Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2011-05-23Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Monday, May 23 at 4:30 p.m. J J 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Agenda 1. Call to Order 2. Review Draft Agenda for Regular Meeting 3. Town Official's Reports 4. Report from Committees a. Budget Committee b. Codes and Ordinances Committee c. Comprehensive Plan Committee i. Discuss resignation of David Mountin and consider replacement d. Operations Committee e. Planning Committee f. Personnel Committee g. Public Works Committee i ^ h. RMAB 5. AdHoc Committees a. Fire Protection b. Asset Management c. Youth Services d. Police Services 6. Intermunicipal Committees a. Report on lAWWTP Audit(s) 7. Discussion Topic - Update on the Comprehensive Plan 8. Consider Consent Agenda Items a. Approval of Town Board Minutes: April 5'^ April 25'^ & May 9"^ 2011 b. Town of Ithaca Abstract 9. Review of Correspondence 10. Consider Adjournment n f i Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Monday, May 23 at 4:30 p.m. 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, NY 14850 Minutes Board Members Present: Herb Engman, Bill Goodman, Pat Leary, Tee Ann Hunter, Rich DePaolo, Eric Levine and Nahmin Horwitz Meeting was called to order at 4:36 p.m. AGENDA ITEM -- Review Draft Agenda for Regular Meeting AGENDA ITEM -- Town Official’s Reports Mr. Engman reported that Kristin Taylor from Engineering has resigned. AGENDA ITEM -- Report from Committees Budget Committee – Mr. Levine reported that they are doubling up this month because Mike was at training last month Codes and Ordinances Committee – Mr. Goodman reported that they received comments from Cornell regarding the stream setback law and it will take a few meetings to get through them all. They also looked at the Conservation Zone changes again. Ms. Hunter asked when the Viewshed document was going to be discussed and Mr. Goodman responded that the Conservation Board was still reviewing comments they received on the draft. Comprehensive Plan Committee – Topic Item after Reports Mr. Engman did report that David Mountin has resigned from the Committee and the Board needs to consider whether to leave the seat empty or replace him with someone else. His opinion was that it was not a good time to bring someone totally new into the process and try to catch them up with three years of meeting information. The topic was added to the June regular meeting. Operations Committee – Mr. Engman reported that they reviewed the property maintenance law and made some changes. Mr. Bates asked the Board to get any comments back to him soon because the public hearing is set for the June meeting and the final draft has to meet the 1-0-day deadline. Planning Committee – The Committee did not meet, but Ms. Ritter reported that there was a meeting with Dan regarding his expansion project for Ithaca Beer and he would like to expand the PDZ to allow free-standing signs at the entrances on Routes 13 and 13a. Discussion followed. Mr. DePaolo asked why Dan doesn’t just combine his parcels and Ms. Ritter responded that she would look at that too, but she wanted to get a feel for what the Board was thinking because the applicant did not want to go Page 1 of 6 through the other processes and then have the Board say no and it would have all been for nothing. Discussion followed. The topic will be on the June agenda. Personnel Committee – Ms. Hunter reported that they continued reviewing a draft code of conduct which will be going to the Employee Relations Committee for comment and the next meeting will have a presentation on the Town’s wage scale components. Public Works Committee – Mr. Goodman reported they discussed the Gateway Trail focusing on the lower half near Buttermilk Falls because of the uncertainty surrounding the Emerson parcel. They discussed the parking issue on Sandbank Road and will be forwarding a local law to the full Board for review. The Forest Home Trail was also discussed and he and Mr. Horwitz would be taking a filed trip to familiarize themselves with the safety concerns. They are also starting to look at Capital Projects and the estimates on the emergency repairs on Eastern Heights Dr. were discussed. The option for re-lining which would save the large trees came in the same price range as the other option so Mr. Weber is going to go with that one to preserve the trees. They also starting looking at road preservation strategies and a request by the Town of Caroline to extend the South Hill Trail will be discussed at the next meeting. Records Management Advisory Board (RMAB) – Mrs. Terwilliger reported that they did not meet this month, but they are starting on the Procedures Manual for each department and will begin with the Town Clerk’s Office. She added that this is a very large project that will take quite a while. Ethics Advisory Board – Mrs. Terwilliger reported, as required by law, that the Ethics Disclosure Forms were on file in the Clerk’s office and available for review. She added that the Board met and reviewed them and there were 7 requests for additional information sent out. She also stated that the Board would like to make a few changes to the Form, which will need to be approved by the Town Board. AdHoc Committees a. Fire Protection – Mr. Engman reported that there next plan of action is to tour the fire stations and also schedule a discussion with Bangs Ambulance. They will also be talking with surrounding municipalities regarding mutual aid and their capability of providing emergency response/EMT because some already contract with Bangs and do not have their own. There was some discussion on the City’s contract negotiations which are not happening because there is no incentive to talk, but they are looking at not filling the Assistant Chief position since they have gotten along without one for almost 2 years. b. Asset Management – Ms. Hunter reported that they have discussed and will be recommending starting reserve funds and the need to raise the water and sewer benefit assessments to cover debt load. The board also Page 2 of 6 agrees that they would like to establish the reserve funds as a line item so they are in front of boards in the future and so they are thought of each year during the budget process regardless of how much money may be put in them. They are working on a formula for a ratio to debt load to determine how much should ideally be put in the line. c. Youth Services – Mr. Engman reported that they didn’t meet but there have been a couple of county-wide meetings and inner ring meetings regarding program flow, money flow, and outcome. He also reported that he received a letter from Cornell regarding the POST students who will be inventorying Ash trees in the Town which will lead to a policy discussion on what to do about them. A brief discussion followed. Ms. Hunter added that she heard that some Cortland College Masters students completed a needs assessment for Youth for the Town of Dryden and she suggested that we check with them about doing the same for the Town. The Board agreed that would be a good idea and Ms. Hunter will follow-up. d. Police Services – Mr. Engman noted that they did not meet but there is a project going on now by the State Police, Sheriff’s and City Police to step- up patrols for speeding. Mr. Horwitz asked that a discussion regarding speed control machines be put on the agenda of this committee. Intermunicipal Committees – Mr. Engman reported that the audits for years ending 2007 and 2008 have been completed for IAWWTF and that Katie Stoner, the Sustainability Planner will be doing a walk-through with a company to evaluate possible savings at SCLIWC Discussion Topic – Update on the Comprehensive Plan (Attachment #1) Ms. Ritter reported that she recently attend a conference in Binghamton, Creating a Framework for Regional Prosperity – A Livable Communities & Smart Growth Symposium. It was an excellent seminar and she was excited about the contacts and information. A great mix of people excited about Retrofitting Suburbia, Smart Growth, Sustainability Groups and NYS DOT people were there. A lot of discussion and focus on how current zoning does not allow for great neighborhood planning right now. Mixed uses aren’t allowed etc. Surveys and the changing demographics of the US were discussed with the Gen X Y and Z anticipated wants and needs and the over riding is developing a neighborhood with access to activities and such. A word that was used a lot was “place making”, making it important where you live. Ms. Ritter quoted from an article by Victor Dover who writes to developers and homebuilders to tell them to get on the ball with designing neighborhoods. He says “Architecture is important, but great streets, mixed uses, blended housing types and shrewd phasing are the key tools. The conventional idea of “curb appeal” had changes. The Conventional showcase the square footage in the house and the lot, Smart Growth projects are designed to showcase opportunities for interacting with Page 3 of 6 the community, socializing and knowing your neighbor. It is all about the streetscapes and the roads. Ms. Ritter recapped 2011 Comp Plan Packet with updated Land Use Maps Potential growth areas indicated and each area has been discussed and Cornell is on the ball with Smart Code type growth with mixed uses in the East Hill Plaza area and on South Hill, a major landowner is interested in doing the same but lacks the backing. West Hill revised map was discussed. Cornell owns a chunk, Mr. Perry owns another, Conifer owns another and J. Rancich owns another. Each of these areas are ripe for development and the Main Street idea is not suitable for these areas for different reasons. Ms Ritter said the plan is to create a neighborhood scale plan using the Conifer Rd right-of-way using the natural resources already there, a bike/pedestrian walkway, the population is there and coming. The idea is to have the residential as the primary focus but with areas set aside for retail to serve the neighborhood, not necessarily be a draw for regional visitors. For example, P&C on East Hill draws people from outside of the immediate neighborhood, where West Hill would probably not have a large supermarket and would maybe have a small mom&pop type store that would serve that neighborhood. If you create a Plan and encourage the developers to buy into that Plan and have some rules and regulations tied to the Plan then developers know what the Town wants to encourage ahead of time and it helps them as well as the Town. They would also like to consider using the Smart Code approach in this area which would radically change our Zoning to allow coordinated smart growth with zoning to enforce and support the vision of mixed use communities. Route 13 Corridor was also discussed and ways to somehow beautify that area as it is one of the major entrances to the Town. Discussion followed touching on architectural standards and ways to encourage good growth. Commuter traffic charts were discussed also which the Town has an overwhelming majority of. Consider Consent Agenda Items Mr. Horwitz requested that the approval of minutes be pulled from Consent. His th concern was with the May 9 minutes regarding confidentiality associated with the gas drilling legislation. Discussion followed. If there is a confidentiality agreement and not everyone abides by it, then it is useless. Mr. Levine noted that it is not like a gag order, but to protect the interests of the municipalities when negotiating. The minutes were changed by removing the ( ? ) Page 4 of 6 Approval of Town Board Minutes: ththth April 5, April 25, & May 9 2011 TB RESOLUTION NO. 2010- 090: Approval of Minutes of April 5, April 25, and May 9, 2011 WHEREAS, the draft minutes of the April 5, April 25, and May 9, 2011 of the Town Board have been submitted for review and approval; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the governing Town Board hereby approves the submitted minutes, with changes, as the final minutes of the April 5, April 25, and May 9, 2011 of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca. MOVEDSECONDED : Tee Ann Hunter : Bill Goodman VOTE : Ayes: Engman, Goodman, Leary, Levine, Hunter and Horwitz Motion passed unanimously. Town of Ithaca Abstract TB RESOLUTION NO. 2011-091: Town of Ithaca Abstract WHEREAS , the following numbered vouchers have been presented to the Ithaca Town Board for approval of payment; and WHEREAS , the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board; now therefore be it RESOLVED , that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers in total for the amounts indicated. VOUCHER NOS. 499 - 583 General Fund Town wide 62,382.65 General Fund Part Town 42,324.63 Highway Fund Part Town 58,555.43 Water Fund 33,355.58 Sewer Fund 7,291.77 Warren Road Walkway 1,467.40 Forest Home Traffic Calming Fire Protection Fund 264,792.00 Risk Retention Fund Forest Home Lighting District 55.04 Glenside Lighting District 21.87 Page 5 of 6 Renwick Heights Lighting District 29.08 Eastwood Commons Lighting District 39.86 Clover Lane Lighting District 5.04 Winner's Circle Lighting District 7.56 Burleigh Drive Lighting District 17.64 West Haven Road Lighting District 69.88 Coddington Road Lighting District 40.68 Trust and Agency 1,400.00 Debt Service TOTAL 471,856.11 MOVED: VOTE: Motion passed. Tee Ann Hunter SECONDED: Bill Goodman Ayes: Engman, Hunter, Goodman, Leary, Horwitz and Levine Motion made by Ms. Hunter, seconded by Mr. Goodman to enter executive session to discuss the employment history of a particular person. Unanimous (6:45 p.m.) Motion made by Ms. Hunter, seconded by Mr. Levine to re-enter open session at 7:23 p.m. Unanimous Review of Correspondence - None Consider Adjournment Motion to adjourn made by Mr. Levine, seconded by Mr. Horwitz. Unanimous (7:24 p.m.) Submitted by Paulette Terwilliger Town Clerk I r\ Page 6 of 6 S^/as/Sbn Conference in Binghamton - Creating a Framework for Regional Prosperity - A Livable Communities & Smart Growth Symposium Speakers: - Ellen Dunham-Jones - professor Georgia Institute of Technology, award winning architect and urban designer, and since writing the book "Retrofitting Suburbia" in 2009 a much sought after speak, both nationally and internationally. - President and CEO of Smart Growth America - Acting Director, US EPA Office of Sustainable Communities - an Associate from Jonathan Rose Companies - work closely with not-for profits, towns and cities - a green real estate policy, planning, and development firm, currently $1.5 billion work, (amusement park in Denver) - NYS Dept of State, Director of Smart Growth, - Deputy County Executive Onondaga County - Donna Lupardo, Assembly women (video will be available on web) The speakers were inspiring and it continues to affirm in my mind the need for the Town to be more proactive in planning and pursuing smart growth strategies. Our current zoning does not allow us to create great places for people to live, places of mixed of use, and diverse housing types, with emphasis on neighborhood design - attractive streetscapes, built for the human instead of emphasizing the car. Density to support infrastructure - but green enough to connect people and nature. Three of the speakers described the changing demographics in the US (maybe in Ithaca?): Baby boomers are the largest cohort - they have been the ones to occupy the single family detached house which dominate suburbs. But they are now empty nesters; and many want to unchain themselves from large yards and houses; this group is looking for things to do in retirement and according to surveys they are interested in living in mixed use/mixed age a^as. Gen X - born starting in the mid-60's, are in their 40's mid-late 30s; this population is much smaller and there are not enough of them to fill up the detached single family houses that the boomers will be giving up. ^ ^ Gen Y - Millenials - children of boomers, called "Echo Boomers", due to the huge increase in birth rates through the 1980s and into the 1990s; these are people especially in their twenties and teens; they are delaying having children; and these are people who will not be interested anytime soon in filling up the typical suburban neighborhood, containing only detached single family homes, they want a more urban lifestyle - but in suburban locations - a community feel (they want Fall Creek). Glut of detached houses in the traditional suburban neighborhood anticipated through to 2035. "third places"—not work or home, but the other places we'd frequent, if they were close at hand, to meet friends, make new friends, people watch, and expand social networks.////PTA and other children centered activities gets people knowing one another - now it is meeting places, f > Energy usage - Discussion on energy usage (BTU) of the typical suburban detached house requiring commute versus attached housing with transit connections, expected that this will be a big factor for the Gen Y-Millenials. Sharing walls - less btus . Infrastructure costs - installation and maintenance; examples of how smart growth reduces infrastructure costs - not expanding out, greater density and multi-story. Having an acre or third of an acre lots sizes requires lots of pipelines. Societal issues, how transportation costs hit low-income families the hardest; Isolation that comes from living in suburbs if you do not have adequate transportation options; Depression issues with seniors who can no longer drive or who don't have a car and are isolated away from services and community. Principals from the Congress of New Urbanism charter include: n Livable streets arranged in compact, walkable blocks. n A range of housing choices to serve people of diverse ages and income levels. n Schools, stores and other nearby destinations reachable by walking, bicycling or transit service. " An affirming, human-scaled public realm where appropriately designed buildings define and enliven streets and other public spaces. creating great places for people to live: A place where people want to live is where people will invest. places that are compact, walkable. include mixed uses and a range of house choices, and places that integrate nature and open space. The talk now is about paying attention to the public realm of a development, not just the houses, but the relationship of the houses to the street the side walk, and other public spaces. ' | 2011 Future Land Use Map with land use category descriptions Architectural standards Discussion of each of the potential growth areas Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service for Selected Roads In the Town of Ithaca West HIII-Town AADT**LOS* NYS Rte 96 at Woolf Ln (NYS DOT - Sept. 2010)9,107 N/A'^ Hayts Rd at NYS Rte 96 (Holochuck Traffic Study-LOS existing, am/pm)WA"C Hayts Rd (Town of Ithaca - April 2004)1,265 N/A'' NYS Rte 96 at Harris B. Dates Dr (Holochuck - overall LOS)N/A'^B Bundy Rd between Hopkins Rd and NYS Rte 96 (Town - August 2010) Bundy Rd/NYS Rte 96 intersection (Holochuck - LOS existing, am/pm) 1,044 N/A^ N/A'^ C NYS Rte 79W, west of the Town of Ithaca Line (NYS DOT- 2008; LOS from TGEIS)4,547 A Mecklenburg Rd between Westhaven Rd and Conifer Dr (Town - Aug 2010)7,249 N/A'^ Westhaven Rd (Town - May 2006)405 N/A'^ Elm St (near City) (Town - August 2003)943 N/A^ West Hill-Cltv NYS Rte 96/Vinegar Hill Rd intersection (NYS DOT - Oct. 2010; LOS from TGEIS - 2008) NYS Route 89/Cliff St intersection (NYS DOT-2008; Holochuck-LOS existing, overall pm) Cliff Street/North Fulton St intersection (NYS DOT-2008; Holochuck-LOS existing, overall) 13,539 18,989 19,908 B C E Inlet Valley-Town AADT**LOS* NYS Rte 13S/34/96 from 327 to 13A (NYS DOT - 2008)19,965 N/A'^ NYS Rte 13A, off Rte 13, before Bostwick Rd (NYS DOT - 2008)4,975 N/A'' Inlet Valley • City NYS Route 13 (NYS DOT - 2008)21,143 N/A'^ NYS Route 13A (NYS DOT - 2008)5,377 N/A'^ South HilMown AADT** LOS* NYS Rte 96B just south of main entrance to Ithaca College (NYS DOT - 2008) 8,700 N/A'^ NYS Rte 96B/Alumni St (10 main entrance) intersection (College Circle - 2010) N/A'^ B King Rd W between Stone Quarry Rd and NYS Rte 96B (NYS DOT - August 2010) 6,646 N/A'^ King Rd E between NYS Rte 96B and Coddington Rd (NYS DOT - August 2010) 2,758 N/A'^ King Rd E/NYS Route 96B intersection (College Circle - overall LOS) WA^ A rbCfthHilN CItv Route 96B (NYS DOT - 2008) YS Route 96B/Ctinton St Intersection (0 "NM = not available "Annual average daily traffic (abbreviated AADT) measures the total volume of traffic of a highway or road for a year divided by 365 days. AADT is a usefui and simple measurement of how busy the road Is. The AADT data in this chart came from the NYS DOT, Tompkins County, and the Town of ithaca. "Level of Service (abbreviated LOS) is used to analyze highways or roads by categorizing traffic now. It is also a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and increased travei time. The LOS data in this chart was excerpted from traffic studies submitted to the Town for the foliowing proposals: Holochuck Homes Subdivision, Cornell TGEIS, and College Circle Apartment Expansion. Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service for Selected Roads in the Town of Ithaca (continued) East Hill-Town AADT**LOS* Honness Ln (Town - April 2005)1,724 N/A'^ Mitchell St (Town - April 2005)4,966 N/A-^ Mitchell St (NYS DOT - August 2010)4,010 N/A^ Ellis Hollow Rd, near Ellis Hollow Senior Apartments (Town - April 2005; LOS - TGEIS)4,228 B Ellis Hollow Rd/Mitchell St/Pine Tree Rd Intersection (TGEIS - 2008)N/A'^B Pine Tree Rd, between Snyder Hill Rd and Ellis Hollow Rd (Tompkins Cty - Oct. 2010; TGEIS)7,689 A Pine Tree Rd, between Snyder Hill and NYS Route 79E (Town - Sept. 2003; TGEIS)6,548 A Pine Tree Rd between Snyder Hill and NYS Route 79E (Tompkins Cty- Sept. 2010; TGEIS)8,090 A NYS Route 79E/Pine Tree Rd intersection (TGEIS - 2008)N/A'^E NYS Route 366/Pine Tree Rd Intersection (TGEIS - 2008)N/A'^F East Hlll-Cltv NYS Route 79E (NYS DOT - 2008)19,346 N/A'^ Dryden Rd/Maple Ave/lthaca Rd intersection (TGEIS)N/A'^C East State St/Mltchell St intersection (TGEIS - 2008)N/A'^C ' % '^N/A = not available '"Annual average daily traffic (abbreviated AADT) measures the total volume of traffic of a highway or road for a year divided by 365 days. AADT is a useful and simple measurement of how busy the road is. The AADT data in this chart came from the NYS DOT, Tompkins County, and the Town of Ithaca. "Level of Service (abbreviated LOS) Is used to analyze highways or roads by categorizing traffic flow. It is also a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and increased travel time. The LOS data in this chart was excerpted from traffic studies submitted to the Town for the following proposals: Holochuck Homes Subdivision, Cornell TGEIS, and College Circle Apartment Expansion. • 1 f \ - V Anticipated land use categories Neighborhood Residential Desired character: Current character: The Neighborhood Residential land use designation includes areas developed primarily after 1950, with single-family residences and townhouses in platted subdivisions. Many of these areas have been developed at densities of between 2 and 3 units per acre, and most are comprised of primarily single family detached homes, some with an accessory attached unit. A mobile home park and some apartment complexes are located on land designated in this category. Many larger less developed and undeveloped parcels also exist in this category, some containing large 19th century homes and farm houses providing traces of the Town's historic past. New development in the Neighborhood Residential category is envisioned to be a mix of housing types, lot sizes, and price ranges, built to create intentional neighborhoods with linkages and proximity to services, employment, nearby neighborhoods, transit stops and recreational areas. Development will ideally incorporate human-scale design; an interconnected street network providing a variety of routes for local traffic; public spaces that are accessible, defensible and visible; and other features that foster a sense of community. Contemporary suburban development patterns (streets with limited connectivity, excessive cul-de- sacs, monoculture of housing types) are strongly discouraged. Infill development will be context- sensitive and compatible with the established built environment. Land categorized as Neighborhood Residential is located in areas anticipated to be served by public sewer and water, close to Neighborhood Center areas and/or the City of Ithaca where topography and transportation networks are suitable. Detached residences, accessory dwelling units where appropriate. Cottage communities, two- to four-unit attached residences, and townhouses, integrated into the larger neighborhood. Limited low-intensity retail uses, offices and personal services serving nearby residents, grouped in very small clusters generally located at intersections of busier non-local streets, within a convenient walking distance (10-15 minutes) of most or all residents in a neighborhood. Civic uses typically found in a traditional neighborhood (schools, libraries, places of worship, etc.). Residential density: 4 to 6 dwelling units/acre average for a development site, 2 to 10 dwelling units/acre at specific locations in a site. Zoning equivalent: MDR, HDR, NC, PDZ. Transect equivalent: T-3 (suburban), T-^ (general urban). Location: Predominant use: Other uses: r-N I » 19 I r\ n o Current character: Desired character: Location: Predominant use: Other uses: The Rural Residential land use designation Is a transitional area between the open space of conservation or agriculture and more densely developed suburban residential areas. Characterized by single family houses that are generally unserved or under-served by water and sewer utilities, on lots ranging from i to lo or more acres. Many parcels were developed gradually overtime with successive subdivisions of former large farm parcels. Frontage or strip residential development, with residential lots strung along arterial and collector roads, is common in some Rural Residential areas. Many larger less developed, undeveloped and agricultural parcels also exist in this category. Residential development in Rural Residential areas should be integrated into the surrounding agricultural and natural landscape, not encroach onto it. New development in the Rural Residential category is envisioned to be large lot residential development on local roads, sited to have a low visual impact from arterial and collector roads and viewscape corridors; and agricultural urbanism development, cluster/conservation development, or ecovillages where a large contiguous parcel of agricultural, forest and/or environmentally sensitive land is preserved. Frontage subdivision along arterial and collector roads should be greatly restricted or prohibited. Land categorized as Rural Residential is located in areas not anticipated to be served by public sewer and water, or frequent public transit service, between areas designated as Neighborhood Residential and Agricultural or Conservation. Single household residential, accessory dwelling units where appropriate. Agriculture and forestry, small cottage industries. Residential density: i dwelling unit/acre average for a development site, depending on soil conditions. Zoning equivalent: LDR, AG, PDZ. Transect equivalent: T-z (rural). : \ f \ t » ! \ Anticipated land use categories Neighborhood Center Current character: Desired character: f ^ k Location: The Neighborhood Center land use designation includes distinct areas of the Town that are in close proximity to major employers, providing an opportunity to serve an existing population with housing and services. Each of the identified centers has a unique character that stems in large part from its location, history, topography and the needs and character of the associated major employer. Each area also includes varying amounts of developed and undeveloped land. On East Hill, near the Cornell University campus, the Pine Tree/Ellis Hollow Roads Center location includes apartment complexes, a shopping center (partially housed with offices), a hotel, and freestanding retail, commercial and office uses. On South Hill, near Ithaca College, a collection of retail services, a hotel, multi-family and single- family residential types can be found in the Danby and King Road intersection. On West Hill, nearthe Cayuga Medical Center, this least developed proposed center provides a range of specialized medical services and includes an apartment complex and several detached residences. As an action plan of the Comprehensive Plan update, each Neighborhood Center area will require an individualized plan to determine the scope, design and mix of uses that will complement and recognize the development needs, opportunities and constraints of each area. New development in the Neighborhood Center category is envisioned to include a combination of residential, office, retail, and commercial uses. Centers should be anchored by a central public space, open space and/or a defined "main street" and be transit oriented. Uses would be combined in the same building or on the same site with residences. Residences appealing to a broad range of household types and lifestyles would be included, with decreasing density away from the core of the neighborhood center. Development will ideally incorporate human-scale design; an interconnected street network providing a variety of routes for local traffic; public spaces that are accessible, defensible and visible; and other features that foster a sense of community. Residential infill and redevelopment will be context-sensitive and compatible with the established built environment. Retrofitting of existing vehicle-oriented development is strongly encouraged. Undesirable development includes streets with limited connectivity, multi-unit housing in disconnected complexes, excessive cul-de-sacs, commercial uses with prominent parking lots, monoculture of topologies, and other contemporary suburban residential development patterns. Areas categorized as Neighborhood Center are located in the approximate geographic center of each of the three subregions of the Town (West Hill, South Hill, East Hill), centered on intersections of relatively busy arterial or collector streets. Predominant use: Other uses: Planned mixed use; residential, commercial and civic. Small-lot (3,000-6,000'^) detached residences with accessory dwelling units where appropriate, cottage communities, two- to four-unit attached residences, townhouses, garden residences, live- work residences, and loft residences, integrated throughout the neighborhood. Senior housing and continuing care. Retail uses, offices and personal services serving neighborhood residents and workers, grouped at the intersections of busier non-local streets or on internal collector roads, within a convenient walking distance (10-15 minutes) of most or all residents in a neighborhood. Retail buildings may include upper level residential units. Civic uses (schools, libraries, places of worship, community centers, museums, etc.). Residential density: 8 to 12 dwelling units/acre average for a development site, 6 to 20 dwelling units/acre at specific locations in a site. Zoning equivalent: HDR, MR, NC, CC, LC, PDZ. Transect equivalent: T-4 (general urban), T-5 (urban core). arnrgiasfiaic r ' ^ f > Anticipated land use categories Mixed Use Urban Current character: The Mixed Use Urban land use applies to the Emerson Power Transmission (formerly Morse Chain) site located on South Hill. This multi-building, four story, former industrial complex contains over 770,000 square feet of building space; approximately one-third of which is within the Town of Ithaca, the remainder being in the City. Built from 1906-1970 the facility includes a mixture of manufacturing and office buildings. Approximately 60 acres of the 94 acre site are within the Town. Steep slopes, shallow soils, and extensive bedrock outcrops are limiting factors to future development of the land. An abandoned railroad bed traversing the west side of the facility is proposed as part of a two mile multi-use trail (Gateway Trail) that would connect the NYS Black Diamond Trail with the Town's South Hill Recreation Way. The site boasts magnificent views of the City, Cayuga Lake and beyond. Desired character: Location: Uses: Residential density: To be determined. Zoning equivalent: PDZ. Transect equivalent: T-5 (urban center). Redevelopment and new development of the site is envisioned for mixed uses, including retail, co ops, condos, apartments, and office space. Light industrial uses would be appropriate for the former manufacturing portions of the site. Passive recreational uses may also exist on the site. The South Hill site is located partially within the City and Town of Ithaca, immediately adjacent to City neighborhoods and in close proximity to the Ithaca Commons and Ithaca College. The site is accessed from State Route 96B (Aurora Street). Mixed residential, retail, offices and light industrial. Anticipated land use categories Gateway Corridor Current character: Desired character: Location: Predominant use: Other uses: The Gateway Corridor land use designation includes parcels fronting on Elmira Road (NY 13/34/96) between Seven Mile Drive and Five Mile Drive, and parcels immediately to the north that access Elmira Road. The south end of this area includes scattered commercial uses, and three motels. The north end includes a microbrewery, climbing machine manufacturer, and a paving and earthmoving contractor. Commercial and industrial uses are in unremarkable buildings dating to the 1960s and 1970s, repurposed houses, and prefabricated metal buildings. Cayuga Inlet and Buttermilk Falls State Park shield the area from the busy Elmira Road retail commercial strip in the City of Ithaca. The Gateway Corridor area remains somewhat unaffected by the recent growth of the Elmira Road strip. Situated along a busy travel corridor used by commuters, truckers and visitors, including tourists of two nearby state parks, the area is uniquely situated for growth and redevelopment opportunities. New and retrofitted development in the Gateway Corridor category is envisioned to include a mix of office, small-scale retail, hospitality, and tourism uses, separated from an area of light industrial and skilled trade uses. New residential development may be appropriate for internal portions of the corridor where highway noise would be less impacting. The scale, architecture and landscaping of future development will need to be carefully designed and articulated. This area should retain a semi-rural character, with deep setbacks from arterial streets (50' or more), wide spacing between uses, landscaped front yards, site-built buildings, and vehicle parking sited on the sideand/orrear of structures. Shared curb cuts will reduce potential conflicts with highway traffic. Architectural design, landscaping, and site planning regulations that may be adopted in the future should apply to this area, including industrial uses. Agglomeration of mechanical commercial uses, and incremental expansion of commercial zoning resulting in strip commercial development, will be strongly discouraged. While the corridor will likely remain strongly auto-oriented, pedestrian connections within the corridor and to adjoining or nearby residential neighborhoods will unify and promote service linkage opportunities. See the current character section. Commercial, lodging/hospitality, incidental trade uses. Skilled trades, custom industry, light industrial, outdoor entertainment, residential. Residential density: To be determined. Zoning equivalent: C, LDR, NC, LI, PDZ. Transect equivalent: T-3 (suburban). ' 1 ^ % o ^ 1 ¨ ^ t 1 1h. t y Anticipated land use categories Agricultural Current character: Desired character: Location: Predominant use: Other uses: Residential density: Zoning equivalent: Transect equivalent: The Agricultural land use designation includes areas with a rural character, where agricultural uses and open space predominate. The farms represent a diversity of enterprises ranging from small scale fruit and vegetable producers, livestock farmers, and ornamental horticultural businesses to a few farmers engaged in larger dairy and commodity field crop production. Residences not associated with farms are scattered throughout the Agriculture-designated areas, mostly along the road frontages. This category also encompasses various agricultural-related teaching and research facilities of Cornell University. Through many of its colleges and departments, Cornell has a large agricultural presence on East Hill, such as open fields, pastures, farms and associated farm buildings and structures. Land in the Agricultural category is envisioned to be a home for farming and farm-related businesses, where there is minimal intrusion by non-agricultural uses, and the right to farm will be honored. Agritourism will be encouraged to keep agricultural uses financially viable. Only very limited residential development should be considered in this area, on sites that are poorly suited for agricultural uses or open space preservation. Residential development in Agricultural areas should be integrated into the surrounding agricultural and natural landscape, not encroach onto it. Frontage subdivision along roads should be restricted. The existing agricultural-related teaching and research facilities on East Hill are a high priority to retain in agriculture and should be maintained. Land categorized as Agricultural is concentrated in the western part of the Town along the borders of Enfield and Ulysses. Portions of South Hill are also actively farmed, and Cornell University uses areas of East Hill for agricultural research. Agricultural uses, agricultural related business, equestrian facilities, dwelling units of the owner or operator of an agricultural use on the site, accessory dwelling units where appropriate. Small cottage industries and home occupations, agritourism, very limited low-impact residential development. 1-2 acre average for a development site. C, AG, LDR, PDZ. ; T-2 (rural). ; 5 i Anticipated land use categories Conservation / Open Space I 1 Current character: Desired character: Location: Predominant use: Other uses: Residential density: Zoning equivalent: Transect equivalent: The Conservation / Open Space land use designation includes areas having significant natural features. The category includes sites designated as Unique Natural Areas, as well as several large parks and preserves, such as Buttermilk Falls State Park, Robert Treman State Park, and Cornell Plantations. Some large parcels with residences are present. Land in the Conservation/Open Space category will be protected from inappropriate development. Natural features such as wetlands, mature woodlands, watercourses, and viewsheds will be protected from intrusion by residential, commercial, industrial and institutional uses. Portions of some areas shown as Conservation/Open Space may be suitable for very limited low- impact residential development. Individual site evaluation will be necessary to determine suitability for development. Land categorized as Conservation/Open Space consists of lands approximating or reverting to a natural state, including lands unsuitable for settlement or agriculture due to topography, hydrology or vegetation. They may contain wetlands, steep slopes, mature woodlands, or other natural features. Lands within this category are located throughout the Town. Parks (predominantly passive recreation), conservation areas, nature preserves, arboretums, open space. Agricultural uses, very limited low-impact single household residential development on a case-by- case basis. 1 dwelling units/7 acres average for a development site. C, AG, PDZ. ;T-i (natural). Anticipated land use categories Institutional / Public Current character:The Institutional / Public area Includes the campuses of Cornell University and Ithaca College, their ancillary research facilities, and reserve land; and the site of Cayuga Medical Center and adjacent associated facilities. Cornell University, located on the east side of the City of ithaca and on East Hill, has a generally traditional campus layout with buildings lining an interconnected grid of roads, grouped around internal quadrangles. Ancillary facilities of CU include greenhouses, orchards, and farms, which are located on parcels with the Agriculture and Conservation / Open Space designation. Ithaca College, located on South Hill, reflects campus planning practice in the 1960s and 1970s, with a built-up central core surrounded by a loop road, parking and open space. The campus edges of CU and IC are generally well-defined, with the campus and ancillary facilities of Cornell University having some overlap with neighborhoods in the city and town. Desired character:Development in the Institutional / Public zone should reflect the current best practice in campus planning, medical facility design and site planning, and land stewardship. Land categorized as Institutional/Public includes the Cornell University and ithaca College campuses, their ancillary facilities and reserve areas not related to agriculture and conservation, and the site of Cayuga Medical Center in the West Hill area. College and university campuses, hospitals. Laboratories and research facilities, business incubators, and related facilities managed by a college, university or hospital as part of their larger mission. Residential density: Not appiicable. Zoning equivalent: C, AG, LDR, MDR, OPC, PDZ. Transect equivalent: SD (special district). Location: Predominant use: Other uses: : ^ f 1 * 1 im Anticipated land use categories Limited Industrial Current character: Desired character: Location: Predominant use: Other uses: Residential density: Zoning equivalent: Transect equivalent: The Limited Industrial land use applies to the Therm International Inc. facility site. The 130,000 square-foot facility includes a main manufacturing and warehouse plant built in 1935 with several support buildings added in the 1980s. Used forthe manufacturing of engine parts, the facility now includes advanced materials manufacturing. Situated near the City and Town municipal boundary on South Hill, much of the 35 acre parcel remains undeveloped with woods and moderate slopes. The facility is tucked into existing neighborhoods with the Six Mile Creek Natural Area Immediately adjacent to the east. The facility has one main un-signaled access drive off Hudson Street Future industrial development should not be piecemeal, but instead take the form of an industrial park or other scheme where there is coordinated planning over a group of contiguous lots. The acreage of industrial zoned land in the Town should be limited to only the amount needed to realistically meet future demand. Architectural design, landscaping, and site planning regulations that may be adopted in the future should apply to industrial uses. Industrial areas should be well buffered from residential areas. South Hill area, off Hudson Street/Coddington Road, south of the City of Ithaca boundary. Future industrial districts should be on relatively flat sites that are not environmentally or visually sensitive, close to arterial roads that are easily negotiated by truck traffic, in areas where their externalities will have little or no impact on residential, recreational, and agricultural uses. Light industry, skilled trades, Potential for future redevelopment for mixed use. Not applicable. LI, PDZ :T-3 (suburban). Anticipated land use categories Office / Technology Current character: Desired character: The Office Technology land use applies to the South Hill Business Campus on State Route 96B. The 271,000 sq. ft. facility consists of a two-story 1957 factory, a four-story 1957 office tower, and a two- story 1975 addition. Once used for manufacturing machine part, the complex has been transformed into a mixed use facility housing a tapestry of manufacturing, research and development, and office uses. The 56 acre site has two signalized access points from State Route 96B. Much of the facility enjoys distinctive and prominent "long view" of Cayuga Lake. The reuse of the manufacturing facility for mixed use purposes is supported and encouraged by the Town. Expansion of the facility would be done through a master plan design to create an attractive complex of related buildings in a campus-like setting. Prominently sited along the state highway, architectural design, landscaping and site plan regulations would guide future development of the facility. f ^ Predominant use: Other Uses: Zoning equivalent: PDZ Transect equivalent: T-3 (suburban). Mixed use for office, manufacturing, and research and development. To be determined. Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Transects Atransect isa cut or path through part of the environment showing a range of different habitats. Biologists and ecoiogists use transects to study the many symbiotic elements that contribute to habitats where certain plants and animals thrive. Human beings also thrive in different habitats. Some people prefer urban centers and would suffer in a rural place, while others thrive in the rural or sub-urban zones. Before the automobile, American development patterns were walkable, and transects within towns and city neighborhoods revealed areas that were less urban and more urban in character. This urbanism could be analyzed as natural transects are analyzed. To systemize the analysis and coding of traditional patterns, a prototypical American rural-to-urban transect has been divided into six Transect Zones, orT-zones, for application on zoning maps. -Center for Applied Transect studies <i> @ mNATURAL ZONE RURAL ZONE SUBURBAN ZONE GENERAL URBAN ZONE URBAN CENTER ZONE URBAN CORE SPECIAL DISTRICT - Duany Plater-Zyberk and Company T-1 Natural T -1 Natural Zone consists of lands approximating or reverting to a wilderness condition, including lands unsuitable for settlement due to topography, hydrology or vegetation. T-2 Rural T -2 Rural Zone consists of sparsely settled lands in open or cultivated states. These include woodland, agricultural land, grassland, and irrigable desert. Typical buildings are farmhouses, agricultural buildings, cabins, and villas. T-3 Sub-Urban T -3 Sub-Urban Zone consists of low density residential areas, adjacent to higher zones that some mixed use. Home occupations and outbuildings are allowed. Planting is naturalistic and setbacks are relatively deep. Blocks may be large and the roads irregularto accommodate natural conditions. T-4 General Urban T-4 General Urban Zone consists of a mixed use but primarily residential urban fabric. It may have a wide range of building types: single, sideyard, and rowhouses. Setbacks and landscaping are variable. Streets with curbs and sidewalks define medium-sized blocks. T-5 Urban Center T -5 Urban Center Zone consists of higher density mixed use building that accommodate retail, offices, rowhouses and ^ apartments. It has a tight network of streets, with wide sidewalks, steady street tree planting and buildings set close to the sidewalks. T-6 Urban Core T -6 Urban Core Zone consists of the highest density and height, with the greatest variety of uses, and civic buildings of regional importance. It may have larger blocks; streets have steady street tree planting and buildings are set close to wide sidewalks. Typically only large towns and cities have an Urban Core Zone. -SmartCode 9.2 Tompkins County Non-ResidentIn-Commuting Workforce (2008) -14,901 WorkersOther Counties1,698- 11%Onondaga County325 - 2%Broome County400 - 3%Tioga County3,140-21%Seneca County1,090-7%Cayuga County2,165-15%Chemung County1,245-8%Cortland County3,230 - 22%Schuyler County1,608- 11%^Cayuga Countyn Chemung County□ Cortland County□ Schuyler County■ Seneca Countyn Tioga County■ Broome County□ Onondaga County■ Other CountiesData Source: Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) based on American CommunitySurvey (ACS) 3-year data (2006-2008).Graphic provided by Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council.c,. cc:: Tompkins County Non-ResidentOut-Commuting Workforce (2008) - 4,469 WorkersOther Counties949-21%Onondaga County415-9%Broome County305 - 7%Tioga County165-4%Seneca County235 - 5%Cayuga County520- 11%Chemung County195-4%Cortland County1,675-37%Schuyler County110-2%11 Cayuga Countyn Chemung County□ Cortland County□ Schuyler County■ Seneca County■ Tioga County■ Broome County□ Onondaga County■ Other CountiesData Source: Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP) based on American CommunitySurvey (ACS) 3-year data (2006-2008) .jSraphic provided by Ithaca-Tompkins County, Transportation Council. Agriculture Zoned Lands and Parcel Acreages Calculations showing potential lot creation under different zoning scenarios ^ Property Owner/Farmer Road Road Parcel Potential number of parcels Potential number of parcels Name No.Name Acreage With existing 7 acre mininim with zoning change to 15 acre mininum Suwinski, Jan H 451 Sheffield Rd 372.62 53.23 24.84 Voss, George K King Rd W 278.70 39.81 18.58 Baker, Phyllis 380 Bostwick Rd 237.87 33.98 15.86 Ranclch, John Mecklenburg Rd 157.04 22.43 10.47 White, Christlanne 812 Elmira Rd 145.17 20.74 9.68 Palmer, Miriam L Bundy Rd 143.34 20.48 9.56 Eastern Artificial Insem Corp 521 Sheffield Rd 128.05 18.29 8.54 Voss, George K 385 King Rd W 124.38 17.77 8.29 Eddy, Nelson H 430 Bostwick Rd 118.69 16.96 7.91 Drake, Robert Mecklenburg Rd 108.88 15.55 7.26 Palmer, Miriam L Bundy Rd 108.46 15.49 7.23 Baker, Alice J 383 Bostwick Rd 106.59 15.23 7.11 Joan S Krantz Revocable Trust 179 Sheffield Rd 94.49 13.50 6.30 Drake, Robert A Mecklenburg Rd 91.12 13.02 6.07 Soos, Anne C 195-197 Calkins Rd 88.58 12.65 5.91 Teeter, Alan J Enfield Falls Rd 86.98 12.43 5.80 Eddy, Nelson A Teeter Rd 80.57 11.51 5.37 Wedemeyer, Robert Trumansburg Rd 72.81 10.40 4.85 Voss, George K 290 Sand Bank Rd 72.28 10.33 4.82 Pokorney, Douglas J 282 Hayts Rd 71.12 10.16 4.74 Jackman, Robert Alexander 1428 Trumansburg Rd 69.75 9.96 4.65 Glldersleeve, Bert E Hayts Rd 58.01 8.29 3.87 Conlon, Richard L 860 Elm St Ext 57.32 8.19 3.82 Inlet Valley Homeowners Calkins Rd 56.91 8.13 3.79 Suwinski, Jan H 1440 Mecklenburg Rd 55.62 7.95 3.71 Forest, Claire 330 King Rd W 54.10 7.73 3.61 Mallon, Joseph S 471 Bostwick Rd 52.27 7.47 3.48 Bartholomew Family Partnership Enfield Falls Rd 47.41 6.77 3.16 Ferguson, Gary ShefHeld Rd 42.52 6.07 2.83 Suwinski, Susan J Sheffield Rd 41.97 6.00 2.80 Cummins, Stephen 1408 Trumansburg Rd 39.84 5.69 2.66 y Messier, David 179 Calkins Rd 38.51 5.60 2.57 Greenspun, Tom 425 Bostwick Rd 37.77 5.40 2.52 West Hill Cemetery Asc 200 Hayts Rd 32.26 4.61 2.15 Bennett, Michael R 645 Sheffield Rd 31.86 4.55 2.12 Debell, John Bundy Rd 29.71 4.24 1.98 Drake, Robert Mecklenburg Rd 25.83 3.69 1.72 Magacs, John 293 Bundy Rd 23.16 3.31 1.54 Teeter, Alan J 296 Enfield Falls Rd 21.69 3.10 1.45 Teeter, Alan J 296 Enfield Falls Rd 21.49 3.07 1.43 Fernandez, David Bundy Rd 20.61 2.94 1.37 Enzlan, George H 268 Bundy Rd 20.10 2.87 1.34 Greenspun, Nathaniel 429 Bostwick Rd 19.81 2.83 1.32 Tourance, Daniel 221 Sand Bank Rd 17.97 2.57 1.20 Alpha, Christopher G 260 Hayts Rd 16.92 2.42 1.13 Maynard, Catherine Sheffield Rd 15.60 2.23 1.04 PIpitsa Zaharis Trust 145 Iradell Rd 14.97 2.14 1.00 Mobbs, William Enfield Falls Rd 14.44 2.06 0.96 Harrick, Estate of Estelle King Rd W 13.56 1.94 0.90 Herman, Thomas W 424 Bostwick Rd 13.05 1.86 0.87 Schaap, Richard Iradell Rd 11.89 1.70 0.79 Lupo, Michael W 123 Iradell Rd 11.20 1.60 0.75 Daughhetee, Steven 245 Hayts Rd 10.70 1.53 0.71 McCutcheon, Brian 133 Iradell Rd 10.48 1.50 0,70 Younes, Munther A 294 Hayts Rd 10.33 1.48 0.69 Schaap, Richard 181 Iradell Rd 9.72 1.39 0.65 Kellogg, Catherine 284 Enfield Falls Rd 9.68 1.38 0.65 Fogarty, Yvonne 238 Bundy Rd 9.54 1.36 0.64 Roswech, Todd Woodgate Ln 9.25 1.32 0.62 Dengler, Jason A 1496 Trumansburg Rd 8.78 1.25 0.59 Greenspun, Tom 439 Bostwick Rd 8.42 1.20 0.56 Poole, Robert J 226 Bundy Rd 8.19 1.17 0.55 RIghtmyer, Bruce 155 Poole Rd 8.14 1.16 0.54 Lucatelli, Anthony 1456 Trumansburg Rd 7.87 1.12 0.52 Walton, Stan 8 Max Dr 7.44 1.06 0.50 ^ Hohn, Thomas 244 Hayts Rd 7.01 1.00 0.47 Gibson, Julia 101 Poole Rd 6.54 0.93 0.44 ^ Eddy, Nelson H Bostwick Rd 6.42 0.92 0.43 Agriculture Zoned Lands and Parcel Acreages Calculations showing potential lot creation under different zoning scenarios Stratakos, Peter King Rd W 6.33 0.90 0.42 Williams, Sylvia A 300 Hayts Rd 5.99 0.86 0.40 Teeter, Alan J 2S6 Enfield Falls Rd 5.96 0.85 0.40 Mignot, Lori O 165 Iradell Rd 5.83 0.83 0.39 Verberg, Rolf 680 Sheffield Rd 5.80 0.83 0.39 Weir, Patrick M 1486 Trumansburg Rd 5.60 0.80 0.37 Bonamie, Daniel F Hayts Rd 5.51 0.79 0.37 Vignaux, George J 1470 Trumansburg Rd 5.43 0.78 0.36 Maynard, Catherine 421 Sheffield Rd 5.43 0.78 0.36 Goodrich, Gregory 8 Vera Cir 5.40 0.77 0.36 Jones, Ham's K 135 Iradell Rd 5.35 0.76 0.36 Boodley, Nancy K Shefneld Rd 5.07 0.72 0.34 Ferguson, Gary 1485 Mecklenburg Rd 5.00 0.71 0.33 Bosak, Jon 1448 Trumansburg Rd 4.92 0.70 0.33 Richards, Richard Enfield Falls Rd 4.87 0.70 0.32 Littlefield, John B 1362 Mecklenburg Rd 4.86 0.69 0.32 Gary, Mikel 218 Bundy Rd 4.76 0.68 0.32 Graap, Jennifer L 1388 Mecklenburg Rd 4.74 0.68 0.32 Note; Parcels less than 4.5 acres in size were omitted from table f \ I \ Agriculture Zoned Lands & Parcel Acreages * < Town of Ulysses Cayuga / prMpn*'""" " City of Ithaca PaoIr Rri Town of NewfieW Agriculture Zone with individual parcel acreage Miles N A 0.5 1 ' 4 - I ' ^Mbmg Depot1Proposed- Development r-y.nview. ^ri; "Mbbile'AmCrop FieldolunteerFireman^ *"{SheJdrake)Early Bird .FarmCrop Field(Eddy)^^ns^ction'offipeZ^A^^rihentTown Publicdrake)Early Birdpom maize m »_ ^n and chicken«ite»(McMlllian Wfc^gfgejVdss RropertyElmira RoadGateway Corridor & Vicinity ^Map Date 3/17/11 aAerial Photo 2007 iA^;-,€ddydale Farm Ma^^0 250 500 ysgeirV'l®: : •: ■"•^: ■ •;"nlmilCleveU^13 unitsprpposic2S0l^^':ovAiho'uses;x%MonkemeyerPropertyundeveiopedalian'r/-1 '*<; *■ ^[ ' ^ll/R^nkeme^^q'il'Cf'* .•» .U ••'*^"3'I S-buttermilk • * » wFaJis(s o I d-1p:PjyS WyJ ij^ ji^ Aubel^pr^>2p^3Skerjif.Hd^dlComl^^rci^i■1' :.■F-v!'k • . Mpnkempyer^l^pringwood Tpwnh3Usd^* ~■f:South Hill NeighborhoodCenter LU & greater areaMap Date 3/3/11Aerial Photo 2007•ij^-.'''leonardo/L.^Prpperty ^Nangyal Monastery '\^*--N-0f*itft^We^tview Rart^r^ m■. Town of Ithaca -West Hill Area ‘:j-rS’ ;9_4:.- t t ZJ’ rrc 4 $.t_*t t4t.•- Town dJiy&$& ‘- Map Date 4/6/11 Aerial Photo 2007 In. I / 0.5 Miles A —_I —- -fliw&c ,‘t1? Y *prOr euestdan faciMvj’t 1’- D CD a U’ .__:.r-i jeYard) —:1 Gildérsleeve, BertE L k Homes’ U- -I %a.-t.&- -ar ‘I— aW t t.-fts -441fl _______ -— C’-.. L4 IJIN / .,1 ‘‘F \‘v Creek FaWn Zj,* cipient).‘ IS F Psiona k4 tA ‘.jfr I °‘OV6dOk 4——ab’4 ?..rrrr -,1JfflL £4 4:4 ** 7Zun’ts Home ‘C !J Peny,Richard — -,r..ta ..4 t.t’‘Q V.. Town Ranachj P ii _ Lv’.r r ______ •J ‘V. ___ MeckIenburgRoade .L EcoVill -ji tn4 bi3 ør 15 ‘1’fl W 4 I •&____. Palmer,Miriam L .Rane tn b,John ipfl1- (prey -Drake,Rbbéd) sold recenfly to rH Drake,Robert LTregaskis, R 1141 0 0.25 1 C A CDC TownofIthacaFutureLandUseMapLandUseCategories(BundytoMecklenburgPotentialk.-,EastHillPotentialrowlhPaa‘NElmiraRo&PonkGrowthArdjfNeighborhoodResidentialRuralResidentialHighDensityResidentialNeighborhoodMixedUseCenterMixedUseUrbanGatewayCorridorOfficeParkTechnologyAgriculturalConservation!OpenSpaceOutdoorRecreation(publicandprivate)Public!InstitutionalLimitedIndustrialE——Mileso0.250.51.52ComprehensivePlanUpdate2011N‘V1DRAFTMAPDATE:FErPuARy18.201 Town of Ithaca -Future Land Use Map Revised West Hill Area -Neighborhood Scale Plan Proposal - Neighborhood Residential Rural Residential Neighborhood Center Mixed Use Urban Gateway Corridor Office Park Technology •Agricultural •Conservation?Open Space •Outdoor Recreation (public and private) •Public?Institutional •Limited Industrial HAYTS RD: :1 Future Land Use Map Comprehensive Plan Update 2011 Map Created 5?17?11 CED 0 0.25 w S Miles 0.5 1