Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 1976-06-28 TOT114 OF ITHACA SPECIAL BOARD NEETIMG -- June 28 , 1976 At a Special Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca , Tompkins County , New York , held at the Town of Ithaca Offices at 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , on the 28th day of June , 1976 , at 5000 p . m . , there were PRESENT , T°Jalter J . Schwan , Supervisor Andrew We Tv1cE Aree , Councilman Noel Desch , Councilmian Robert N . Powers , Councilman Catherine A . Valentino , Councilwoman Shirley Raffensperger , Councilwoman Lawrence A . Fabbroni , Town Engineer/Building � Inspectcr James V . Buyoucos , Town Attorney Barbara Holcomb , Planning Board Chairwoman Robert Parkin , Highway Superintendent Representatives of the PMed9 a A14ENP?A1ENTS TO 11976 BUDGET Motion by Councilman Powerspa seconded by Councilman Desch , RESOLVED , that this Town Board hereby approves amendments to the Town of Ithaca budget ( Part-Town Highway Fund ) , as .follows . " Under the Hi.ghcrmay Fund Estimated Revenues , Repairs and Imprc, remcn-l" s o Item I , the Intr; a fund 'transfer from General/ Par •:. _o `Arn KA.:%enuels to the Highway/ Part Town ( DR2812 ) in the amount of ? 89 , 905 . 00 is to be amended to read $ 79 , 905 . 00 . " Under the Highway Fund Estimated Revenues/PRachinery Fund , Item III , the Interfund Transfer from General/Part Town Revenues to the lllighway/Part Town ( 91112812 ) in the amount or $ 19 . 00 is to be amended to read $ 10 , 019 . 00 . ( There is no net change in the total Interfund Transfer listed under the General Fund or in the tax rate . ', ) `The amendhent toI,the 1976 Budget Summary for the Part Town Highway Fund is as follows Total Estimated Revenues , Item I - $ 91 , 602 . 00 Total Appropriations , Item I = 101 , 602 . 00 Taxes'ito be raised , Item I = 100000000 Total Est 'plated Revenues , Item III = 161719 . 00 Total Appropriations , Item III = 41 , 026 . 00 Taxes,! to be raised , Item III = 24 , 307 . 00 REPORT ON AUCTIOU OF HI`GHWAY BARN Councilman McElwee reported that at the highway barn auction in the morning (!,, ( June 28 ) the bidding proceeded to $ 103 , 000. When no further bids were forthcoming , the Town Supervisor placed one bid ( in accordance with the conditions of sale ) of $ 105 , 000 ( the agreed upon minimum price ) . One further bid in the amount of $ 105 , 100 was made by George Arsenault , Mr . Arsenault made the down payment of $ 10 , 510000 , which amount was deposited � in an interest - bearing account , in accordance with the conditions of sale . Per . Buyoucos will handle the legal details in connection with the Town Board Minutes - 2 - June 28 , 1976 transfer of title . �2r Buyoucos recommended that the Town review its insurance coverage 'p, on the building to see that it is . adequately insured ( advising the insurance agent the property was sold for $ 105 , 000 ) . Coyncilman ' McElwee noted that the Town is agreeing to turn the building over '1 in an " as is " condition arid , therefore , s��cL, 16 guard against vandalism . He said also that the premises ought to be adequately insured against firea Councilman Powers recommended hav- ing inside and outsideiphotographs taken . Mr . Buyoucos said photo - graphs are of value , but , more important , someone should go over the property and premises with Mr . Arsenault- and allow him to see for himself the condition of the property and : how him the defects , if any . Mx . Buyoucos said Ilr . Fabb oni should check to determine whether the property is in the floor! zone . SITE SELECTION - PROPOSED NEW HIGHWAY 14AINTENANCE FACILITY It appeared that owners of 'property in the area ( properties under consideration for a highway maintenance facility site ) had not as yet been notified that the areas are under consideration . Coun- cilmen Powers did not feel there should ba c4n open session until the property owners were notified . klro Fabbroni said he would be able to contact people prior to an informationai meeting . Upon the recommendation of the Town Attorney the Board went into executive session !'ito discuss site selection . After the executive session , the Town Board agreed to let the option on the property at Five I11le Drive expire . The Board also acted as follows : l2otion by Councilm.- n Dosch # seconded by Councilwoman Valentino , RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca agrees that it will extend to July 30 , '' 1976 the option to purchase the property on Seven Mile Drive as a s';!ite for the proposed highway maintenance faci - lity , and the Town Attbtney is hereby authorized to prepared or ap- prove whatever legal language is required to implement the Board ' s intent ; purchase of this property to be contingent upon the Town Board approving the property as a municipal highway maintenance facility . A roll call vote resulted as follows ° Supervisor Schwan , voting Aye Councilman MCiElwee , voting Aye Couic: ilman Desch ; voting Aye CouncilwomaniiValentino , voting Aye C�i,t r4,cilwoman Raffensperger , voting Aye Councilman Powers , voting Nay The resolution was thereupon declared duly adopted . XEROX CONTRACT Motion by Supervisor Schwan ; seconded by Councilman McElwee , RESOLVED , that the Town '' shall renew its contract with the Xerox Co . for the maintenance of Xerox equipment . Unanimously carried . ADJOURNI3ENT The meeting was ; duly adjourned . � V Jet 1 tt� >G1Y✓f.7 G'v�. Edward L . Bergen Town Clerk Special Meeting - - Town of Ithaca Planning Board June '30 , ' 1976 PRESENT : Barbara Holcomb , Sam Slack , Daniel Baker , Liese Bronfenbrenner . Lawrence Fabbroni , The Planning Board members felt that it was most important that a highway facility be as close as possible to a major highway . The Planning Board members felt that a site containing about 6 acres was necessary . ' iA The Planning Board members looked to each neighborhood area in the Town of thaca - - South Hill , Northeast , East Ithaca , Forest Home and West Hill - - and discussed each in turn in depth . They also discussed the East Shore Drive area . The Planning Board members decided as a group that the best possible area was the Inlet area . Several Inlet sites were discussed in detail . The Planning Board members felt that condemnation proceedings were not the best route to go . The Planning Board members felt that sites involving lengthy negotiations such as those with the Treman Estate were not the best route to go . Mr . Sam Slack summed up the °°opinion of the Planning Board as follows : i After thoughtful consideration , the Planning Board recommends that the j Seven Mile Drive site is the preferred site for the Town Highway Maintenance Facility based on said Board ' s discussion of the impact on the community and taking into account the availability of the land , the ease of accessability to State Route 13 , a natural', buffering of neighboring houses , the size and topography of the Seven Mile Drive site , and the fact that it is near said Route 13 which would be mutually maintained , or at least maintained , for ease of access to other area!l's of the County and thus allow for ease of access to the three major highways in the County . r . Daniel Baker , a West Hill resident added : I would rather use Seven Miele Drive than Five Mile Drive when entering onto Route 13 while going to Ithaca . Mr . Baker also noted that the Town trucks would be passing the least number of residences in getting to and from Route 13 . The property has a natural buffer from the three adjacent resi - dences . The proposed building will be , because of topography , set back about 400 ' which certainly will not bother anybody . " The Planning Board members agreed that the front of the Seven Mile Drive j site could be improved from marsh land to a well landscaped site with additional buffering for the one remaining adjacent property . t rwannronl / / / / / b TOWN OF ITHACA MAINTENANCE FACILITY SITE SELECTION NORTHEAST ITHACA - Since a minimum of six acres was considered sufficient for future needs , the only remaining lands of this size are owned 'Iby R . Lucente , O . Schoenfeld , and Cornell Univer - sity . In the case of the private lands all are zoned residential and would most definitely be surrounded by an R- 15 density of housing , not considered to be • A desirable mix of land use . In the case of Cornell lands and other lands in adjacent municipalities cost of land , time for negotiation , special State legislation , available acreage , and skewed location when considering future growth in East , South , and West Ithaca were all seen to be disadvan- tages discounting the short terms advantages of being where there are many of the existing roads served . EAST ITHACA - Aside from Cornell lands all remaining acreage is surrounded by residential homes which are strung out along roads . Access to Northeast would be through Forest Home , to South would be via Burns Road , and to West through City and Octopus - - all undesirable truck travel routes . Cornell lands would involve costly land , negotiation time , and Special State legislation in addition to the locational problems . SOUTH ITHACA - While much remaining land is on South Hill , all travel off South Hill would require the use of Sand Bank Road , Stone Quarry Road , Aurora Street , or Burns Road - - all steep , narrow , winding routes undesirable for truck traffic with great time delays and/or danger involved in reaching Northeast Ithaca , East Ithaca , and West Hill , WEST ITHACA - Again , while much land remains on West Hill virtually every part of the Town with the exception of the inlet valley area would require going through the Octopus and would require sizeable travel distances to sources of road materials in Lansing and SPencer , and to service areas of Forest Home . Lands which are least impacting and with reasonable costs are the most remote and lands closest in the most expensive or impacting on adjacent homes . Although Route 96 will improve travel times some around the Octopus , the above inverse relationship of cost versus time from Ithaca center will always prevail for West Hill especially with a new Hospital . INLET ITHACA - By process of elimination the Inlet Valley Area of the Town offers itself 'as the Town center . If you look at travel times to the Northeast , East , and South parts of the Town they are all about equal . With access to West Hill by routes other than the Octopus and expected growth in both the West and South parts of° Town , location in the Inlet Valley . with ready access to Route 13 seems a wise move for the future . On the basis of the above very general analysis , many sites -in the Inlet Valley area were evaluated as prospective sites , some were rejected from the start because of topography , neighboring uses , usable acreage , flood areas , and the following eleven sites were those studied in the greatest detail . 1 . Site 6 - 31 - 2 - 21 Five Mile Drive 5 acres a . Advantages - Location affords direct access onto Route 13A feeding directly to West Hill and Route 13 . Cost $ 11 , 000 . b . Disadvantages - Usable land is all fill and setback from road would be minimal . Opposite historic landmark " Old Hundred House " . It is in area zoned residential with lig, indus - trial backlands . Remainder of land is presently included in broad definition of flood plain and much of land is included within a prospective corridor for proposed Route 13 . Little expansion capability . 2 . Site 6 - 33 - 2 - 6 . 1 Seven Mile Drive 10 . 8 acres a . Advantages - Close proximity to Route 13 . Natural wooded buffer along stream to visually screen operation from three adjacent residences . 11 Site area large and deep enough to afford 400 ' set- back '„ from road and area to develop buffer strip between operations and one home to north of lot . Potential to improve stagnant wet front area to a pondilwith landscaped perimeter . Adjacent to commercially zoned frontage along heavily traveled Elmira Road . Cost ' $ 13 , 850 . Long ;,range room for future expansion . b . Disadvantages - Objec„tions of business owners along Elmira Road . Noise„ although it is minimal when compared to adjacent farm uses but particularly , heavy truck and heavy traffic use of existing Route 13 , Site 6 - 31 - 4 - 1 Opposite County Maintenance Bldg . Bostwick Road a . Advantages - Contiguous to maintenance building zone of County and School . Site flat , well -drained , - easily developable . Creates opportunity to cooperate with County in using specialized maintenance facilities ( e . g . , paint shop , wash bay ) . Long range room for future expansion . b . Disadvantages - Land not for sale . - Cost of land and any delay beyond existing construc - tion season . Oversaturation of truck uses . 4 . Site 6 - 31 - 1 - 3 Mined - out areas north side of Coy Glen a . Advantages - Accessible to Route 13A and West Hill . ` Access road to site completely buffered from adjacent Glenside residences . Within a proposed park area of Town much of which must presently be restored from bare land and gradual restoration by Town seems the most promising . I ' r 4 . a . Advantages - Availability of minor amount of gravel and fill for roadwork as well as fill areas from roadwork excess . b . Disadvantages - Noise although minimal would be noticeable to Glen'side residences particularly those along Coy Glen Road . Rumsey- Ithaca Corp . lease through 1987 . Land held by Alan Treman Estate with certain letters of intent - to Cornell and so long negotiations would be necessary , x� - Cost of delay in construction . Site 6 - 31 - 1 - 10 . 1 Tompkin's County Lands -r a . Advantages - Contiguous within maintenance building property of County . Creates opportunity to cooperate with County in using specialized maintenance facilities ( e . g . , paint shop',, wash bay ) , b . Disadvantages - No land available , long -range County plans call for additional storage buildings or mining operations in two 'areas with suitable grades for a building site with ilaccess to same . Two 'sites of minimal acreage with little expansion room . County buildings presently totally , utilized as far as truck storage , additional equipment would require additional building space . 6 . Site 6 - 31 - 1 - 3 , 14 Mined area South of Coy Glen if a . Advantages - Accessible to Route 13A and West Hill . Contiguous to maintenance building zone of County and School . Within a proposed park area of Town much of which presently must be restored from bare land and gradual restoration by Town seems the most promising . Compete visual buffer from adjacent residences . Availability of minor amounts of gravel and fill for roadwork as well as fill areas from roadwork excess . b . Disadvantages - Rumsey- Ithaca Corp . lease through 1987 on part , interminable on part . - Access poor . Part of land held by Alan Treman Estate with certain letters of intent to Cornell and so long negotiations would be necessary . - Cramped site circulation with neighboring gravel extraction buildings and future traffic . - Cost of delay in construction . 7 . Site 6 - 31 - 1 - 12 West of access to southside Glen mines a . Advantages - Contiguous to maintenance building area . b . Disadvantages - Slope unsuitable for building . - No buffer from two adjacent homes . - Minimal acreage if available . - Access poor . , Little room for expansion . Y 8 . Site 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 2 Mancini Lands a . Advantages - Direct access to Route 13 . Flat ' lands easily developable . Zoned Light Industrial . Room for future expansion . b . Disadvantages - Cost ' $ 16 , 000 per acre . 9 . Site 6 - 33 - 3 - 2 . 2 Mancini back lands a . Advantages - Visual buffer from all adjacent propertie4 b . Disadvantages - In the middle of potential future resideri' ial development . - Access road must be built . Cost $ 5 , 000 per acre . 10 . Site 6 - 33 - 3 - 1 Millard Brink ' s back lands ( Seven Mile Drive ) a . Advantages - Well -drained development site . Access to Seven Mile Drive . Close to County buildings making use of specialized maintenance facilities more convenient . Room for future expansion . b . Disadvantages - In the midst of potential future residential development . Opposite and below three homes on Seven Mile Drive with no existing buffer zone . Cost ' $ 3 , 000 per acre . 11 . Site 6 - 31 - 4 - 4 . 12 Five Mile Drive and Fidler Road a . Advantages - Direct access to Route 13A . b . Disadvantages - Insufficient land . - Adjacent unbuffered residential uses . - When all eleven sites are compared on the basis of location , site layout , fect on adjacent properties , adjacent zoning , environmental considerations , al usage , cost , long - range planning , intermunicipal cooperation , I personal - ly would rank Sites # 4 and # 6 as the best from all points of view and overall objectives of the Town , but purchase becomes a problem with an estate without a will involved and in attempting to put a project on line when construction costs are very competitive . Site # 2 is then my next choice as the site offers the greatest opportunities for screening adjacent residential uses , is very compatible with adjacent farming operations , and will be an asset to the area rather than a detriment. r Fabbroni - 7 / 7 / 76