Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Packet 2023-03-16 DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING 215 N. Tioga St 14850 607.273.1747 www.town.ithaca.ny.us TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING COMMITTEE THURSDAY, MARCH 16, 2023 at 3:00 P.M. Meeting Location: Ithaca Town Hall, 215 N. Tioga Street, Aurora Conference Room (Enter from the rear entrance of Town Hall, adjacent employee parking lot.) Members of the public may also join the meeting virtually via Zoom at https://us06web.zoom.us/j/6750593272. AGENDA 1. Persons to be heard. 2. Committee announcements and concerns. 3. Consider approval of February meeting minutes. 4. Consider request for a Limited Historic Commercial Overlay District for 130 Forest Home Dr. 5. Continue discussion of Prioritized Pedestrian Corridor Needs and Prioritized Bicycle Corridor Needs maps. 6. Review and consider appraisal for two potential conservation easements (282 Hayts Road and Hayts/Sheffield/Bundy Rds) and recommendation to the Town Board. 7. Staff updates and reports. 8. Discuss next meeting date and upcoming agenda items. A quorum of the Ithaca Town Board may be present, however, no official Board business will be conducted. 1 Town of Ithaca Planning Committee Thursday, February 16, 2023 (3:00 PM Aurora Conference Room and on Zoom) DRAFT Minutes Committee members: Rich DePaolo, Chair; Rod Howe; Margaret Johnson. Board/Staff members: Director of Planning, C.J. Randall; Director of Code Enforcement, Marty Mosely (via Zoom); Justin McNeal, Town Civil Engineer. Guests: Brian Rumsey, 110 Buttermilk Falls Rd. E 1. Persons to be heard: None 2. Committee announcements and concerns: None 3. Approval of January meeting minutes: Rod moved; Rich seconded; Margaret abstained. The January 19, 2023, minutes were approved as presented. 4. Consider request for a Limited Historic Commercial Overlay District. Brian Rumsey submitted a memo to the committee with the history of the family owned Buttermilk Falls Bed and Breakfast near the entrance of the State Park. The memo also requests consideration for the Limited Historic Commercial Zoning to allow the business to be remotely owned while managed by someone full time onsite (possibly a Hospitality student). The intent is to begin with cosmetic upgrades to the main house for phase 1 to operate as it did in the past with a 5-7 room bed and breakfast. Phase 2 proposes adding a few guest cottages to the property with an additional 6-8 guests. There are 3 adjoining lots total owned by the Rumsey Family, the main house, a long term rental house and storage building lot. Mr. Rumsey stated these would be combined for the phase 2 guest cottage vision. Rich reviewed the LHC language and noted that the additional guest cottage conformity would need to be confirmed by the Director of Code Enforcement whom was not at the meeting at the time. A copy of the LHC law was given to Mr. Rumsey which listed the items needed for the Preservation Plan. The committee identified the concept as an overall good low intensity use of the property and no objections were raised to the applicant moving forward for a formal preservation plan and LHC zoning change application. A meeting with the Planning Director and Codes Director will be set up with the Mr. Rumsey to discuss the possible consolidation and guest cottages phase. 5. Continue revised Solar Law amendments: The November draft of the proposed Solar Law amendments were re-circulated to the committee with a few comments from the new Planning Director’s review. This draft was sent to the Attorney in November with the red lined changes to date, however, it did not go through counsel review. The committee began at the top of the document, a summary of changes are below: C. General requirements (4) Storage batteries -add C.J.’s comment at the end “The accumulation, collection, incineration, disposal, or storage of old, unusable, dead, or damaged batteries is expressly prohibited. 2 (5) Classifications (b) Accessory use/accessory structure-add #1 in front of “A solar energy system that primarily uses the energy from the system onsite” remove “this includes” and change 1 & 2 to 2 & 3. Re-word so all solar proposed in a PDZ is subject to Site Plan Review G. Additional standards for ground-mounted photovoltaic solar energy systems (2) Setbacks. The Director of Code Enforcement noted that front, side and rear “yards” are not defined in this language but are defined in the overall Zoning with reference to the façade of the principal building. With no principal building it would be difficult to determine which is the front, side and rear yard. Battery Energy Storage System should be defined and added as a use per C. J’s comments in the 270-186-additional information to be submitted as part of the site plan application. The definition for “Practicable” was added. (5) Design Standards (g) add suggested text from C.J. “When aboveground cables and transmission lines must cross agriculture fields, utility poles that provide longer spanning distances should be located on field edges to the greatest extend practicable to avoid bisecting of agriculture lands. Electrical transformers for utility interconnections may be aboveground if required by the utility provider. (d) Full-scale photovoltaic solar energy systems standards (2) Setbacks (b) change 50 feet to 75 feet. Note the “yard” and or “lot line” definition needs to be clarified or reference to yard should be removed. (An example is “the front lot line holds the majority if frontage in feet”) (f) Monitoring and remediation requirement. Remove “upon request” from the last sentence. The “fence” clarifying language suggested by C.J. should be included in the Design Standards section. Marty noted the town has its own Solar Permit application that is for all size projects, the town did not adopt the Unified Solar Permit as asked by C.J. Marty and C.J. will get together to iron out the lot line/yard definition issue as well. Another solar developer contacted Planning regarding a 15-20 Acre solar project in an LDR zone which would not be permitted within the current or proposed law. Options at this point are to continue as written, amend to allow more than 10 acres in LDR with circumstances or advise applicant to seek variance route. The consensus was to move forward with this law as anticipated. The committee was comfortable with this amended draft going to the Attorney for counsel review and then the Town Board for action without needing full committee review an additional time. The only outstanding issue was the lot line/yard definition and that could be circulated via email. The redlined version with the inclusions from the final committee review and counsel comments can also be circulated via email. An anticipated schedule would be the final draft back from the attorney for introduction the town board in March at the study session meeting (27th) and to set a public hearing date for April. 6. Discuss potential project initiation: Transportation Plan (2007) update: Time did not permit a full discussion of this topic; however, committee members were asked to review the 3 2007 Transportation plan for possible re-establishment of an ad hoc committee with guidelines for revision. This will be a topic at the March meeting. It was noted that the Town did adopt a Complete Streets Policy. 7. Staff updates and reports: There was nothing new on RaNic to update. C.J. noted staff is working on a Comprehensive Plan action status review and also noted the recent award of the Tompkins County SS4A grant to create a multi-jurisdictional transportation safety plan. 8. Next meeting date and upcoming agenda items: March 16th, 2023. Anticipating Preservation Plans for the LHC applicants & Transportation Plan update. The Town of Ithaca Planning Committee meeting concluded at 5:05 pm. 130 Forest Home Drive Request for Limited Historic Commercial Zone designation Town of Ithaca, New York Date: 2023.02.13 Section 270-142.3 C(1): Narrative Historic Significance: Per section 270-142.3A(3), the building qualifies for rezoning by being a contributing building to the Forest Home Historic District, which was identified in the Town of Ithaca Historic Resources Survey. As a contributing building to an historic district, it is eligible to be listed in State and National historic registers, though it is not currently. The new owner intends to maintain the building in accordance with the historic standards of the district, and in compliance with the proposed zone designation, per the preservation plan that follows. The building is a 2-1/2 story wood framed structure with a stucco exterior on the first floor and painted wood shakes on the upper stories, similar to many buildings in the district dating from the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The street-facing facades are symmetrically organized and well balanced, and the steeply pitched roof features two prominent dormers on the east and west roof faces. A later one-story addition (meeting room in plan) and a steel fire escape on the east side facing the parking lot, though not particularly attractive, are innocuous enough to allow the original building to be discerned and appreciated. Similarly, a 2-story addition off the back (north side) is minimally visible from Forest Home Drive and does not detract from the original building. The existing exterior appears to have been well maintained and is in good condition. Description of proposed limited commercial use: Proposed Use: The new owner (applicant) proposes to use the building as a professional office, which is allowed by special permit in the LHC zone, to run her real estate and property management business. Feasibility: The building easily accommodates the proposed use without significant alteration. The first floor of the building is already set up as an office space, having been the previous location of the offices of the Ramin Administration Center (Cornell University) in approximately 1760 net sf of space, which included 4 individual offices (three of which are large enough for 2-3 people), a front reception/office area, meeting room, break room, storage spaces and toilet rooms. The building is set up for mixed use, with the upper 2 floors containing four residential units. The property also has 9 existing parking spaces. Though this is 6 short of the 15 required by zoning, the building has operated in the past without any parking issues given its close proximity to Cornell. The applicant intends to convert one part of the space on the first floor into a laundry room for the residential tenants, eliminating any need to drive to a laundromat and reducing the square footage dedicated to the office use. The attached plan shows one possible laundry location; however, the final laundry room location is yet to be determined. The office suite will be arranged to allow for the care of the owner’s 2 young children, with one former individual office being converted to a playroom/break room. This arrangement would result in a lower intensity of commercial use than the previous office space, presumably also reducing parking demand. Compatibility with neighboring properties and uses: The building is similar in architectural style and building footprint to the surrounding single-family homes. Being constructed later than many of its 1-1/2 story or low 2-story neighbors, it has two full height stories with a taller 12/12 roof with large gabled dormers. Though taller than its neighbors, its position at an offset intersection of 3 streets, with an open parking area to the east, creates open street space on 3 sides which tends to mitigate its height. Being at the meeting of Forest Home 130 Forest Home Drive - 2 of 5 Drive, Judd Falls Road, and The Byway, which could be considered the heart of Forest Home, places it in a prominent central position that supports a use that differs from its single-family neighbors, making it an appropriate location for some kind of commercial use. The past and proposed use of the building as a mixed-use office and apartment structure is a use that blends well with single- family homes, in that the office is a quiet daytime activity that will not generate excessive traffic or parking demand, nor affect the quiet nature of the neighborhood, unlike a bar or pub. The apartments complement the surrounding single-family homes by allowing a mix of incomes and demographics to live in the neighborhood, which prevents it from being an exclusionary enclave. Though constructed after the neighborhood’s heyday as a mill hamlet, this structure is the last remnant of Forest Home’s mixed-use past which included mills (light industrial uses) along The Byway and Forest Home Drive adjacent to Fall Creek, and housing for workers employed at those establishments. How the proposed use will promote preservation: Alteration of the existing building to convert the first-floor office use to a residential use would be an excessive financial burden to the applicant, both in terms of construction cost (+/- $350,000 based on a $200/sf) and the acquisition of a different property in which to locate her office. Furthermore, a conversion to a fully residential use would likely result in some modification of the exterior which may compromise the historic integrity of the building. The building would still require a use variance (or rezoning from MDR to MR) to allow a multiple-residence to exist in this location. The building is too large (just over 7000sf of floor area) to convert to a single-family residence at any reasonable cost. Rezoning to LHC would ensure that the exterior remains in its present condition and would preserve the applicant’s financial resources for ongoing maintenance of historic features. A use variance (either for a multiple-residence or office use), or rezoning to MR, would not offer the protections that rezoning to LHC would grant to the community with regard to protecting a building that contributes to the historic district at a significant street intersection. Section 270-142.3 C(2): Conditions Assessment Overall exterior conditions: The building appears to have been built and modified in a number of stages. The original building was the main rectangular mass fronting on Forest home drive with symmetrical window and dormer arrangements on the south, east and west elevations. Given the layout of windows, with the street facing large storefront glass, this was constructed as a commercial building with a shop or shops on the first floor, and a side entry to either multiple apartments or one upper floor residence, possibly occupied by the business owner, as was typical around when the structure was built. There is an addition on the north side of the original structure which appears to have been stacked open porches. These porches and the stairs that led up to them were enclosed at some point to form the odd-shaped rear section of the building. As was typical of business buildings evolving through the early to mid 20th century, successive additions were constructed on the east side and north side, likely to meet the needs of the business(es) occupying the structure. The east side addition likely came first, given its more elaborate eave detail, with the less sensitive rear addition at the base of the enclosed porches coming later. Given the consistency of window detailing in all the additions, it is also likely these additions happened in quick succession. Overall, the building has been kept in good condition and there does not appear to be any deferred maintenance or deterioration, and no major repairs are necessary at this time. (a) Cladding Materials: · First floor (including 1-story flat-roofed additions on north and east sides): Cement stucco with medium-rough texture, topped with a painted wood trim band and crown molding, no banding at foundation, painted. (figures 1 & 2). Stucco is in good condition with only minor blemishes, and paint is in good condition. · Second floor: Wood shakes with +/-4” exposure , random width with aligned bottom edges, painted. Shakes are butted at trimless exterior corners. The bottom 3 courses are flared outward at 2nd floor line above a painted wood trim band and crown molding separating the shakes from stucco below. (figure 3) · Third floor north and south gable ends: Wood shakes with +/-4” exposure , random width with aligned bottom edges, painted. Shake courses terminate at gable ends with one shake approximately 3” wide set perpendicular to the underside of the rake soffit, so as to form a rake “frieze”. (figure 4) 130 Forest Home Drive - 3 of 5 · Third floor dormers: Wood shakes with +/-4” exposure , random width with aligned bottom edges, painted. Shakes are butted at trimless exterior corners. Shake courses terminate horizontally at the underside of dormer gable end rake. (figure 5) · Rear addition enclosed porches: Wood shakes with +/-4” exposure , random width with aligned bottom edges, painted. Shakes are butted at trimless exterior corners. Shake courses terminate horizontally into a +/-4” rake frieze trim along the underside of the rake soffit. (figure 6). Some curling of shingles appears on the south and east facades, but all shake surfaces appear to be generally in good condition. Paint may need to be redone in 5-7 years. (b) Windows, doors, and trim: · First floor, original building and rear addition: Windows are an assortment or double-hung, casement and fixed wood storefront with flat head and jamb casing, all set within the stucco field with 1-1/2” to 2” stucco returns & ogee corner fillet between stucco returns and flat casing. Traditional 1-1/2” – 2” thick slanted wood sills project about ½” from stucco surface and terminate at jambs without sill horns. Apartment doors are half-lite with 3 horizontal raised panels below and trimmed similar to windows. Commercial doors facing Forest Home Drive are 3/4 lite wood doors with single-lite transoms above and 1-1/2” flat brickmould trim. The left side door has a wood screen door. (figures 7 & 8) · First floor, side addition: Windows are wood French casements (each window is composed of 2 sashes forming a larger opening with an astragal instead of center post between them) in groups of 2 on the south and east facades and a group of 3 on the north façade. Each pair has set of sashes swinging outward and one swinging inward. The triple on the north has the center sash set opening inward and the other two opening outward. The inward swinging sashes are covered with double-hung aluminum storm windows. All have flat head and jamb casings, set within the stucco field and projecting about 1/4” forward of the stucco surface. Traditional 1-1/2” – 2” thick slanted wood sills project about 1/2” from stucco surface and terminate at jambs without sill horns. Exterior door on south façade is a modern replacement flush steel door with a single sidelight in a metal frame, inconsistent with all other detailing. Door is rusting within 18” of ground level. (figures 9 & 10) · Second floor windows, and third floor gable end windows: Wood double-hung windows with 3-1/2” flat jamb and head casing and ogee crown trim under a wood drip cap. Traditional 1-1/2” – 2” thick slanted wood sills project about 1/2” from shake surface and terminate at outer edge of jamb trim. All windows are the same size and are covered with mill finish triple-track aluminum storm windows. (figure 11) · Third floor dormer windows: Wood double-hung window pairs have 4” trim between them and 3-1/2” flat jamb and head casing and simple 1/2” drip cap. Original wood sills, which sit directly on top of the roof/wall intersection, are covered with metal flashing which terminates at outer edge of jamb trim. All windows are the same size and are covered with mill finish triple-track aluminum storm windows. (figure 12) · Rear addition/enclosed porch windows: One window facing north is a single window trimmed similarly to the other second floor windows, but with the same drip cap as the 3rd floor dormer windows. A window on the northeast corner of the 2nd floor enclosed porch facing north is similar, but with no drip cap and asymmetrical trim, and the left side trim and wood sill wrapping the corner about 4”. The 3rd floor enclosed porch windows form a corner with one facing east and one facing north. These appear to be vinyl replacement windows within the original asymmetrical trim and wraparound wood sill (figure 13). · Basement windows, which are concealed from public view in window wells, are not original and are in good condition. All window and door trim appears to be in good condition, though some casings and sills may need to be scraped and painted within the next 2-3 years, primarily on the south and west sides of the building. (c) Roof, eaves, gutters: · Roof of original building: 10/12 to 12/12 pitch with open, un-sculpted 2x6 rafter tails with a vertical end cut (figure 14), and a +/-6” rake board with the eave flared outward at the overhang (figure 15). The undersides of T&G roof boards are exposed and painted. Roofing material is architectural asphalt shingle with white metal drip edges in good condition. White aluminum K-style gutters with standard rectangular downspouts exist along these eaves. · Dormer roofs: 10/12 to 12/12 pitch with open, un-sculpted 2x4 rafter tails with a vertical end cut, 1x4 fascia board and a 1x4 rake (figure 16). The undersides of T&G roof boards are exposed and painted. Roofing material is architectural asphalt shingle with white metal drip edges in good condition. 130 Forest Home Drive - 4 of 5 · Rear enclosed porches and addition roof: Pitch of west side of rear addition matches main roof, with the shed roof over the enclosed porches being approximately a 3/12 pitch toward the back. These portions of the building have simpler shorter eaves and rakes with a flat frieze board at the top of the shake siding up to the underside of the roof boards. The eaves have white K-style gutters with rectangular downspouts. (figure 17) · Side flat-roofed addition: Roof has a large overhang with sculpted rafter tails and exposed undersides of roof boards. Rafter tails protrude from a frieze board of equal depth which terminates the stucco surface (figure 18). Insulation and a membrane roof was likely installed over the original roof deck and its +/-4” high perimeter is finished with a metal coping and drip edge, inconsistent with other detailing. The entire perimeter has a K-style gutter with rectangular downspouts (figure 19). · Rear flat-roofed addition: Metal roof edge is similar to the side addition, though at a higher elevation and without a large overhang or rafter tails. A painted frieze board terminates the stucco under the eave, and a K-style gutter is mounted in front of it. The roof pitches to the north (figure 20). Along the west side there is a level parapet with a metal coping over a frieze board with crown trim (figure 21). Rafter tails, rake boards, rake and soffit trim, and the underside of roof boards may need scraping and painting in 2- 3 years. (d) Entrance canopies and fire escape: · Front canopy over commercial space entry doors: This canopy has a flat roof with a simple crown molding at the top of the fascia board and metal drip edge above the crown (no actual overhang). The crown and fascia are in line with the frieze and crown separating the first floor stucco and second floor shake siding. (figure 22) The canopy is supported by large 45 degree wood wall brackets with concave lambs tongue edges on the 45 degree member, and concave edges cut into the end of the projecting horizontal member and bottom of the vertical member against the wall. The brackets are quite smooth and the edges are crisp, in contrast to the fascia and crown trim, suggesting they are recent replicas of the original supports (figure 23). · Apartment entry canopy on west side: This is a much simpler gabled canopy supported by unadorned 2x4 painted braces terminating against the stucco surface, with a flat painted panel on the gable end. It is not likely original to the building. The asphalt roofing appears older than the main roof and needs replacement. Fascia and rake intersection needs to be painted (figure 24). · Fire escape: Black painted steel fire escape on the east side of the building provides a required second means of egress from the upper floors and cannot be removed. It appears to be in good condition (figure 25) but needs to be inspected by an engineer to secure a certificate of compliance. (e) Relevant site elements: There are no historically relevant site elements. Section 270-142.3 C(3)(a): Preservation Plan [1] Restoration/repair of deficiencies: No major deficiencies exist, and no significant repairs or structural stabilization activities are necessary at this time aside from the need to verify the structural integrity of the fire escape. The side canopy, which is not an original element that contributes to the historic character of the building is in need of roofing replacement. This is a small area and should not be a significant expense, but should be done within the next year to avoid possible damage to the canopy or adjacent stucco cladding. The historically inappropriate rusting steel door on the south elevation of the side addition should at a minimum be sanded and repainted to prevent further deterioration. Any deteriorating, though non-historic site elements, such as the fencing at the northwest corner, should be replaced, preferably with new material which complements the original style of the building. [2] Long term maintenance plan: 130 Forest Home Drive - 5 of 5 There is a need for paint to be scraped, primed and touched up on some exterior wood surfaces, though the current conditions do not pose an immediate threat to those finishes. These should be attended to however, within the next 2 years, as part of a complete repainting of the building. Any chipping paint should be checked for lead. The new paint job should then be regularly checked for deterioration so that original trim elements do not suffer water damage that might lead to their needing replacement. Sheet metal surfaces such as copings and gutters (currently stained and weathered) should be cleaned or painted as part of this work. During the whole-building repainting, special attention should be paid to original window components that have been covered by the aluminum storm windows, as these tend to not get repainted unless the storm windows are removed. Glazing compound and exterior caulk should also be checked for deterioration and repaired as needed. Roofing should be inspected every 5 years, and any leaks be fixed immediately to prevent damage to eaves and exterior finishes. Gutters should be cleaned every 2 years to prevent backups that could damage eaves. If the steel door on the south elevation is eventually replaced, a wood door in keeping with the other entrance doors on the building (half-lite doors with 3 horizontal recessed panels below) should be installed, likely with a coordinating sidelight in a new wood frame (Figure 26). If windows on the first, second or third floors are replaced (to save energy for example), painted wood, or aluminum-clad wood window units, such as Marvin Signature Series or equal, should be used to maintain the original lines and sash profiles of the originals. Flat looking fiberglass or vinyl window units, or windows of any material that have sash and trim profiles significantly different from the originals, should not be considered appropriate. Any new exterior-mounted lighting, or exterior hardware or accessories should be complementary to the original architectural style of the building, and sensitively placed. New vent covers, or other mechanical equipment should be sensitively located, preferably on the rear (north side) of the building away from the street view. Cabling, tubing or piping for new mechanical equipment (such as air-source heat pumps) should be routed inside the building and not run exposed over exterior finishes. Any new mechanical equipment should be located so as to not be visible from the streets. [3] Landowner consent to biennial inspections: I, Lirong Wu, grant consent to Town officials to access the property at 130 Forest Home Drive, for the purpose of conducting biennial inspections of the exterior conditions of the structure located at that address, related to its rezoning to a Limited Historic Commercial Zone per Section 210-142.3 of the Town of Ithaca Code. Per Section 270-142.3 C(3)(a)[3] the Town shall provide written or verbal notification to the property owner of the inspection prior to entering the property. Signature: __________________________________________________ date:_________________________ VIEW FROM SOUTHWEST VIEW FROM SOUTHEAST VIEW FROM NORTHEAST VIEW FROM NORTHWEST Figure 1. Stucco cladding, top at trim band and crown molding Figure 2. Stucco cladding, bo! om without wash Figure 3. Shake siding, second fl oor Figure 4. Shake siding, N & S gable ends Figure 5. Shake cladding at dormers Figure 6. Shake cladding at rear addi! on and enclosed porches Figure 7. 1st fl oor windows, south and east fi xed windows Figure 8. 1st fl oor windows, typical double-hung windows Figure 9. First fl oor French casement windows Figure 10. Steel door in metal frame Figure 11. Second fl oor, and third fl oor gable end windows Figure 12. Third fl oor dormer windows Figure 13. Rear addi on/enclosed porch windows Figure 14. Original building, roof eave Figure 15. Original building, rake detail Figure 16. Dormer eaves and rake Figure 17. Rear addi on/enclosed porch eave & rake Figure 18. Side addi on eave and frieze Figure 19. Side addi on, coping and gu er Figure 20. Rear fl at-roofed addi on eave Figure 21. Rear addi on parapet Figure 22. Front canopy, crown and fascia Figure 23. Front canopy, support bracket Figure 24. Side canopy Figure 25. Steel fi re escape Figure 26. Suggested style of replacement door Information and text from the 2007 Transportation Plan Pedestrian Corridor Needs Map Map: Pedestrian Corridors identified in 2007 Transportation Plan that have not been addressed 1) Categorized as Essential: - Trumansburg Road (Dates Dr. to City Line) - Coddington Road (short segment, City Line to Egbert Blvd/IC Entrance) - Pine Tree Road (Slaterville Rd to Honness Ln) - Forest Home Dr/Caldwell Rd - Warren Road (Forest Home Dr. to just north of Fairway (connect w/ CU walkway towards Hasbrouck)) 2) Categorized as Recommended: - Mecklenburg Rd. (City Line to Westhaven Rd; ~500 ft. from City to Linderman Cr. walking path completed in 2020) - Elm St. Ext (City line to Valley View Rd. to West Haven Preserve) - Danby Road (Alumni Circle/IC entrance to King Road) - King Road East (from Danby Rd to Troy Rd; with gap in middle connected by planned recreation trail) - Troy Road (King Rd E. to Coddington Road) - Coddington Road (Troy Rd. to Egbert Blvd/IC Entrance) - Slaterville Road (City line to Pine Tree Rd) - Snyder Hill Road (Pine Tree Rd to Dove Dr.) - Forest Home Dr (~1000 ft section along residents towards Flat Rocks) - Warren Road (connect “Essential” segment to Hanshaw Rd) - Murial St. (Hanshaw to Rose Hill Rd) Additional corridors identified since 2007 (not on 2007 prioritization map) - East Shore Drive (Boynton M.S. to Ithaca Youth Bureau) and Cayuga Waterfront Trail connection - Gateway Trail Connection (Stone Quarry Rd to Chain Work to S.Hill Recway). - South Hill RecWay Extension (Burns Road to points south) Text from 2007 Pedestrian Priority Map 1) Factors Favoring Pedestrian Infrastructure - Higher density/intensity of land use (Medium and high density residential, neighborhood/ office park commercial) - Located along the route of a bus - Within ½ mile of an elementary school, assisted living facility, employment/activity center for disabled. - Within ½ mile of other pedestrian generators - High 85th percentile speed; limit > 25 mph - High volume/ classification (arterials, collectors, > 4,000 vpd) - Outside funding is available; hence, cost to Town is low - Links into existing or planned pedestrian network - Sufficiency of existing infrastructure 2) Factors Against Pedestrian Infrastructure - Detrimental to environmental resources including natural, historic, scenic, agricultural, etc. - Negative neighborhood consensus 3) Who Pays? When the benefit of a sidewalk or walkway primarily belongs to local property owners, the responsibility for the cost of construction and/or maintenance belongs to the property owner. When the benefit extends beyond the vicinity to a broader public benefit, then the responsibility for the cost of construction and maintenance belongs to the Town. 4) Short and Long Term: Short term accomplishes goals in approximately ten years. Long term accomplishes goals over twenty years. Long term projects become priorities based on changes in need or opportunity (funding, with another project, etc). 5) For New Development ...if any of the items listed below apply then Planning Board may also require sidewalks on existing roads to connect into existing sidewalks: - Children walk to school; - Current or likely future presence of numerous children in an environment where, in the absence of a sidewalk, many children can be expected to be present on the road shoulder; - Bus stop within convenient walking distance; - If development is Connected to other sidewalks; - Provides access to trail system or public parks; - Safety for pedestrians. 6) For Existing Development ...if at least three of the following apply: a recommendation from the Planning Board and approval from the Town Board is also required - Convenient walking distance to place of regular public use -Link existing or planned sidewalks/walkways - Existing/ planned shoulders inadequate - Proximate access to public transit - ROW sufficient, or easement reasonably obtained - No dead-ends w/o forseeable connection - Moderate peak hour traffic 1 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO: PLANNING COMMITTEE MEMBERS FROM: MICHAEL SMITH, SENIOR PLANNER DATE: MARCH 7, 2023 RE: AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION EASEMENTS - C. DENISE SCOTT-POKORNEY (282 HAYTS RD) - JULIA P. HOLMES (HAYTS / SHEFFIELD / BUNDY RDS) The Town has recently received two new applications (Pokorney & Holmes) to potentially participate in the Town’s Agricultural Land Preservation Program. This program was set up by the Town in 1999 to preserve the Town’s farmland resources by purchasing the development rights (PDR) on active agricultural lands. The Town purchases the development rights from willing sellers, and the landowner conveys to the Town of Ithaca an agricultural conservation easement. Through this program, the Town has acquired three agricultural conservation easements (Laughing Goat Fiber Farm, Indian Creek Farm and the Mallon property). The Policies and Procedures Manual outlines the general process for applications to this program. Since the Town has not designated an “Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Committee” in many years, the Planning Committee has most recently been handling any items related to the PDR program. So, at this point, Planning staff has prepared the information below and the attached maps for the Planning Committee to consider. In reviewing this information, the Planning Committee will need to consider a recommendation to the Town Board as to whether the parcels warrant further consideration, and whether the Town Board should authorize the preparation of a formal appraisal for each property. In terms of costs for the appraisals, Planning staff has requested cost estimates from two qualified appraisers. North East Appraisals & Management Co, Inc. has responded with an estimate of $7,800 to prepare both appraisals (attached) and we hope to have the second estimate available by the March 16th meeting. There are several maps attached which show the general location of the properties, a 2018 aerial image, streams/wetlands/contours, soil types, and a 1954 aerial image. C. Denise Scott-Pokorney (282 Hayts Rd) The Pokorney’s purchased the 70 +/- acre property at 282 Hayts Road in the 1970’s. There is currently a house on the property along with several barns and sheds. The 2 house is served by private well and septic system. The property has approximately 245’ of road frontage along Hayts Road. This farm has been in active agriculture for at least 100 years, with a 1938 aerial image showing open active farm fields over the majority of the property. The Pokorney’s have raised quarter horses and thoroughbreds on the property in the past. They still have some horses on the property, but they are just maintained for their pleasure. They currently lease approximately 35 acres of the tillable acreage to a local farmer for hay, corn and soybeans. No fertilizer or herbicides have been used on the property since 2009. There is a stream (Indian Creek) running along portions of the south end of the property near Hayts Road and a second stream running along the east and north sides of the property through the wooded areas. There are approximately 27 acres of woodlands on the property and multiple wetlands scattered throughout the wooded areas. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture” and is designated as “Rural/Agriculture” and “Natural/Open” on the Town’s “Future Land Use / Character” map (2014). The property is also located in Tompkins County Agricultural District #2 and is included on the “Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements Target Areas” map (1999,updated 2006) as part of the Policies and Procedures Manual for this program. The soils on this property are very good for farming, with the majority of the soils being classified as “Farmland of Statewide Significance” (approximately 48.1 acres) or “Prime Farmland” (approximately 8.7 acres). Below is a table showing the soils present on this parcel and attached is a short description of each soil type as it relates to agriculture. Full Soil Name Acres NY Importance Drainage Bath and Valois gravelly silt loam (BgC) 37.7 Farmland of Statewide Importance Well Drained Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) 5.8 Prime Farmland Moderately Well Drained Erie channery silt loam (EbB) 13.8 - Somewhat Poorly Drained Ellery, Chippewa, and Alden soils (EcA) 10.4 Farmland of Statewide Importance Poorly Drained to Very Poorly Drained Kendaia silt loam (KaB) 2.1 Prime Farmland if Drained Somewhat Poorly Drained Lansing gravelly silt loam (LbB) 0.8 Prime Farmland Well Drained Lyons silt loam (Ly) 1.0 - Poorly drained and Very Poorly Drained Julia P. Holmes (Hayts, Sheffield and Bundy Rds) The Holmes’s purchased this 87 +/- acre property in 2022 from the GENEX Cooperative following a subdivision. There are no structures on the property the Holmes’s 3 purchased. The property has approximately 4,380’ of road frontage (+/- 1,385’ along Hayts Rd, +/- 580’ along Sheffield Rd, and +/- 2,415’ along Bundy Rd). The Holmes’s main farm is located in the Town of Ulysses, but they have been renting this field in the Town of Ithaca for several years from GENEX, before purchasing it last year. In general, their farm raises corn, soybeans, alfalfa hay, and mixed grasses hay on their +/- 600 acres and rent an additional +/- 750 acres from area landowners. They also board approximately 150 bred heifers for a large local farm. This 87-acre parcel is mostly open fields and has been used for field crops as part of their farm operation. There is a small stream (Williams Brook) in one corner of the property with some woods (+/- 13 acres) and wetlands on the east side of the property. The property is currently zoned “Agriculture” and is designated as “Rural/Agriculture” on the Town’s “Future Land Use / Character” map (2014). The property is also located in Tompkins County Agricultural District #2 and is included on the “Purchase of Agricultural Conservation Easements Target Areas” map (1999,updated 2006) as part of the Policies and Procedures Manual for this program. The soils on this property are very good for farming, with the majority of the soils being classified as “Farmland of Statewide Significance” (approximately 10.1 acres) or “Prime Farmland” (approximately 69.5 acres). Below is a table showing the soils present on this parcel and attached is a short description of each soil type as it relates to agriculture. Full Soil Name Acres NY Importance Drainage Bath and Valois gravelly silt loam (BgC) 0.4 Farmland of Statewide Importance Well Drained Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) 0 to 3 % slope 0.1 Prime Farmland Moderately Well Drained Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) 3 to 8 % slope 49.8 Prime Farmland Moderately Well Drained Erie channery silt loam (EbB) 1.0 - Somewhat Poorly Drained Kendaia silt loam (KaB) 18.3 Prime Farmland Somewhat Poorly Drained Kendaia and Lyons silt loam (KnA) 1.3 Prime Farmland Somewhat Poorly Drained to Very Poorly Drained Langford channery silt loam (LaB) 9.7 Farmland of Statewide Importance Moderately Well Drained Lyons silt loam (Ly) 3.8 - Poorly Drained and Very Poorly Drained Please let me know if you have any questions prior to the meeting. ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Hayts R dSheffield Rd0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200100 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Pokorney & Holmes Properties Location Map Town of IthacaTown of EnfieldPokorney Bu ndy Rd Holmes Trumansburg RdFLLT Ag Easement FLLT Ag Easement Town Ag Easement ‘‘‘4V’$DEC192022APPENDIXATOWNOFITHACAOFn:oAPLAN;:iAGRICULTURALCONSERVATIONEASEMENTAPPLICATIONFORMI.APPLICANTINFORMATION:Name(s):DE3O€.C5?C)i(L2A)42j_____________________HomeAddress:_______-Jfl%cJ...Street0CitySta.jZipHomePhone:___________________________CellPhone:‘34a‘S2iOEmail(s):CC)JtL1Whyareyouinterestedinplacinganeasementonyourproperty?/sfr’.fZ4(_)£4/s5pA-c_Areyouinterestedinthepossibilityofdonatingalloraportionofyou-conservationeasement?Yes____ _No____ _Possibly,Iwouldlikemoreinformation_____II.EASEMENTPROPERTYINFORMATION:TaxParcelNumber(s):Number:2’1Acreage:__________________Number:__________________________Acreage:___________________Number:__________________________Acreage:___________________Number:__________________________Acreage:___________________De ed Ref er en c e( s):Book__________Page______ ____Book________ __Page______ ____Book_________Page_________Book__ _______Page____ _____and/ordocumentnumber(s):________________________________________Totalacreageofferedforeasement:_______________ __(pleasesubtractoutanyexclusion)Reasonforexclusion:_______ ___/0,;A/?,9yis.1%,rp&4cJi2E...II.FARMINFORMATION:Farmtractaddress/location,ifdifferentfromabove:Totalacreageoffarm:1 Isthepropertymanagedorfarmedbyanyperson(s)otherthantheowners?Ifso,statetheirnames,anyrelationship,andresponsibility:eC7$t’2iL/79?’ifl,5.1111Whatyearwasthepropertyfirstpurchasedbyafamilymember?/‘—‘—ii’bcw)c)ZIsthereaNaturalResourceConservationService(NRCS)ConservationPlanforthefarm?Yes_____No_____Date:_______________ _Conservationpracticesinusecurrently:_____________________________________________________________Pleasebriefiydescribeyourfarmingoperation.Pleaseincludeanyotherrentedlands.ThisistogivetheTownanoverallpictureofyourentireoperation.F,y-rn&vh.’46s)rcj/t4w&sc’-j2d-)t-I-ryL7t‘cLe3pL’wbec)‘2cc9(t&ef-/cftY)CropProduction:Pleasesubmitinformationonanycropsgrownonthefarm,includingcroptypes,acresgrownandaverageyieldperacre.54bieCc’c‘I7‘—‘-‘LivestockProduction:Pleasesubmitinformationonanylivestockandproductsfromlivestock,includinglivestocktypes,averagenumbers,andproductsornumberssold.k)c.SIdentifyanythingspecialaboutthepropertyorfarmoperation(e.g.historicalsignificance,uniquenessoftheagriculturaloperation,naturalfeatures).‘-1pSC%ccQ’t2 Ill.MORTGAGES,LIENS,EASEMENTS:LienHolders:‘jL.)LI\Easements:UtilityRight-of-Ways:t’’S-‘Tc>6‘-14--J-,Z,--t),%-).*—MineralRights:4)Q_IV.SIGNATURES:AppraisalandPurchaseStatement:Applicants,selectedbytheTownBoardinacompetitiveevaluationamongallapplications,willbeofferedanappraisaltodeterminethedevelopmentandagriculturalvaluesoftheproperty.ApplicantsmayacceptorrejecttheTown’sappraisal.Ifrejected,applicantsmayorderanotherappraisalfromaqualifiedappraiserattheirownexpense.TheTownmayofferless,butnomorethantheappraisedvalueoftheproperty;ortheBoardmaydecidenottomakeanofferafteranappraisalhasbeencompleted.ApplicantsreservetherighttoacceptorrejecttheofferbytheTown.Signatures:ItisnecessaryforALLownersofthefarmlandtracttogivetheirapprovalandconsenttothisapplication.I/wehavereadandunderstandthe“AppraisalandPurchaseStatement”andtothebestofmy/ourknowledge,themationsubmittedinthi,licationistrueandcorrect.Signed:Date:I/2Signed:Signed:Signed:VDate:Date:Date:Mortgagees:Pleaselistallmortgages,lienholders,easements,utilityright-of-ways,orownersofmineralrightsforthefarmlandtract.3 ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Aerial Image Taken Spring 2018 H ay ts R d 0 100 200 30050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights C. Denise Scott - Pokorney 282 Hayts Road / Tax Parcel No. 24.-1-34.2 Aerial Map ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 H ay ts R d 0 100 200 30050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights C. Denise Scott - Pokorney 282 Hayts Road / Tax Parcel No. 24.-1-34.2 Streams, Wetlands & 2' Contour Map Indian CreekWetlands 1134 1130 1114 1108 1 1 7 4 1 1 7 0 ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 H ay ts R d 0 100 200 30050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights C. Denise Scott - Pokorney 282 Hayts Road / Tax Parcel No. 24.-1-34.2 Soils Map Bath and Valois gravelly silt loam (BgC) Statewide Importance BgCBgC BgC BgC BgC Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) Prime Farmland Erie channery silt loam (EbB) Kendaia silt loam (KaB) Prime if Drained CfB Ellery, Chippewa and Alden (EcA) Statewide Importance EcA EcA Lansing gravelly silt loam (LbB) Prime Farmland Lyons silt loam (Ly) BgC ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Aerial Image Taken 1954 H ay ts R d 0 100 200 30050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights C. Denise Scott - Pokorney 282 Hayts Road / Tax Parcel No. 24.-1-34.2 1954 Aerial Map \fAPPENDIXAJAN192023JjTOWNOFITHACAAGRICULTURALCONSERVATIONEASEMENTAPPLCA&I.APPLICANTINFORMATION:Name(s):Gc)OQHomeAddress:cc’cvJt)jYIStreetCityStateZipHomePhone:(o9—CeS3’CellPhone:_______________________Email(s):Whyareyouinterestedinplacipganeasementonyourproperty?V3;2an+UQiOj2V1V1+,VTeç2442t(1flOe(Thft9erraykci4-Areyouinterestedinthepossibilityofdonatingalloraportionofyourconservationeasement?Yes_____No_____Possibly,Iwouldlikemoreinformation__ ___II.EASEMENTPROPERTYINFORMATION:TaxParcelNumber(s):Number:-Acreage:(ADC-’Number:VAcreage:____________Number:__________________________Acreage:______________Number:_________________________Acreage:_ _____________DeedReference(s):Book__________Page______Book__________Page_________ _Book____ ___ __Page_____ _Book_________Page—______and/ordocumentnumber(s):________________________________Totalacreageofferedforeasement:(pleasesubtractoutanyexclusion)Reasonforexclusion:____________________________II.FARMINFORMATION:Farmtractaddress/location,ifdifferentfromabove:-Totalacreageoffarm:1 j0-‘00)Dcia)CDa)•ThCD-—,))r’%).-i.—CDCDa)D.<2o.—DCri.—Doo-DvCDD...-HCDIf,r-l•0-h0)-‘30CD0)0DCDQIf,0C,a)If,D-I’C,0)DC,CDCD-QCCDDCDIf’If,0-h=CDIf)4_q_C,4-,--<-V-o-‘CD°Li0-a)C,<CDOCDDCD0)If,3CD00)_‘CD)C,ri.4-,-If,-‘0:3:3C0)3Dcr’<CD=“CDIf)If)0)D0V00—CC4-,-If,-h0•B<CDIf,0C,DC,CciDI—12J0-40-v00CC,4-’-0D-vCD0)CDIfCCB4-’-D-h0-4B0)4-,.0D0Da)DC,-I0V(f0:30DCDa)-‘B:3C,C0DOtIC,0V4-’-VCDIf,a)C,CDI.nCDCDr-,.CD.a)a)2u,00—.CDCDCa)CDIf.qrlCDfl-+C,0-‘cDVr*-tCDVC-<-...a)V,CDCDQC-.2—-hzBflIJ00CDDB“CD4—,-0D-V0)Dh04-,-DCD-ha)B•.‘Jrt0-—4voa)DV’a)CD:3C-4o-I’1CDC,-‘CD00C-‘o-hCDB:3:3CDOo-D-CDa)-Sr•i.a)—.5-:3•-vCDa)If’CD:3C,C0CDa):30:3-CD-ICD:34-,.CD0a):30If’-4:3-V.,If’4-,.0CD4-,-:3-CD-‘V.,—4..,.a)D_CDIf,0-DCDQ3-‘a)CD:3VI°CD:3C--‘—-isra)CDcia):3-DCDIf’0:304-.,.:3-CD4-,-:3-a):34-,-CD0:3CD-S--4.)-hLi,0If)a)4-,-CD4-,-:3-CD-4:3a)BCDIf,a):3b0 ,4III.MORTGAGES,LIENS,EASEMENTS:Pleaselistallmortgages,lienholders,easements,utilityright-of-ways,orownersofmineralrightsforthefarmlandtract.IV.SIGNATURES:AppraisalandPurchaseStatement:NoceApplicants,selectedbytheTownBoardinacompetitiveevaluationamongallapplications,willbeofferedanappraisaltodeterminethedevelopmentandagriculturalvaluesoftheproperty.ApplicantsmayacceptorrejecttheTown’sappraisal.Ifrejected,applicantsmayorderanotherappraisalfromaqualifiedappraiserattheirownexpense.TheTownmayofferless,butnomorethantheappraisedvalueoftheproperty;ortheBoardmaydecidenottomakeanofferafteranappraisalhasbeencompleted.ApplicantsreservetherighttoacceptorrejecttheofferbytheTown.Signatures:ItisnecessaryforALLownersofthefarmlandtracttogivetheirapprovalandconsenttothisapplication.I/wehavereadandunderstandthe“AppraisalandPurchaseStatement”andtotheknowledge,theinforationsubmittedithisapplicationistrueandcorrect.Signed:Date:Signed:ftAftktGYC’,cU1&Date:Signed:O1)Y’’\.I)L‘Date:Signed:Date:bestofmy/ourMortgagees:LienHolders:Easements:UtilityRight-of-Ways:MineralRights:)‘c,1EW-cU(L)\Lpw)c-Un’-\\o—3 ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Aerial Image Taken Spring 2018 Hayts R d Sheffield Rd0 100 200 300 40050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Julia P. Holmes Hayts/Sheffield/Bundy Road's / Tax Parcel No. 24.-5-1.6 Aerial Map Town of IthacaTown of EnfieldBund y Rd ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Hayts R d Sheffield Rd0 100 200 300 40050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Julia P. Holmes Hayts/Sheffield/Bundy Road's / Tax Parcel No. 24.-5-1.6 Streams, Wetlands & 2' Contours Map Town of IthacaTown of EnfieldW i l l i a m s B r o o k Wetlands 1 2 4 6 1 2 5 6 1 1 9 8 1 1 8 4 1 1 9 4 Bund y Rd ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Hayts R d Sheffield Rd0 100 200 300 40050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Julia P. Holmes Hayts/Sheffield/Bundy Road's / Tax Parcel No. 24.-5-1.6 Soils Map Town of IthacaTown of EnfieldLangford channery silt loam (LaB) Statewide Importance KaB LaB Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) Prime Farmland Erie channery silt loam (EbB) Kendaia silt loam (KaB) Prime if Drained CfB Lyons silt loam (Ly) Bund y Rd CfB CfB CfB Kendaia and Lyons silt loams (KnA) ´ Map Produced March 6, 2023 Aerial Image Taken 1954 Hayts R d Sheffield Rd0 100 200 300 40050 Feet Town of Ithaca - Agricultural Purchase of Development Rights Julia P. Holmes Hayts/Sheffield/Bundy Road's / Tax Parcel No. 24.-5-1.6 1954 Aerial Map Town of IthacaTown of EnfieldBund y Rd Agricultural Conservation Easements – Pokorney & Holmes Soil Resource Descriptions Prime Farmland is best suited to the production of row, forage and fiber crops. Due to inherent natural characteristics such as level topography, good drainage, adequate moisture supply, favorable soil depth and favorable soil texture, this land consistently produces the most food and fiber with the least fertilizer, labor and energy requirements. Prime soils tend to be resistant to erosion and run off. Thus, they support intensive cultivation with minimal adverse environmental impacts. Statewide important farmland is of particular statewide importance for the production of food, feed, fiber, forage and oilseed crops. Generally, these farmlands include those that are nearly prime and that produce high yields of crops when treated and managed according to modern farming methods. If conditions are favorable, some may produce as high yields as high as prime farmland. Summarized Soil Descriptions Bath and Valois gravely silt loam (BgC) – 5 to 15 percent slopes Farmland of Statewide Importance These soils occupy either moderate uniform slopes or the complex slopes of small knolls. These soils are suited to most crops commonly grown in the county, to pasture, or to forest. These soils have moderate limitations as cropland. Their slope causes moderately rapid runoff and loss of water that crops need in midsummer. Slopes also creates a moderate erosion problem. Adjustment of crop rotation or simple practices are needed to control runoff. Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfA) – 0 to 3 percent slope Prime Farmland Conesus soils occur on nearly level topography and is well suited to crops, pastures, or forest. Many areas are used intensively for intertilled crops. All of the crops commonly grown in the county can be grown, including vegetable crops and crops needed to support dairying. This is potentially one of the most productive in the county. Erosion is not a serious problem. Conesus gravelly silt loam (CfB) – 3 to 8 percent slope Farmland of Statewide Importance This soil is commonly on the intermediate or on the highest parts of a broadly undulating landscape. Many areas of this soil are crossed by long, narrow, shallow depressions in which water runs during heavy rains. This soil is well suited for crops, pasture, or forest. It is used most commonly for crops and pasture, though some small woodlots remain. It is well suited for vegetables, including green beans, peas, and cabbage. The erosion hazard is moderate. Ellery, Chippewa, and Alden Soils (EcA) – 0 to 8 percent slope Farmland of Statewide Importance All of these soils are wet. This mapping unit occurs in the uplands, mainly in level and slightly depressed areas that receive large amounts of runoff from adjacent higher areas. Most areas are too wet for cultivation unless they have been drained artificially. Some areas are in permanent pasture. Some of the larger areas are forested with water-tolerant species. Erie channery silt loam (EbB) – 3 to 8 percent slope This soil occupies gently sloping areas that have slight or no undulations. It typically receives some runoff from higher land, but has enough slope that runoff removes some of the excess water. Erie soils are not highly productive, but this is one of the better soils in the series. It can be used for crops, pasture, or forest. Under good management moderate yields of common field crops can be obtained. Many areas can be improved by diverting the runoff from adjacent land. Kendaia silt loam (KaB) – 3 to 8 percent slope Prime Farmland if Drained This soil occupies gently sloping landscapes that receive runoff from adjacent soils. This soil is suited to crops, pasture, or forest. In areas that lack artificial drainage, the choice of crops is restricted. Corn, small grain, and hay can be produced. Simple practices to remove excess water from the surface improve these areas significantly as cropland and make them highly productive of many vegetable crops. The removal of excess water is a principal management need. Kendaia and Lyons silt loam (KnA) – 0 to 3 percent slope Prime Farmland if Drained This unit consists of somewhat poorly drained and poorly drained, nearly level soils. Unless these areas of Kendaia and Lyons silt loams have been artificially drained, wetness limits their use mainly to pasture, long-term hay, or forest. If adequate artificial drainage is established, they can be highly productive of a wide variety of crops, including vegetables. Langford channery silt loam (LaB) – 2 to 8 percent slopes Farmland of Statewide Importance This soil commonly occurs as very slight knolls, or on intervening small, gently sloping areas, in a landscape that slopes gently in one direction. This soil is suitable for crops, pasture, or forest. It is among the better soils of the uplands for crops, even though slightly limited by wetness. This soil has moderate limitations for cropping and needs special management practices (tiling, stripcropping, fertilization, liming). Lansing gravelly silt loam (LbB) – 3 to 8 percent slope Prime Farmland This soil is among the best in the county for crops, pasture, or forest. It is suited to all of the crops commonly grown in the county, including deep-rooted legumes, corn, small grains, and vegetables. It is among the best on uplands for many nonagricultural uses, such as housing. Lyons silt loam (Ly) This soil occupies level areas of closed depressions from which water cannot escape. Areas that have not been drained are suited mainly to woodlands, pasture, or wildlife. Areas that are adequately drained can be used for vegetable crops, hay, corn, and small grains. Taken from 1965 Tompkins County Soil Survey