Student Chapter , Cornell University , as follows : 1 . SITE ANALYSIS - USGS Map _ Site Aerial Site Location Indicated 2 . SITE ANALYSIS - Site Inventory Management Analysis Geotechnical Investigation 3 . SUITABILITY ANALYSIS - Area Suitable for High Impact Complex Site Environmentally Sensitive Area Cleared Corridor Perimeter Vegetation 4 . CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT - PASSIVE 5 . CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT - ACTIVE 6 . CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT - SEMI -ACTIVE 7 . MASTER PLAN • Mr . Patrowicz stated that tonight is the final presentation of all the work he and his colleagues have done on this project . He stated that it represents the most up - to - date information possible . Mr . Patrowicz stated that after this presentation , the work will then be turned over to Mr . Fabbroni and the Town of Ithaca , with the hope that some of it will actually be constructed , perhaps in phases . Mr . Patrowicz proceeded to review the project , recalling the April 13th presentation to the Planning Board , and noting that the site is a 14 - acre area in Eastern Heights overlooking the Six Mile Creek area and adding that the views are beautiful . Mr . Patrowicz stated that they have been working with Susan Beeners of the Town staff since November of 1981 and he proceeded to describe the project history . He spoke of the survey that was done in December of 1981 in which 100 survey shots were taken and from which the base maps were created . Mr . Patrowicz described the work of the geo - technical crew as it established the depth of bedrock , the soil foundations , and so on , and which went into the laboratory and were analyzed . He described moving on to a delineation of use zones , a suitability analysis , so to speak . Utilizing the drawing affixed to the wall and noted above as # 4 - Suitability Analysis , Mr . Patrowicz described Mr . McCaffrey ' s work in the geology area , noting shale and sand in • the center , :bedrock out - crops , little springs in an area , and so on . He described the soil as like a sieve , being silty gravel , adding that water does not drain through the soil very well . He Planning Board 6 September 7 , 1982 ' noted that the area is susceptible to frost heave since the soil is not very deep , and added that that is very important information to have at hand . He described the hydrology of the area and pointed out a highly disturbed area . He described the drainage , the vegetation , adding that Ms . Beeners had identified the major zones in that regard , for example , the area of conifers . Mr . Patrowicz pointed out the area suitable for high impact , being close to roads , with the views particularly excellent for surveillance . He pointed out the environmentally sensitive area which should be protected , noting that trails are there . He described the area delineated as complex site where there is the existing play structure , and noted bedrock at the surface . He described the perimeter vegetation as delineated on the drawing . Mr . Patrowicz reiterated that the work had been presented to the Planning Board in the Spring of 1982 and the Board had , indeed , expressed its liking of all aspects resulting in the three Concept Development Schemes - - 1 ) Passive ; 2 ) Semi -Active with ice skating , tennis , additional parking , bicycle course , and 3 ) Active with playfields and an important buffer . Mr . Patrowicz pointed out that all the schemes are based on the suitability analyses . Mr . Patrowicz stated that throughout the whole summer he worked on putting all these ideas together as best he could , the • result being drawing # 7 , the Master Plan affixed to the wall . He described the Plan in detail , noting , among other things , the main entrance , additional parking and future parking ; plenty of vegetation to buffer the homes ; beautiful views over a miniature ice rink tied to a pavilion which , itself , ties into a maintained lawn area ; pedestrian access which emphasizes the spring area and has a garden look and offers an educational experience in that one can see how water seeps out of bedrock , a retention basin which it is not known if that is even feasible , but if built , the gazebo would be nearby ; an emphasis on conifer growth ; streamside gardens ; the nature trails already in place but emphasized ; perhaps for Boy Scouts , an area for a revegetation project zone , wildflower embankment to be enhanced , natural amphitheatre ; day - camping area on a regional basis , if desired , noting the spot for that with a campfire area which would have to be clear of trees ; a playfield area near the entrance with no cars permitted but with parking nearby , being the least steep of all the slopes that are there . Mr . Patrowicz stated that he would encourage this plan to be implemented in phases and over several years . Mr . Patrowicz expressed his thanks to the Board for the opportunity of working on this fascinating project and for their positive responses to the project as it was presented . • Chairman May , joined by all the Board members , complimented Mr . Patrowicz and his colleagues on an outstanding job done . Mr . Planning Board 7 September 7 , 1982 May stated with enthusiasm that he hoped the Town can carry the proposal through to completion . Mr . Mazza inquired of Mr . Patrowicz what the logical phasing might be . Mr . Patrowicz offered that it would only be predicated on the Town ' s priorities - - it could be done effectively in any order , howE! ver , how people might move around the site in a logical sequence would appear to be where to start in thinking about such priorities . He suggested that maybe the playfield should be crone first and adding that you have to bring people through the site . Mr . Klein inquired about summer use for the rink . Mr . Patrowicz suggested basketball , volleyball . Mr . Klein stated that the concepts were very professional and very well presented , He asked Mr . Patrowicz , with reference to the parking , if he had based it on actual number projections . Mr . Patrowicz responded , no , adding , really the parking area is just a place for people to put their cars should they drive to the park . Mr . Stanton was curious about the retention pond being in what was noted as the highly disturbed area . Mr . Patrowicz commented that it might not retain anything . Again , Mr . May thanked the gentlemen from Cornell for their time and excellent work . CONTINUED DISCUSSION - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Mr . Lovi described the 10 - page document entitled " Interim Land Use Plan for the Town of Ithaca " in the hands of the Planning Board . He noted it being more fully developed as a result of the discussions the Board has had and commented that even some new ground has been broken . It was indicated that the Board will review the document , discuss it further with Mr . Lovi and another draft will result . ad hoc COMMITTEE ON GROUP HOMES The Board discussed setting up a meeting of the ad hoc Planning Board Committee to establish guidelines for the placement of' group homes in the Town of Ithaca . The committee members are : Montgomery May , Barbara Schultz , Edward Mazza , Virginia Langhans , with Lawrence O ' Neil , Skip Landen , and Fred Kulhawy as participants . It was agreed that the committee would meet on September 28 , 1982 at 7 : 30 p . m . at Mrs . Schultz ' s home , 270 Pennsylvania Avenue . The Secretary will prepare the proper notice and reminders . ADJOURNMENT • Upon Motion , the Chair declared the September 7 , 1982 meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned . Planning Board 8 September 7 , 1982 NOTE Mr . Dan Peterson appeared before the Board and stated that he had a prepared statement to be heard by the Board on Commonland . The Chair indicated to Mr . Peterson that the meeting was adjourned and Commonland had not been an agenda item . Mr . Peterson left the statement with the Board ( see attachment ) . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , Town of Ithaca Planning Board . • • What I have to say has to do with the COMMONLAND development . • On May 25 , developer Jerry Weisburd filled out the town version of the Environmental Assessment Form . On May 28 , Lawrence Fabbroni reviewed this form and declared the development as " UNLISTED " under the SEQR laws and recommended that a negative declaration of environmental significance be made to the state . In other words , to not require an environmental impact statement . Subsiquently , Peter Lovi , of the town planning department , on June 9 , pointed out to Mr . Fabbroni that he was dead wrong about the unlisted action business . The next day , Mr . Fabbroni relayed to this board that the development is indeed " TYPE 1 " . • I am here tonight to take issue with the recommendation for a negative declaration . This board is supposed to be making its decision , on whether or not to require an envirommnetal impact staement , using the critera set out in subpart 11 of part 617 of the state Environmental Conservation Regulations . This subpart of the regulations has NO counterpart in the town law . These criteria should not be confused with the Type 1 criteria . The development passes the Type 1 threshold but this only means that the action is * likely to require an environmental impact statement , and that slightly different procedures are to followed in the decision of whether or not an environmental impact statement will actually be required . We have looked into the criteria to be used and find that most of them • point directly to problems with the COMMONLAND development . Remember , If any one of thesroblems are found in the project , there may be a significant environmental effect , and the State Regulations require that an environmental impact statement be made . Specifically , the criteria that concern the project are . 1 . an increase in potential for erosion ( the development borders a highly erosion prone area ) 2 . interference with the movement of wildlife ( deer live in the area to be developed ) • 3 . atttracting a large number of people to an place , that would not normally come ( residents will be greatly attracted to use the watershed as their backyard , this area is very sensitive to overuse ) 4 . a conflict with a communitys existing plans ( romp . Co Comprehensive Plan , Aug 1975 , Dept . of Planning states that a coordinated land use plan is needed to preserve undeveloped natural areas and provide a rational plan for future developement ) * 617 . 10 c , 617 . 6 . c . 2 • 5 . impairment of the character of a neighborhood • ( the Slaterville road residents have come to you to complain about this ) 7 . creation of a hazard to human health ( the devopment border is only 100 feet from a dangerous cliff , and the developer has refused to build a fence to protect children ) 8 . change in the intensity of the use of the land ( this is obvious ) finally 9 . creation of a demand for other actions which would fullfill any of these criteria (there will be a demand for more develo ment , in particular shopping iFacilities and the East Hill Connector Finally , I would like to point out that , if this board ' still makes a negative declaration of environmental significance, you must file with the State giving reasons supporting that determination . * In light of these criteria that I have been talking about , I don ' t think that you will be able to give defendable reasons for filing a negative declaration . *617 . 10 . b T/!/1 CA -SIX 14111a FC � C- r v Pry !-"s FkVAT ( 0 /1) co � � � � ? �