HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1983-07-05 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
JULY 51 1983
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on
Tuesday , July 5 , 1983 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ,
Ithaca , N . Y ., , at 7 : 30 p . m .
PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , Barbara Schultz , Bernard
Stanton , Carolyn Grigorov , David Klein , James Baker ,
Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) , Peter M . Lovi
( Town Planner ) , Susan C . Beeners ( Town Landscape
Architect ) , Nancy M . Fuller ( Secretary ) .
ALSO PRESENT : Ann M . Ceurvels , Ronald F . Ceurvels , D . M . D . ,
Frederick Beck , Esq . , Jane Abbattista , Carl
Abbattista , Milton Greene , Gladys Blatchley ,
Claude Robb , James T . Berg , Yogesh Amin , Ellen
Robb , Ann Goldfarb - Clapp , James Clapp , Bruce Ryan
( WHCU News ) , Renee Starzyk ( WVBR News ) , Jim
McKinley ( WTKO News ) .
Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 35 p . m .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MARCH 2 , 1982
MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board Meeting of March 2 , 1982 , be and hereby are approved as
written .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Stanton , Klein , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 3 , 1983
MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mrs . Carolyn
Grigorov :
RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board Meeting of May 3 , 1983 , be and hereby are approved as
written .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Stanton , Klein , Grigorov , Schultz , Baker .
Planning Board 2 July 5 , 1983
• Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
APPROVAL OF MINUTES - MAY 17 , 1983
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Bernard
Stanton *
RESOLVED , that the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board Meeting of May 17 , 1983 , be and hereby are approved as
written .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Stanton , Klein , Grigorov , Baker .
Nay - None .
Abstain - Schultz .
REPORT OF THE TOWN ENGINEER , LAWRENCE P . FABBRONI
Mr . Fabbroni reported that a lot of his departments '
activities have been related to the new sewage treatment plant ,
beyond getting some last minute things in by the June 30th
deadline , much effort was put into the draft Sewer Use Law for
the three entities . Most of the effort has come on a
week - to -week basis for more information requested from the people
in Albany who are prioritizing this project . Mr . Fabbroni stated
that the word seems to be good so far with respect to funding for
next year , commenting that that is the best news . Mr . Fabbroni
stated that Don Kinsella , City of Ithaca Superintendent of Public
Works , deserves a lot of the credit , adding that the completion
of this project will be the culmination of a six to seven year
process .
Chairman May commended everyone who had worked on this
project for a job well done . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the
localities will have been saved 4 . 5 million dollars by receiving
75 % versus 55 % Federal funding . The State may have funded some
of the difference down the line .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that the Town is also looking at
long - term alternatives for Northeast Transit in terms of
purchasing a vehicle with Appalacian Regional Commission ( ARC )
funds and Section 18 Transit funds . There is a grant already
written for the equipment but there is a need to agree on a
particular vehicle ; they are leaning toward a transit vehicle
rather than a beefed - up school bus , i . e . , a 12 - 15 year life cycle
bus . The Town runs all facets of transit in a route - - stop and
go - - highway travel - - so this type of vehicle would be most
• appropriate . A great many specifications will have to be met in
choosing this vehicle .
Planning Board 3 July 5 , 1983
• Mr . Fabbroni stated that , additionally , much work has been
pointed toward the next six weeks in terms of summer help . He
has been going over assignments of work with everyone . The
program involves the County Summer Youth Employment Program
( SYEP ) and CETA . The workers will be working with Bob Parkin ,
the Town Highway Superintendent , Mike Ocello , Assistant to the
Town Engineer , and Susan Beeners , our landscape consultant .
Application was made to CETA for a work crew of 12 and the Town
received 11 workers . Last year the SYEP had 60 applicants at the
Town of Ithaca , and this year we had to stop applications at
something over 150 applicants . The job market does not appear to
be particularly good for the 18 - 19 year olds , so some of the 14 ,
15 , and 16 year olds got left out . Applicants selected were
looked at in terms of their ability to operate power equipment ,
enthusiasm , clerical ability , etc .
Mr . Fabbroni reported that the Stone Quarry Project had been
pretty much completed , adding that it was quite a big project .
He stated that he is now preparing to pave Stone Quarry Road with
the exception of the Railroad area which ties in with the
drainage project . He commented that he has gone over this with
the City Engineer and it appears that their Capital Projects
program makes it necessary to schedule part of the work next year
with a 1985 completion .
Mr . Fabbroni noted that the Burns Road matter is an Agenda
Item and thus will be covered in detail later .
Chairman May thanked Mr . Fabbroni for his report .
REPORT OF THE TOWN PLANNER - PETER M . LOVI
Mr . Lovi reported that the majority of his time had been
spent in setting up the Summer Youth Employment Program and
getting the workers together for the next six weeks . Mr . Lovi
also commented that over 150 applicants came to the Town Office
in a one -week period ; 80 applicants were interviewed , and 29 were
selected to fill positions . Workers will work a 72 - hour day with
1 crew working Monday and Tuesday and 1 working Wednesday and
Thursday . The work day will run from 8 - 4 with a 2 - hour lunch .
The summer workers will be working in six different areas : brush
cutting crew , construction crew with Susan Beeners and Richard
Schoch , park maintenance and landscaping crew , office work crew ,
and surveying crew . Mr . Lovi commented that there is a grant
proposal in process for the landscaping aspect under the Small
Business Administration ,
Mr . Lovi reported on the delivery of a new superstar transit
that will be used by Mike Ocello for survey work . The equipment
will cut down , considerably , the amount of time involved in
surveying from the sending the survey crew out to the field to
• the final drawing of the map . Mr . Ocello has some 10 to 15 miles
of surveying to do and those on his crew will be those who have
some aptitude in surveying . Mr . Lovi stated that , in addition
Planning Board 4 July 5 , 1983
• to . this , Mr . Ocello and Miss Beeners have been developing some
interesting ways to use the Diazit machine we presently have to
expand our graphic capabilities by superimposing information and
coming up with composite maps from original base maps . This will
also cut map making time down considerably . This new technique
they have devised has been put to good use already in connection
with the Six Mile Creek Committe . Mr . Ocello prepared some
graphics for them showing the City property and adjacent
landowners - - in the Watershed . With regard to the Six Mile
. Creek Committee , Mr . Lovi reported that no meeting had been held
since the recent death of the swimmer in the reservoir . Mr . Lovi
stated that he did not know the direction that might be taken as
a result of this tragedy . He was encouraged with the progress of
the Committee although it is going slowly and there seems to be
somewhat of a " wish - list " philosophy . Mr . Lovi also noted that
Burns Road is an Agenda Item for discussion later .
Chairman May thanked Mr . Lovi for his report .
REPORT OF THE TOWN BUILDING INSPECTOR - LEWIS D . CARTEE
The Building Inspector ' s Report of Building Permits Issued
for the month of June 1983 had been received by the Planning
Board members with their Agendae . Such report shows that 10
permits were issued in the month of June 1983 for $ 163 , 500 . 00 in
• improvements , as compared to 12 permits in June 1982 for
$ 231 , 650 . 00 in improvements .
REPORT OF THE PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE TO THE COUNTY
PLANNING BOARD , CAROLYN GRIGOROV
Mrs . Grigorov reported on the June 8th meeting of the County
Planning Board and stated that the EMC representative reported
that the EMC is in agreement with the concept of the Natural
History Museum but not the project , since the location has not
been decided .
Mrs . Grigorov further reported that there was some
discussion of whether or not the relocation of Route 13 was a
" dead issue . " There has been organized opposition to all
feasible solutions . Without consensus , the Department of
Transportation will not act . The Tompkins County Planning Board
endorsed a route some time ago - - November 197. 9 .
Mrs . Grigorov reported that the Six Mile Creek Study Group
reported at the meeting on suggestions that joggers and
ski - dooers should be limited to the old railroad way that NYSEG
owns .
Mrs . Grigorov noted that Bed & Breakfast places are the
• _ trendy thingandthe State has no regulations for houses that can
take fewer than ten . Localities may need to establish some
regulations standards need to be in place .
• Planning Board 5 July 5 , 1983
• Mrs . Grigorov stated that a great deal of the meeting
involved discussion of economic development concerns . Mr . Tom
Mailey , Director of Cornell University Industrial / Research Park
and Executive Vice President of the Tompkins County Area
Development Corporation was the guest speaker . The Corporation
has the following goals and objectives to guide their activities .
The Corporation acts as a communicator - as a facilitator - to
cut down red tape to a minimum , act as a coordinator and a
matchmaker by putting available resources together . The agency
has a facility of 150 , 000 sq . ft . of which 25 , 000 sq . ft , is
presently available to those who can fit into the overall
framework and purpose of Industrial / Research Park activities .
Mr . Mailey pointed out that the agency was organized into various
committees in order to concentrate on different assignments at
the same time . He cited some of the agencies with which the
corporation has a working relationship and is represented on
several of the Boards : NYS Industrial Development Task Force ,
Southern Tier East Regional Development Board - Economic Advisory
Committee ( this helps establish prospective contacts ) , Regional
Industrial Development Team , Central New York Hi -Tech Council
( this is a consortium of State - University - Industry - private
sector ) , TIDE - NYSEG ( Team Industrial Development Group ) , Tompkins
County Economic Advisory Board , Business Development Center ( TC3
has already started one ) , Occupational Education Committee -TC3 ,
and the NYS Economic Development Council ( this is the former NYS
• Chamber of Commerce ) . The Council has a mailing list of 6 , 000
who have a SIC code as major manufacturers . It conducts training
schools , outreach programs , and sharing of ideas . Mr . Mailey
said the corporation acts as a liaison between and has regular
contacts with other agencies such as - - SBA , UDC , JBA- Job
Development Authority , Science and Technical Foundation , New
Business NY Development Corporation , and Farmers ' Home
Administration . He pointed out that the purpose of the
corporation is not only to make an effort to provide space for
industrial and research purposes , but to show the overall
desirability of the area and the quality of life as well . He
said that the region in which Tompkins and Broome Counties are a
part of ( a five county area ) is second to Silicon Valley
( California ) for hi - tech activities . When asked if a particular
size of operation is favored , Mr . Mailey stated that usually
small operations are favored because of their flexibility and
variety of resources .
Chairman May thanked Mrs . Grigorov for her report .
PUBLIC HEARING : CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION
APPROVAL FOR PROPOSED EIGHT ( 8 ) LOT SUBDIVISION ALONG SLATERVILLE
ROAD AND HONNESS LANE ( AS PHASE I ) : A PORTION OF TOWN OF ITHACA
TAX PARCEL NO . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 2 , KNOWN AS 131 HONNESS LANE , GLADYS
BLATCHLEY , OWNER / DEVELOPER .
• Chairman May declared the Public Hearing in the above - noted
matter duly opened at 7 : 50 p . m . and accepted for the record the
Clerk ' s Affidavit of * Posting and Publication of the Notice of
Planning Board 6 July 5 , 1983
Public Hearing in Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on June 27 ,
1983 and June 30 , 1983 , respectively . Chairman May read aloud
the Notice as published and as noted above and asked Mrs .
Blatchley to speak to the matter .
Mrs . Blatchley presented a final subdivision map of Gladys
W . Blatchley Lots dated May 27 , 1983 , prepared and sealed by
Milton A . Greene , L . L . S . She stated that Mr . Greene was present
to answer any questions . Mrs . Blatchley stated that the proposal
was for five lots on Slaterville Road and two on Honness Lane
with the eighth lot being also on Honness Lane and achieved by
draining the pond presently there and filling it in . An access
road into the interior of the subdivision , off Honness Lane , is
planned in Phase 2 .
Chairman May asked if there were any comments at this point
from the public .
Mrs . Ann Goldfarb - Clapp , 120 Eastern Heights Drive , spoke
from the floor and asked where on Slaterville Road this
development was located . Mrs . Blatchley stated that it was
located at 1430 Slaterville Road on the upper side of the road ,
east of Hillside Alliance Church .
Mr . Stanton asked if the developer planned to have access on
• Slaterville Road for each of the five lots . Mrs . Blatchley
stated that that was correct . Mr . Stanton noted that all the
lots have 100 feet or more frontage .
Mrs . Schultz asked about the pond draining . Mrs . Blatchley
stated that they are in the process of getting that started .
Chairman May asked how long the pond had been in its present
location . Mrs . Blatchley stated that it was built in 1955 . Mrs .
Schultz wondered about problems with it filling up . Mrs .
Blatchley stated that they planned to back the pond up where the
source of flow for it was and bring it around on the lot lines to
drain it to Slaterville Road .
Mr . Carl Abbattista , representing Mrs . Blatchley , stated
that the arrows on the plan represent the diverting of the spring
on the proposed lot line into the proposed culvert to eventually
come down the ditch and meet with drainage presently east of the
church property . Water will be diverted in the direction of the
arrows on the diagram . The drainage of the pond will occur in
the same direction . The water will come down to meet the ditch
and run , taking a natural course , down the ditch and run 60 - 70
feet behind the property there .
Frederick Beck , Esq . , 309 North Tioga Street , Attorney
representing Mr . and Mrs . Douglas Armstrong , spoke from the
• floor . The Armstrong property is immediately west of the
proposed road running south of Honness Lane , Mr . Beck stated
that the Armstrongs have serious concerns with respect to this
Planning Board 7 July 5 , 1983
• project which relate to the matter of drainage . Mr . Beck asked
Mr . Abbattista if the drainage plans had been discussed with Mr .
Fabbroni and Mr . Lovi in depth . Mr . Abbattista stated that they
had been discussed in depth - at least he thought so . Mr . Beck
stated that , as Mr . Abbattista knew , there has been a flow of
water in times of heavy rain and there are underground springs .
Mr . Beck described severe damage that has occurred over a period
of years with respect to the Armstrong property which has not
made them very happy . Mr . Beck further stated that his clients '
biggest concern , whatever the drainage might be , is that the
plans that are proposed by the developer are such that the Town
Engineer and the Town Planner would be satisfied and that the
Armstrongs could be assured that , whatever was going to be done ,
the problem of drainage would be taken care of so problems such
as they experienced in the past do not occur .
Mr . Abbattista explained in more detail the plans of
drainage that would be of concern to the Armstrongs . He stated
that removing the pond and removing it properly would make Mr .
and Mrs . Armstrong very happy . Mr . Abbattista also commented
that Elton Reed is the person they have hired to do this ; Mr .
Reed is very knowledgable in the field . He stated that ,
depending on the weather , the work will be done within a week or
so . Mr . Abbattista described the work involved such as the use
of a backhoe , digging back to the dike area wall on the pond to
• the south end . He stated that they are not going to cut into the
dike or bank . He described the siphoning out of the water into a
ditch by means of a 14 " to 12 " plastic pipe . The water will
follow the ditch 60 - 70 feet behind the Armstrong property . Mr .
Abbattista stated that Mr . Reed has been in contact with Mr .
Lisle Crandall , Senior Technician with the Soil Conservation
Service , under whose direction the pond was built in the first
place in 1955 . As to the spring , which is the source of the
pond , it will be diverted and once the lot is developed will be
put underground .
Mr . Beck stated that Mr . and Mrs . Armstrong are not unhappy
with the proposal , but , they want to be sure that the problems
from the past will be alleviated . He asked what the plans were
as to construction progress - - Slaterville Road lots first or
Honness Lane lots . Mr . Abbattista stated that it was a matter of
demand but they would be starting with the first 8 lots . Mr .
Beck asked about the road . Mr . Abbattista stated that the
Honness Lane lots would not be developed until they were
absolutely assured that the problems of drainage had been taken
care of , adding that after the pond is taken care of that will be
the last lot to be developed .
Mr . Fabbroni commented that he had pointed out to the
Armstrongs that the Town would be as concerned about the drainage
under the road as they about their backyard . The Town sees the
• ditch on the high side of the road as critical regardless of
drainage flow or sub - surface condition . The ditch would cut off
the sub - surface condition as much as possible and run off ,
Planning Board 8 July 5 , 1983
• draining to the south and southwest . The topography works in
that direction as well so it is not working against the
topography . However , in regard to Lot 8 , the exact location of
the spring and the ability to completely drain off that lot is
yet to be determined with the key aspect being how any water on
the east lot line is brought along . It must be isolated to be
successful .in producing a dry Lot 8 . It is very difficult now
with the pond in there to tell the exact location of the spring
and what is feeding the pond on the high side , that will be key .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that he was satisfied with the plans , at
least as much as he can be , that the plan we see and the ditch
proposed on the east side of the road , with good sub - base , will
produce a successful dry base for that lot and also for the
Armstrongs ' backyard .
With respect to the drainage on the whole eight lots , Mr .
Fabbroni stated that his question for the Board and the applicant
is that in some way in the action that they take they should tie
down who is actually going to perform the drainage that Mr .
Greene has outlined in enough detail on the plan now , i . e . , how
does the overall drainage scheme get accomplished ? If the lots
are sold individually , the plans should specify how the overall
drainage scheme gets accomplished . If the developer does not do
it prior to the sale of the lots , the potential buyer has to be
alerted to the fact that it is their reponsibility . The Town
• will not issue a certificate of compliance until that drainage is
in place .
Mr . Abbattista stated that as of this meeting it was their
intention to do the drainage work themselves prior to the sale of
the five lots on Slaterville Road . Mr . Fabbroni added - - and ,
obviously , prior to the sale of lot 8 . He also added that lots 1
and 2 are less of a problem .
Mr . Klein asked how deep the pond was . Mrs . Blatchley
stated that at one time , in the middle when it was brand new , it
was 10 feet . Mr . Lovi stated that it was no deeper than 10 feet .
Mr . Klein stated that he would have some question about
having that filled in , adding that whoever builds there is going
to build on fill . He stated that his question would be - - is that
particular lot going to be a nightmare for somebody ? Mr .
Abbattista responded that that remains to be seen . Mr . Klein
stated that extreme care must be taken in filling that pond .
Chairman May asked Mr . Fabbroni if he thought Lot 8 should
be removed from the proposal , wondering if he would feel better
if it were .
Mr . Fabbroni responded in the negative , stating that he
thought it should be addressed , so that a potential buyer is
• aware , by pointing out the difficulties , perhaps by including a
copy of this plan with the various documents at the time of
closing , so that they know this was a pond - - also , the diversion
Planning Board 9 July 5 , 1983
ditch - - otherwise , how does the Building Inspector police that
this information is passed along .
Chairman May asked if anyone from the public wished to be
heard . Attorney Beck asked about the timetable . Mr . Abbattista
stated that the first stage is a question of demand ; the
development will move as fast as the lots will move . The second
stage is a little difficult to pinpoint but they are thinking of
within two years as an outside guess . Phase 2 involves the
interior part .
Mr . Beck asked if they planned to do the drainage ditches as
soon as approval from the Board was obtained . Mr . Abbattista
stated that that was correct . Mr . Abbattista further stated that
the subject of the pond drainage was not a issue . Mr . Stanton
stated that the pond was not contingent upon the subdivision .
Mr . Fabbroni explained about a drainage easement for five of
the eight lots , indicating an easement through all of the five
lots on Slaterville Road for back lots . The Town has asked that
some kind of structure be built where the stream comes down to
Route 79 drainage ditch and makes a right angle turn and that
this structure as well should be built in conjuntion with this
phase . Some responsibility must be taken as to how this
structure is to be accomplished . Mr . Fabbroni commented that
• this is a little unusual because the developer will not be
building the houses . He stated that the plans do what he wanted
- - a conceptual scheme for remaining land and two means of
draining down through easements and a swale and down along the
future right of way between Multari and the other lot that Mrs .
Blatchley owns ; some concept for future open space . Mr . Fabbroni
spoke here of the following letter , a copy of which each Board
member had received :
" May 27 , 1983
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Ithaca , New York
This letter will serve as notice that it is our intention to
donate a parcel of land located on the property owned by me ,
adjacent to the proposed eight - lot subdivision along the
Slaterville Road and Honness Lane , known as Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 2 . This land will be donated to the Town of
Ithaca within the next two years and will represent at least 10
per cent of the total square footage of said subdivision .
Signed ,
( sgd . ) Gladys W . Blatchley
Gladys W . Blatchley
131 Honness Lane
Ithaca , New York "
Planning Board 10 July 5 , 1983
• Continuing , Mr . Fabbroni noted that there are no utility
concerns other than easements properly indicated on the survey .
The lots on Slaterville Road would require water to be brought
across the road at the developer ' s or future landowner ' s expense .
Referring to the access plan , Mr . Fabbroni noted that the Board
had thoroughly discussed this at two prior meetings .
Chairman May asked if there were any more questions . There
were none . Chairman May closed the public hearing at 8 : 20 p . m .
Chairman May asked the Board to consider the Environmental
Assessment Form ( Long Form ) . Mr . Stanton wondered why the Long
Form had been used . Mr . Lovi explained that the Long Form was
completed because of the consideration of the entire subdivision
in terms of environmental assessment as to the scope and the
drainage even though Phase I is the particular item for which
approval is actually being considered at this time . Mr . Lovi
commented that the Long Form would probably be in order next
time .
Mr . Stanton suggested that it would be helpful if in the
future Question # 29 were answered more in laymen ' s terms with the
soils ' " real " names rather than chemical formulae . Mr . Baker
commented that the numbers are important because they designate
erosion factors .
• Chairman May noted that Mr . Lovi had reviewed the EAF on
June 27 , 1983 , making the following recommendations :
" Type of Action : Unlisted
Re : Question # 9 - I would estimate 2 . 4 acres of roadway given
the present plan for Phase II subdivision .
Re : Question # 48 - The estimated number of persons in the
subdivision following the Phase I subdivision is 36 .
RECOMMENDATION : Negative Declaration
The subdivision , as presented , should not create any adverse
environmental problems . Particular care should be taken to
ensure that the existing pond drains properly and that all other
drainage works are constructed as approved . "
MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board , acting as
lead agency in the review of the proposed eight ( 8 ) lot
subdivision along Slaterville Road and Honness Lane ( as Phase I ) ,
being a portion of Town of Ithaca Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 2 , known
as 131 Honness Lane , approve and hereby does approve the
Environmental Assessment Form ( Long Form ) as completed ; and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that pursuant to the State Environmental
Quality Review Act , Part 617 , this action is classified as
• Unlisted ; and
Planning Board 11 July 5 , 1983
• 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 Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Klein , Stanton , ' Schultz , Grigorov .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Chairman May asked Board members to turn now to
consideration of the project itself .
Mr . Stanton stated that the key item to the approval is that
the drainage process be completed and approved in an acceptable
manner to the Town Engineer . He asked if the plans presented
were acceptable enough in detail for the Town Engineer , i . e . , for
the first phase - - eight lots . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the
plans show a cross section of a typical ditch along the back of
lots 3 to 7 , i . e . , the cutoff swale for these five lots ; his idea
of the easement ; and the first phase depicts enough of the
• drainage for the pond . Mr . Stanton asked about the structure
that was to be constructed . Mr . Fabbroni described what would be
to his satisfaction and the idea of the easement . Mr . Greene
stated that the structure will be done according to the
requirements of the Town Engineer , adding that if it has to be
done , it has to be done . He stated that that lot is not feasible
until it is taken care of . He suggested that a note could be
written on the plans for the Board ' s approval that states this
structure would be constructed .
Mr . Klein commented that his concern still goes back to Lot
8 . Some sort of language should be included alerting a potential
buyer about the fill in this lot which would indicate the need
for special foundation requirements , etc . Mrs . Schultz asked how
long it takes for fill to settle . Mr . Fabbroni stated that this
depends on what type of fill is used and other factors . Mr .
Fabbroni stated that he thought it can be worked through , adding
that Mr . Klein ' s concerns in terms of a potential buyer are well
taken . He stated that most of the embankment material is
suitable for fill as long as it is dry and added that it has to
be tight material in order to have held the pond all these years .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that probably the best suggestion is that the
buyer knows the exact height of the fill , adding that the pond
looks benched in the first place .
Mr . Abbattista stated that anyone buying the lot would be
• seeing the map being presented for subdivision approval as it
will be recorded in the County Clerk ' s Office . The pond is shown
on this map and they should be able to ascertain that this
Planning Board 12 July 5 , 1983
• particular lot was once a pond . However , he also stated that
perhaps additional language might be appropriate .
Chairman May asked if the Board members wished to consider
waiving final approval . Mr . Stanton asked what else the Board is
going to find out , adding that he thought it better to waive ,
noting that the Board has discussed this proposed 8 - lot
subdivision twice before . Mr . Stanton stated that he thought a
waiver made sense .
MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . Montgomery
May :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board waive and
hereby does waive consideration of the grant of final subdivision
approval for proposed 8 - lot subdivision along Slaterville Road
and Honness Lane , as Phase I , being a portion of Town of Ithaca
Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 2 , Gladys W . Blatchley , Owner / Developer ,
said Board having determined that no substantive changes with
respect to said 8 - lot subdivision shall occur .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Klein , Stanton , Schultz , Grigorov .
• Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Bernard
.Stanton :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board grant and
hereby does grant preliminary subdivision approval which , in this
case is final subdivision approval , for an Eight - Lot ( 8 - lot )
Subdivision along Slaterville Road and Honness Lane ( as Phase I ) ,
being a portion of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 58 - 2 - 39 . 2 ,
known as 131 Honness Lane , Gladys W . Blatchley , Owner / Developer ,
as set forth on map entitled " Final Subdivision Map of Gladys W .
Blatchley Lots , New York State Route 79 & Honness Lane , Town of
Ithaca , County of Tompkins , State of New York " , prepared by
Milton A . Greene , P . L . S . # 42000 , dated May 27 , 1983 , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that such grant of final approval is
contingent upon the following conditions being met :
10 the drainage being completed to the satisfaction of the Town
Engineer as stated in Note 4 on said Final Subdivision Map
of Gladys Blatchley Lots , and
20 levels being done after the pond has been drained , available
•
to any future purchaser , such that he or she may establish
the amount of fill with respect to Lot No . 8 , and
Planning Board 13 July 5 , 1983
• 39 the completing of the swale back lot of the five lots ( Lots
No . 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , and 7 ) facing on Route 79 prior to the sale
of any of said five lots , and
4e the pond being drained by a ditch as defined in said Final
Subdivision Map of Gladys Blatchley Lots .
Mr . Abbattista asked about the two lots to the west of the
Armstrongs ' property . He asked if it were possible to get
approval to sell those lots at any time . Chairman May pointed
out that Lots No . 1 and 2 were not mentioned in the Motion on the
floor .
Mr . Fabbroni explained that a continuous path must be
provided to drain the spring to the drainage ditch west of Lot 3 .
He stated if that is maintained by the very fact of doing that
then he felt that the Armstrongs , Lot 1 , and Lot 2 would be
protected . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he had no concerns about the
sale of Lots No . 1 and 2 so long as the ditch is done as a part
of the draining of the pond . Chairman May stated that he saw no
problems with selling Lots 1 and 2 . Mr . Fabbroni also felt this
way provided that the ditch described by Mr . Greene was
completed .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
• vote .
Aye - Stanton , Klein , Grigorov , May , Schultz , Baker .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
DISCUSSION OF 1983 WORK PROGRAM FOR EASTERN HEIGHTS AREA PARK AND
CONSIDERATION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE PARKS AND RECREATION
PLANNING COMMITTEE THEREFOR .
Mr . Fabbroni introduced the subject of the Eastern Heights
Area Park to the Board by saying that they would remember that
there was a meeting of the Planning Board about two weeks ago at
which time the Board solicited public input after some review of
how we came to be where we were at the present time . A Park
Committee meeting was held subsequently at which several
residents had presented their input . After receiving this input ,
Mr . Fabbroni stated that it seemed clear that there were two
alternatives for the Board to consider at tonight ' s meeting .
The first alternative was essentially a " no " alternative ,
i . e . , to do nothing more than what is on the site except some
additional landscaping / revegetation if the Small Business
Administration grant comes through . This alternative is in
support of the petition of the various households in this area .
• The second alternative , if " to do something " is wanted ,
could be the " Padamsee Plan " so to speak . Mr . Fabbroni proceeded
to describe same briefly , utilizing a drawing appended to the
Planning Board 14 July 5 , 1983
bulletin board , indicating expanded children ' s areas , basketball
court , one tennis court . Mr . Fabbroni described these as being
the types of activities that Eastern Heights residents might ask
their neighbors to go up and engage in and , also , would be the
types of activities that the residents could not provide in their
own backyards for whatever reason . Mr . Fabbroni noted , beyond
that staff took those activities and took a look at problem
areas , area sizes , orientation to sun or wind , or other factors
such as compatibility with adjacent uses , unusual landscape on
the site , and then came up with a proposal which could be
accomplished in 1983 , and some ideas for the future on the site .
Susan Beeners presented two diagrams of alternative plans
and gave an explanation of the sitings of the various activities .
Ms . Beeners stated that one diagram was basically the same
as the Padamsee plan , but some things had been located in areas
that are the most appropriate . What could be done in 1983 under
this plan would be to install a gravel drive from Tudor Road with
five parking spaces at the end ; a half - court basketball court ;
park signs ( indicating two ) including the park use law somewhat
abbreviated , the play area would be expanded to include swings ,
see - saw , and benches ; meadow trails extended and expanded to
provide more opportunities for cross country skiing and walking ,
sled hill landings ( indicating two ) with corrogated metal pipe
installed so that there would be a smooth landing over both
areas , existing parking area holds about two cars very
uncomfortably at the moment , therefore , needs to be expanded to
the south by about two or three spaces which would involve
minimal impact ; drainage swales in the play field should be
worked on this summer to mitigate the annual water falls which
occur in the spring ; the fireplace described as being destroyed
would be repaired ; benches , steps , railings , other park furniture
would be upgraded and repaired ; and , pending the Small Business
Administration grant revegetation work would be done this year .
Along the ridge is the area most suitable for a doubles tennis
court , it being difficult to revegetate - there are some drainage
problems , but they can be overcome . Also , a storm retention area
( dry pond ) ( indicating on drawing ) similar to what has been done
at DeWitt Middle School would be completed , a walkway , as well as
new drive mentioned and cul de sac mentioned with five or six
spaces . Also , an exercise trail - - not a cinder running track - -
would be included ( indicating starting point ) using existing
meadow trails and having exercise stations describing sit - ups and
push - ups .
Mr . Fabbroni addressed the concerns expressed by the public
with respect to " expanding " the play field . He stated , for the
record , as the plan indicates , the play field is not to be
expanded from what it is now . Mr . Fabbroni spoke of safety
insofar as concerns about fire . Because of the location of this
park and the picnic facilities , two hydrants are located close to
the park , with normal response time being the same as in a house
on fire , and considering the fact that the Ithaca Fire Department
has just added the ability to run well over 600 feet of hose , the
Planning Board 15 July 5 , 1983
staff conclusion was that every fire is fightable in this area .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that the problem which had been raised as to
fires was taken seriously by the staff and the conclusion reached
was that with the available water supply , coverage is better than
most other parks in areas around Ithaca . Referring now to the
proposed Tudor Road completion , Mr . Fabbroni stated that that
would be done either at the time the additional parking area is
developed or next year and would be strictly timed with the
Highway Paving operation . He noted that the grading is already
done and the work will be low - level , surface , not a major paving
operation , but just an all -weather surface to be able to enter
the top part of Tudor Road , Mr . Fabbroni commented that staff
did not agree with all the concerns there were about parking . He
noted that , from a winter maintenance consideration , it would be
much easier from the Town ' s standpoint to have a downhill entry ,
and would be to everyone ' s best interest . As far as entry to the
park , it would be only idle curiosity on the part of a person who
would wonder where this street goes , which would cause use of
lower Tudor .
Chairman May asked Mr . Fabbroni what the number of responses
had been concerning this issue of the Eastern Heights Park ,
apologizing for not being able to attend the June 21st meeting .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that the Board had received a Petition
• representing about 55 households in Eastern Heights which stated
that they wanted nothing else done to this park . Two hundred
fifty to three hundred households were notified of the June 21st
meeting . Mr . Fabbroni summarized for Chairman May what was
discussed at that meeting . Chairman May asked if the half - court
basketball and the tennis court really came from the neighbors .
The Board members indicated that that was the case and pointed
out , in addition , that " boxing off " of the playfield had been
desired .
Chairman May asked if anyone from the public wished to speak
to this matter .
James T . Berg , 212 Tudor Road , spoke from the floor and
stated that he had owned his home for seven years . He stated
that he was very serious in his comment and in no way being
facetious , in stating that there is extreme minimal use of this
property and in asking what this " urban development dream " is for
thirty years down the road that is being propounded for the
residents . Mr . Berg urged that the Town wait ten years and see
what the need is ; how the population had grown , and what the
needs would be . Mr . Berg stated that the residents fear many
people , many automobiles , many students , adding that there have
been loud , annoying parties often at night . Mr . Berg stated that
the residents are positive that the Town has nothing from the
public to expand this park and asked that it be left as it is
now .
. Planning Board 16 July 5 , 1983
Mrs . Grigorov stated that Eastern Heights Park is a day- time
park ; night use is illegal .
Mr . Claude Robb , 221 Eastern Heights Drive , spoke from the
floor and stated that he has observed people in the park at 3 : 00
a . m . and he has called the sheriff who has not responded to
calls . Mr . Robb stated that the alternate plan was only
presented in case other things are wanted . He stated that it was
the general opinion of Eastern Heights Association to do nothing
more with the park , except the landscaping . Mr . Robb stated that
there is only one person who wanted the park at all and that
person should disqualify himself . Mr . Robb repeated that no one
wants anything more done .
Mrs . Grigorov stated that someone at the last meeting wanted
tennis .
Mrs . Ann Goldfarb - Clapp , 120 Eastern Heights Drive , spoke
from the floor and stated that one fireplace has been totally
destroyed , another bench has been destroyed and asked the Board
to check it out . She stated that maintenance is a big deal and
it costs money to build and maintain these facilities . She
stated that there is no park supervisor , it is not a State park .
She stated that it is very difficult to get in touch with the
sheriff and then wait until he arrives . She also felt that it
• would take a great deal of time for the fire department to arrive
at the park in time to fight a fire . She stated that Mr .
Fabbroni had said there was no problem with fires because there
were two fire hydrants , but again , the fire department response
time is just not good enough and a fire station there would be
better . Mrs . Goldfarb - Clapp stated again that there is no water
source available ; she described the litter and destruction of
property further and repeated that the residents oppose further
development of the park . She stated that the landscaping aspect
is wonderful , but wanted nothing that says " come on in and have a
good time " .
Dr . Ronald Ceurvels , 214 Tudor Road , stated that the
signatures on the petition were those of families living closest
to the park and , therefore , most directly affected by the park .
He stated that the Board could see that it was the unanimous
decision of those most affected by traffic not to develop the
park any further . Dr . Ceurvels stated that he purchased his home
because of the character of the neighborhood and he sees further
development as changing that character . Dr . Ceurvels stated that
he has three small children who use the street . He stated that
someone is opening a Pandora ' s Box here . He asked whose desire
it is to develop this park .
Chairman May stated that it was in the overall parks
development plan .
• Mr . Berg commented that even though it is in a plan , the
Board should wait to see what the population is like in a few
Planning Board 17 July 5 , 1983
• years ; wait and see what is needed . He stated that Eastern
Heights has many places with students - transients who do not
care and are simply not interested in this sort of thing .
Mrs . Gr_ igorov asked how many homes could have been built if
there were not a park . Mr . Fabbroni stated that 45 units ,
meaning 30 homes with apartments , realistically could have been
located in the area .
Chairman May asked what else needs to be done to the park to
stabilize and maintain it as it stands .
Miss Beeners stated that the following needs to be done :
1 ) upgrading and repairing of existing facilities , play field
and park furniture ,
2 ) smoothing of sled hill landings ,
3 ) increase parking slightly ,
4 ) revegetation , pending the SBA grant money .
Mr . Fabbroni commented that the landscaping / revegetation
aspect is sort of endless , adding that if the Jobs Bill grant is
received that would be a major shot .
Mrs . Grigorov asked what the Board can do about the issue of
enforcement . Mr . Lovi stated that there was very little that can
be done . Mr . Lovi spoke of the Frandsen land and his development
which had been brought up at the June meeting , noting that it is
a redesigning of the project on a more local concern and is a
good compromise . He stated that phasing over a long period may
be good but , on the other hand , you may not get development .
Chairman May stated that maybe the Town should spend money
where people are more interested .
Mr . Stanton pointed out that we are all looking at this map ,
dated July 5 , 1983 , for the first time . Miss Beeners stated that
this map came from the Park Committee Meeting of June 23rd and
the Planning Board Meeting of June 21st at which , in both cases ,
residents were present and plans discussed .
Mr . Robb informed the Board that the Park Committee met at
noon and a day - and - a - half later after the Planning Board Meeting .
He pointed out that most people are working during the day . Mr .
May noted that the opinion of the neighborhood is obviously
negative .
Mr . Stanton asked if this is , as it appears , a controversy ,
would it not be a good idea to make copies of this map and have
it available to the area residents , either sent out or have
someone go around to households with copies of the map for
• comment .
' Planning Board 18 July 5 , 1983
' Mr . Klein stated that it was not his intent to participate
in a project that is very unpopular even though it is part of the
Comprehensive Park Plan and has been evolved in a logical way .
He did not feel the Board should put its approval on a
development that is not wanted and that the money should be spent
somewhere where needed . He was in favor of the more passive ,
open space area .
Mr . Stanton again suggested putting the proposal out for
everyone to see .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that it was made very clear at the last
large meeting that certain people in Eastern Heights would
monitor these discussions with names and addresses of those
residents asking to receive notification being given to the
Secretary . He stated that it was clear also at that time that
this would be discussed at the next Planning Board meeting ,
adding that , if the residents here present are the only ones to
show up , these are the only ones interested .
Mr . Robb stated that , logistically , this was put out a
little late - - he did not receive his notice until Saturday . He
stated that a lot of the resident were away on vacation and this
was the reason for the small turnout .
• Chairman May stated that the Town has tried to make everyone
aware ; if this is the group responding , this is the consensus of
the neighborhood . Mr . Fabbroni stated that more meetings are
fine , but a survey of the neighborhood would be somewhat lacking
in credibility unless professionally administered . Chairman May
stated that the Planning Board forum was fine with him . Mr .
Fabbroni stated that it was more feasible to ask a representative
group to come here than for the staff to seek a representative
group .
Mrs . Grigorov asked what the area designation of the park
is , to which Mr . Fabbroni responded , the East Ithaca Area is what
we said .
Mr . Berg stated that when he finally came up from the City
to retire he wanted peace and quiet and that is why he had chosen
Eastern Heights ,
Mrs . Schultz stated that somewhere in the time -- span prior to
the adoption of the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Park and Open
Space Plan and the residents who have bought their property in
Eastern Heights , there was this open space . The question was ,
and is , what do you do with it , some part of this plan has
worked ; how far do we have to go . Mrs . Schultz stated that this
Board is the Planning Board , it plans for now and for the future .
She stated that the Planning Board had reviewed and recommended
• on the Park and Open Space Plan from 1974 to its adoption in 1975
and its revision in 1977 . It was very carefully and very
seriously determined that this is what has to be done because
Planning Board 19 July 5 , 1983
' this is where the population will grow and this is what they will
need . Mrs . Schultz described the dilemma of the wants and the do
not wants . Mrs . Schultz stated that the Planning Board is very
responsive to the people it serves , adding that what the public
says and what the Board says are considered seriously and , added
to that , is the personal , reasoned , decision of each member such
as herself . She said the Park and Open Space Plan reflects that
kind of effort on the part of the Planning Board and the Town
Board . Mrs . Schultz stated that she grew up in a neighborhood
where there was a town park 600 feet from her home . She stated
that it had very extensive use , was ultimately lighted , and used
for night games , tournaments , etc . She stated that she does not ,
to this day , really recall it as being that awful . Mrs . Schultz
stated that Eastern Heights Park most certainly does not look
like that park and yet it is there to serve the people who live
here . Mrs . Schultz noted the proposed Blatchley subdivision , the
Frandsen subdivision , and stated that each of these has its own
need for open space . Mrs . Schultz stated that it is important to
set aside this open space and to plan for it . Mrs . Schultz
stated that it was her opinion that the more you do use the park ,
the less vandalism , and the more self - patrolling ; such a chain is
a self - generating thing .
Mr . Berg agreed that it was important to use the land for
something but stated that the important thing to consider is
• timing , i . e . , when it is prudent and wise to add to the park , but
moving fast in terms of tennis courts , etc . , is neither prudent
nor wise . He stated that the park area is just fine as it exists
right now .
Mrs . Goldfarb -Clapp asked the Board to remember that parks
such as Cass Park and Stewart Park are not bordered by homes as
closely as this . She stated that the residents have no objection
to a nice park in their beautiful neighborhood - - passive - - just
for the neighborhood .
Mr . Stanton stated that he sees this plan as not being so
extreme as some of the residents who are here . He thought that
perhaps if the tennis courts were left out the residents would be
happier , adding that he would like to see the half - court
basketball if he had 8 - to 10 - year - olds at home . He stated that
the 5th of July did bother him as not a good time to expect
people to come to a meeting and that he thought this plan should
be distributed , perhaps a photograph could be taken around to the
residents to see what they thought about it . Mr . Stanton stated
that , at least if we do not do anything , he would like to feel
more comfortable about not doing anything if that is what the
residents want , or maybe , we would find out that it is wanted by
some .
Chairman May summarized the situation at the moment as he
• saw it - - two sled hills , parking area , i . e . , the three or four
projects described by Miss Beeners , and hold off work for 1984 .
Mr . Fabbroni commented that what Mr . May had said could be done ,
• Planning Board 20 July 5 , 1983
' adding that if we wait it cannot be done . Mr . May stated that
these things seem to him to be stabilizing the site and
protecting the site as it exists . Mr . May stated that he was not
happy with doing something when it is not wanted .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . Bernard
Stanton :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board recommend
and hereby does recommend to the Parks and Recreation Planning
Committee of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca that with
respect to Eastern Heights Area Park the following projects be
scheduled for completion during the 1983 working season :
1 . The regrading of the landings at the bases of the sled
hills ,
2 . The extending of the existing parking area by approximately
thirty feet ( 30 ' ) to the south to re - establish parking ( for
a five car total ) taken by field grading ,
3 . The upgrading and repairing of the park furniture ;
4 . The repairing and upgrading of the drainage in and around
the play field ;
• 5 . The installing of a gravel walk from the parking area to
Tudor Road to provide continuous walkway / bikeway circulation
from Skyvue Road to Tudor Road , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that the matter of the Eastern Heights
Area Park be reviewed again by said Town of Ithaca Planning Board
in the latter part of 1983 with respect to 1984 status .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Schultz , Stanton , Grigorov , Klein , Baker .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
Mr . Robb wanted a copy of the map for circulation . Miss
Beeners stated that she would provide it , adding that she had the
names of the four persons who are acting as representatives of
the Eastern Heights area .
FINAL REVIEW OF PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE TOWN OF ITHACA
SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT .
Mr . Lovi stated that it would be appropriate at this time
for the Board to consider approval of the regulations if there
were no major questions at this time . Mr . Lovi further stated
that deletions appeared in square brackets and additions were
Planning Board 21 July 5 , 1983
• underlined on the Board members ' copies which they had been sent
under the May 10 , 1983 memorandum .
MOTION by Mr . Bernard Stanton , seconded by Mr . Montgomery
May :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
congratulate and hereby does congratulate the Town of Ithaca
Engineering and Planning Staff on their efforts in preparing and
completing the Subdivision Regulations , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that said Regulations be passed on to the
Codes and Ordinances Committee of the Town Board .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Schultz , Stanton , Grigorov , Klein , Baker .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . David Klein :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board move and
• recommend and hereby does move and recommend to the Town Board of
the Town of Ithaca the acceptance of the Draft Generic
Environmental_ Impact Statement , prepared with respect to proposed
revisions to the Town of Ithaca Subdivision Regulations , and as
presented in the May 10 , 1983 Memorandum to said Planning Board
by the Town Planner , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that said Town of Ithaca Planning Board
recommend and hereby does recommend the review of said D / GEIS by
said Town Board at its earliest convenience .
There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , . Schultz , Stanton , Baker , Grigorov , Klein .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
BURNS ROAD - CAPITAL PROJECT REVIEW
Mr . Fabbroni described the improvements to be made with
respect to Burns Road , referring to the project as the proposed
Burns Road Relocation , but . noting that the improvements call for
a widening of the road in both directions as well as the
relocation . He described the hazardous condition of the road as
• it exists and has existed for some time , pointing out that both
ends of the road are very difficult to pull out of and how the
changes should improve the visibility . He commented that it
Planning Board 22 July 5 , 1983
• certainly is nobody ' s freeway , noting , as an example , the
well - known dip in the road . Mr . Fabbroni set forth the reasons
for proposing the Burns Road relocation . He stated that Burns
Road is not a good situation and , even by relocating the north
end it would not become anyone ' s dream highway . He urged the
Board to travel the road and see for themselves , if they have not
already done so , and they will see that outside of the project
area it could not be that dream highway . Mr . Fabbroni noted that
where the relocation is proposed ties in with the County decision
that the Burns Road Bridge needs redoing ; it is less than sound
and load limits have been imposed on it ; rebuilding the bridge is
needed and is going to happen . Mr . Fabbroni commented , in
conjunction with this , that there is also a creek and a one - lane
structure - - Burns Road has two water crossings . Mr . Fabbroni
displayed a diagram of Burns Road and surrounding area and
described the proposed changes , noting among others , that what is
involved is 1 , 200 feet of relocation to replace what is at least
double that and in which there are vertical and horizontal
changes in the same vehicular motion . He stated that this is not
good by any standards ; it is not a safe condition . He stated
that we do not have accident information regarding this road ,
pointing out that this is a problem throughout the Town because
the Town has at least six different responding agencies . Mr .
Fabbroni stated that snow maintenance operations have been very
difficult . Mr . Fabbroni recalled that once the Town had a
near - fatality of its own with the front end of the plow being out
• into Slaterville Road and pointed out that it is an unsafe
situation even if the hedge is cut down there is not
sufficient sight distance back to the City . Mr . Fabbroni pointed
out that the proposal is a simple relocations there are no
ulterior motives .
Mr . Fabbroni continued and spoke of the fill needed . He
stated that we do have some fill to consider , there is some
valuable and some poor soil down in the valley to work with . He
stated that if one plans properly for the drainage and cut
materials , dry and compact them properly , one can build on any
type of soil .
Mrs . Grigorov asked where the reservoir was located with
respect to the proposal . Mr . Fabbroni pointed this out on the
diagram and recounted some fascinating history of the watershed
area , efforts on increasing the storage area in the dam , and the
clear existence of a road in just about the same spots as the
proposal long , long , ago .
Mr . Fabbroni displayed the proposed alignment and elevations
and discussed same with the Board . He stated that the plans are
to raise the bridge 15 feet above the flat elevation. of the road
there now , adding that the source of gravel is important , i . e . ,
whether it be local or foreign . He stated that if a gravel
• source is found locally , the Town could afford to borrow a little
more . If a local source cannot be found , the vertical alignment
of Burns Road will have to be compromised . He noted that the
Planning Board 23 July 5 , 1983
area involves all City - owned land , the nearest house is at least
one - quarter mile distant .
Mr . Fabbroni continued to use the diagrams to describe the
proposed project . He indicated a NYSEG power pole right of way
and pointed out how the site distance would be much better in
both directions with a flat entry onto Route 79 , Mr . Fabbroni
stated that he has talked to people who live nearest to the
intersection and they have stated " Anything you can do to that
intersection would improve our life . "
As to the total scope of the project , Mr . Fabbroni stated
that , at this particular point , we did not have the final design ;
we have existing profiles ; we are looking at soil conditions ; the
reservoir area will be screened from this right of way .
Mr . Fabbroni pointed out the area in which the City has been
dumping silt , commenting that it is a wasteland that has not been
reclaimed . The area does have ferns that will have to be
carefully handled since these particular ferns are recognized as
those which should not be disturbed ; mitigating measures will be
taken to avoid damage .
Mr . Fabbroni stated that it is appropriate for the Board to
make any kind of comments they may have because they could still
• be incorporated in plans . He further stated that it is important
that the Board understand the project and give some support too ,
adding that that would be good from his standpoint as Town
Engineer . He noted that the environmental review process will
take most of the summer . After the soil studies are completed ,
he hoped to do some major earth moving to create a surcharge
situation to let nature take its course . He stated that the
County will need access to the bridge if they rebuild in 1984 or
even 1985 . Mr . Fabbroni spoke of the swap of an existing right
of way and land as part of the proposal . He noted that the new
entrance onto Slaterville road will be about 500 feet farther
away from the City .
Chairman May stated that he hoped to goodness Mr . Fabbroni
is able to do it before anybody gets killed there .
Mr . Fabbroni commented that his preference is to swap gravel
with the City , swapping with our gravel in Forest Home .
Mr . Stanton wondered who could possibly oppose this project ,
adding a conjecture that perhaps the Six Mile Creek people may .
Mr . Lovi stated that he has not heard much from them in this
regard and they are aware of it . Mr . Lovi also recounted some
history of the area . He stated that the City built the 30 - foot
dam in 1903 . They realized they needed another reservoir and in
1911 , they built the 60 - foot dam . At that time , believe it or
not , Burns Road was a " Lake Shore Road " . There was no silt dam ,
there were no trees and consequently the area filled in at a
Planning Board 24 July 5 , 1983
• prodigious rate . Everything existing in this loop dates from no
more recently than the First World War . The siltation pond was
built in 1925 . He stated that the situation now , is one where
you have a low - lying marshy area characterized by man -made ,
silty , soils which are not the best thing when they are wet and
not good as a base when wet . You can keep it dry by proper
drainage that works such that the road bed is suitable . Mr . Lovi
stated that we need to get in in the Fall to have compaction
occur over -the winter ; then the bridge ; and then the road up to
grade .
Mr . Lovi described the timetable regarding the environmental
review process . The D / EIS will go before the Town Board on
Monday , July 11th ; fifteen- day waiting period in re the lead
agency status , forty - five day waiting period for comment on D / EIS
- - now into August ; Final Impact Statement ready for filing and
acceptance for the Town Board ' s September meeting , then a 30 - day
waiting period after that . Mr . Lovi commented that we are
basically looking into the Fall as far as the excavation goes .
Mr . Lovi stated that Miss Beeners is preparing a fairly well
detailed map of the vegetation existing in the area , as well as
the existing wildlife , forests , rabbits , woodchucks , deer . With
respect to the important access to the reservoir , which is a
concern , Mr . Lovi stated that we plan , as part of the
• revegetation scheme , the incorporation of existing vegetation
with some burrs . Mr . Lovi pointed out that it is primarily soils
and drainage that are being looked at environmentally .
Mrs . Grigorov asked where the money comes from for this
project . Mr . Fabbroni stated that $ 20 , 000 has been budgeted ,
commenting that a linear project like this moves so much quicker
than some realignments and adding that the major excavation work
would be hired on a daily basis .
MOTION by Mr . Montgomery May , seconded by Mr . James Baker :
RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board inform and
hereby does inform the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca that said
Planning Board is keenly aware of the Burns Road Relocation
Project and also the environmental review thereof presently in
process , and that said Planning Board sees no special problems
with what said Planning Board views as a very excellent project ,
and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
inform and hereby does inform said Town Board of the Planning
Board ' s commendations of the staff ' s efforts with respect to this
very much needed improvement , and
FURTHER RESOLVED , that said Planning Board recommend and
hereby does recommend to said Town Board that the matter of the
Burns Road Relocation proceed with all due haste .
Planning Board 25 July 5 , 1983
J� There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a
vote .
Aye - May , Baker , Klein , Grigorov , Stanton , Schultz .
Nay - None .
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously .
ADJOURNMENT
At this juncture , Mr . Fabbroni informed the members of the
Board that the improved decor of the Town Hall Meeting Room was
the responsibility of the Town Supervisor . He stated that the
beautiful , original , color , photographs of sites within the Town
of Ithaca were taken by Mr . Ocello who was responsible for the
enlarging of his negatives and the framing in such a highly
appropriate fashion . The Board was very impressed and commented
very positively on the pictures .
Upon Motion , the Chair declared the July 5 , 1983 meeting of
the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10 : 30 p . m .
Respectfully submitted ,
iNancy M . Fuller , Secretary ,
Town of Ithaca Planning Board .