Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 1972-12-11TOWN OP ITHACA REGULAR BOARD MEETING I December 11, l$72 At a Regular Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County^ New York, held at the Town of Ithaca Offices at 108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York,;on the 11th day of December, 1972, at 5:00 p;m., there were » ^ I ' n \ ' PRESENT: Walter Schwan, Supervisor Andrew W^; McElwee,'Councilman Noel DeSch^ Counci|LmMri i ^ctor Del Rosso, CoUh^ilnian Robert;N; ipowers, CcpUflcilman * * iALSO PRESENT: ^mes V, lEjUyoucos., ToWn Attorney ; Petor'Ki pb^ancese^ Plslnning Consultant Ms, Ifiarbam Holcomb, Chairman,'Planning Board David Wi Cowan,■Zoning OfficerReynolds Met9, Assistant Zoning OfficerRobert Grpffi i^ttorpey, Groff AssociatesStevfart Ifnowlton^ Limited Partner, Groff AssociatesBen Boynjion, Groff AssociatesWilliam CJfOtnwell, Tompkins County HospitalEugene Ax^pold, Administrator, Tompkins County tt ospitAlR. Hi Com^tock, President of the Board, Tompkins . County HospitalMs. Bonnie Howard, Health Planning Council Ms• Ruth DeWire Robert L, Bruce, County Representative Ms. Sylvia Wahl Ms, Beverley Livesay Arthur L. Berkey Edward P. Riley Members of Radio, TV, and Press The meeting was called to order at 5:15 p.m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Supervisor Schwan; seconded by Councilman Powers,RESOLVED, that the minutes for October 23, 1972 and November 9, 1972be approved as presented, and that the minutes of October l6, 1972 be approved with the correction on page 8 of those minutes that the roadaccepted in the Eastern Heights Subdivision is Skyvue to EasternHeights Drive rather than Snyder Hill Road down Skyvue to Eastern Heights Drive. Unanimously carried. REVISION OP TOWN ELECTION DISTRICT LINES TO CONFORM TO COUNTY RE-APPORTIONMENT DISTRICTS Supervisor Schwan reported that affirmative action is needed on thismatter by the 30th of December, The Town of Ithaca will now electthree members of the Board of Representatives rather than two as inthe past, with the result that the Town must establish a third Countydistrict within the boundaries of the Town. Supervisor Schwan saidthe major change is between Election Districts 2 and 3 on South Hill.Previously we had eight election districts, 1 through 8. Since this original division. District 6 has been divided into two districts --6 and 9> "the dividing line being Warren Road. The County districtlines are now divided 6-7-8, 9-3-^-5^ and 1-2, which have beenlabelled County districts A, B, and C. The other change is on theDanby Road line which used to run 500 feet west of Danby Road andparallel to it. The line now zig-zags through the Ithaca CollegeCampus. These changes mean that people living along the Danby Roadwho used to vote at the National Cash Register Company cafeteria will now vote at the City School District maintenance barns. The line be tween District 5 and District 4 in Forest Home used to follow the 2 -December 11, 1972 nf f 2 Drive, so that some of the people voted in thP Pv2oir ^2?^ in District 5. The line has now been moved into w affecting some 20 houses. The result is that all theForest Home will now vote at Riley Robb Hall (District 4).This will leave the dormitories at Ithaca College in Dikrict 5 as Roart line had not been changed on the Danby? have been necessary to vote for some offices in District3 nd in District 2 tb vote for the County Representative. the foregoing changes, prepared by Planning Consult- f attached to these minutes and available forexamination in the Town Clerk's office. Councilman Desch; seconded by Councilman Powers, RESOLVED, that the eledtion district lines for the Town of Ithaca be n 2® identified on map prepared by Peter K. Prancese, PlanningConsultant, with the result that boundaries have been shifted in District 5 and 7 and between Districts 2 and 3 to conform with the County Reapportionment Plan. Unanimously carried, APPOINTMENTS Motion by Councilman Del Rosso; seconded by Councilman Desch, RESOLVED, that Walter J. Schwan and Robert Ni Powers be appointed to the County Sanitary Sewer Commission. Unanimously carried* There was some discussion with regard to the appointment of one member to the Greatel* IthAca Area Beautification Council. This matter was tabled until January when the Board could be in touch with Florence Burger to determine whether she will accept a re-appoint- ment. Motion by Supervisor Schwan; seconded by Councilman McElwee, RESOLVED, that Jack Hewett be appointed to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the full term beginning January 1, 1973. I Unanimously carried. Motion by Supervisor Schwan; seconded by Councilman Powers, RESOLVED, that Ms. Nancy M, Puller and Mg. Cynthia L. S-earles be re-appointed as Deputy Town Clerks, term to expire December 31, 1973. Unanimously carried. FAMILY PRACTICE CLINIC Mr. Eugene Arnold, Administrator, Tompkins County Hospital, intro duced Mr. William Cromwell, an associate at the hospital, to make a presentation in this matter. Mr. Cromwell said his group was request ing a letter from the Town Board endorsing the Family Practice Clinic in connection with an application they will be making for Appalachian funds for this project. Mr. Cromwell read the project summary, copy of which is a part of these minutes. The Hospital has applied for $200,000 in funds per year for a five year period. Other fxinds would come from fee-for-service, or possibly some State Aid. Two facilities are contemplated, one a hospital based unit and the other an outreach clinic. The clinic would be in a fixed place rather than a mobile unit, it being more economical to transport patients to a fixed place than to bring a mobile unit to the patient. The needfor this project arises from the difficulty of communities outside the urban area to attract doctors to a solo practice setting. The hospital emergency room, therefore, has been increasingly used for non-emergency cases with the resultant inefficiency of emergency room operation, and, for the patient treated in this manner, a lack of continuity and compre hensiveness of care. No site has been selected as yet for this pro ject. - 3 - December 11, 1972 Motion by Councilme.h Desch; seconded by Supervisor Schwan, RESOLVED, that based upon the project summary presented by representa' tives of the Tompkine County Hospital with regard to Tompkins County Hospital Rural Health Care Delivery Proposal, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby endorses the concept and endorses the intention to apply for Appalachian Funds for this project, L Unanimously carried. EASTERN HEIGHTS IHTERSECTIOH LIGHTS Supervisor Schwan reported that the bottleneck in the project for intersection lights in the Eastern Heights Subdivision isthat the New York State Electric & Gas Corporation has said they can not apcept a lump sum payment, as set forth in the resolution of the Town Board at its October 23, 1972 meeting, and that they require a 15® payment annually in perpetuity foi^ the cost of wiring and trench ing to hook up the lights. Planning Board Chairman^ Barbara Holcoinb, suggested that the Town Board and the Planning Board arrange a meeting with representatives of the New Ybrk State Electric & Gas Corporation to discuss this matter and al^o general matters with respect to subdivisions, the obligations of develoi)ers, the Town of Ithaca, arid the New York State Electric & Ga^ Corporation, Couhcilmah Powers thought this would be an excellent idea provided the Elecitrib & Gas Corporation furnishes the Board members with some, type of summary so the Board could study sUch a meeting. Councilman McElwee suggested that the Plaririing Board should look into these matters first, Mrs, Holcomb felt that since the Town Board will be directly involved whenever it comes to a matter of commercial development or multiple residerice development the Town Board should be as familiar with the problems as the Planning Board, The consensus of the Board was thata meeting should be arranged with the representatives of the New York State Electric & Gas Corporation at the January meeting of the Board. Councilman Desch suggested that the Board should have some idea of the options available to it in matters of this type, REVENUE SHARING Supervisor Schwan reported that the Town of Ithaca had received its revenue sharing check in the amount of $33,284.00, He said that with the permission of the Board he would for the time being and until a decision has been made on how to spend these funds, put the money in a Certificate of Deposit, He said that since the Village of Cayuga Heights had received its revenue sharing funds separately, the funds we have received could be used only for part-town projects. The first payment received ($33,284,00) is for the period January 1, 1972 through June 30, 1972, The other half of the 1972 payment (approxi mately a comparable amount) will be received sometime in January of 1973, s-ud after that the funds will be received quarterly over a five- year period,^ He said* indications are that these funds are thought of as a stabilization of taxes factor rather than for tax reduction, the idea being that if there are things that the Town would like to do and would not normally do because of the need to increases taxes to do it, these funds are available for the necessary things. Some of the things that the funds might be used for are the hiring of a constable, or two constables, and the purchase of relevant equip ment such as cars, radar sets, two-way radio sets, and related hard ware; possibly build some town by-pass roads; possibly build some sidewalks. Supervisor Schwan indicated that care would have to be taken in earmarking these funds because there is no guarantee that at the end of five years any additional funds will be forthcoming. It appears that over the five year period the Town of Ithaca will receive roughly $330,000 in Federal Revenue Sharing funds. " ^ - December 11, 1972 REPORT OF TOWN OFFICtALS Chairman of the Planning Board, Barbara Holcomb, reported that there is now a vacancy on the Planning Board. She requested that the Town Board reappoint Daniel Baker to another term since his term expires 1972. She requested also the appointment of Dr. JohnLowe to the Planning Board to replace Frederic Scott who has resigned. Councilman Defich; seconded by Supervisor Schwan,RESOLVi®, that Daniel Bak6r be reappointed to the Planning Board for to begin on January 1, 1973 through December 31, 1978, and that Dr. John Lowe be appointed to the Planning Board to complete the unexpired term of Frederic Scott who has resigned. Unanimously carried. Mrs. Holcomb reported that the Planning Board has recommended that the speed limit on Coddington Road between Juniper Drive and Troy Road be reduced from 55 miles per hour to 4o miles per hour. This is a continuation of the 4o miles per hour speed limit which presently exists on Coddington Road from the City Line to Juniper Drive. Mrs. Holcomb noted that it appears that there has been sufficient building in this area now that mi^t now make for success in this request. Motion by Councilman Deschj seconded by Councilman Powers, RESOLVED, that the Town of Ithaca request of the Department of Trans portation a reduction of the speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 40 miles per hour on Coddington Road between Juniper Drive and Troy Road. Unanimously carried. Mrs. Holcomb reported on several line of sight problems, one of which is at the corner of Honness Lane and Slaterville Road and another on Route 392 and Judd Falls Road. Both are in a State right of way. Warren Road, Hanshaw Road, and Muriel Street are all problem areas (line of sight being hampered by trees and bushes.) The problem is complicated by the fact that many of these trees and bushes are on private property. Mrs. Holcomb reported that Superintendent of Highways, Marion Morey, has suggested that the Plan.Board might pass a resolution which might be passed on to the State officials. Mrs. Holcomb reported that there has been considerable confusion over the fact that the Town Board approved by resolution the acceptance of 1400 feet of Drew Road and 3100 feet of Vera Drive in the Otis Drew Subdivision (conditional, however, upon the Town Attorney's approval of the deed). Superintendent of Highways Morey had also approved the roads. However, at that point in time the subdivision had not been approved and people were not able, therefore, to get building permits. This discussion again raised the question of procedure with respect to approval of subdivisions and roads. In order to prevent recur rence of this type of thing it was decided that a letter of trans- mittal from a prospective developer to the Town Board be prepared indicating approval of proposed roads by the Town Attorney, Super intendent of Highways, and the Planning Board, and indicating also the location of all easements. Town Attorney Buyoucos said that there k- must be an arrangement between the Town of Ithaca and the Hew York State Electric & Gas Corporation indicating under what circumstances the Town is going to take a deed subject to existing easements from the New York State Electric & Gas Corporation. He said also that word should go out to any developer when he makes an informal appli cation that the location of all easements affecting the property in question must be shown on the subdivision plan and that there must be a letter from the utility company confirming the existing easement locations, Mrs. Holcomb reported that the Planning Board will hold a Public Hearing on December 12, 1972 to consider Mr. Worbert Schickel's Eastwood Commons proposal which has been before the Planning Board before. Site plans are now available and the Town Board will have a report from the Planning Board on this matter at its January meeting. RESOLUTIOH CONCSRinKG HOUSING PGR ELDERLY P.H.A. PROJECT NO. 013-^4031 LDC ELLIS HOLLOW ROAD, TOWN OP ITHACA WHEREAS, GROFF ASSOCIATES, (herein also referred to as the "Applicant"), have agreed to develop on a limited profit basis a housing project for elderly persons of low and moderate income (herein referred to also as the "Project") on a plot of land located adjacent to Ellis Hollow Road in the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, State of New York, where no adequate housing exists for such persons, which project is to be aided by a mortgage insured by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Develop ment and augmented by a program of rent supplements authorized by the Housing aind Urban Development Act of I965, or a mortgage insured by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development assis ted pursuant to Section 236 of Title II of the National Housing Act, or a mortgage loan made by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development pursuant to Section 202 of the Housing Act of 1939> And any Federal laws amendatory or supplemental thereto, and WHEREAS, GEOFF ASSOCIATES is to form in the Town of Ithace a limited partnership p^suant to Article V of the Private Housing Finance Law of the State of New York euid have irrevocably dedicated their talents to providing such housing accommodations and other related facilities on a limited profit basis, and WHEREAS, GROFF ASSOCIATES, in accordance with the Law herein referred to, have undertaken the planning and intend to pursue building a housing project for the elderly containing 100 units on the following described parcel of land: ALL THAT TRACT OR PARCEL OF LAND, situate in the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEING situate on Military Lot No. 96 and COMMENCING at a point in the centerline of Ellis Hollow Road and its intersection with the easterly boundary of lands conveyed to GROFF5 et al., by STEHIEN WILLIAM BARNS, SR. (see Liber kJS of Tompkins County Deeds at P€Lge 313) and running thence N. 65 55' 00" W. along the centerline of Ellis Hollow Road 767.60 feet to a point and running thence N. 30 08' 00" E. a distance of 25 feet to the northerly limit of Ellis Hollow Road, and running thence in a north easterly direction on the arc of a circle with a radius of 2821.24 feet a distance of 329 feet to a point, and runniM thence S. 65 55* 00 E. a distance of 640.78 feet to the easterly boundary of the lands of GROPP, et al. and running thence S. 7 08' 00" W. 369.29 feet to the point and place of beginning, being 250,048 square feet of land and WHEREAS, the Federal Housing Administration, in order to maintain the project's feasibility, has required the sponsors to seek and obtain some form of tax stabilization or tax relief pursuant to said Article V from the Town of Ithaca, County of Tompkins and the Ithaca City School District upon the above- described real property and its improvements, and WHEREAS, the tax relief or stabilization herein being sought may be granted in the form of an annual payment in lieu of taxes to the extent permitted by Section 125 of the Private Housing Finance Law, said payment in lieu of taxes to be the difference between the taxes which are due and payable on the premises on such portion of the valuation of the property as is not exempt from taxes and the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00), plus such additional sums which the applicant may be required to pay, as hereinafter provided for, and WHEREAS, the agreed period for the payment in lieu of taxes is to begin on the day and date that the redevelopment company sponsoring this project is issued a certificate of occupancy and compliance by the Building Inspector or Zoning Officer of the Town of Ithaca, for the above-described real prop erty and certifying that the project complies with all applicable laws, codes, rules and regulations; said payments in lieu of taxes shall continue for the life of the mortgage or so long as Federal Housing Administration insurance is in effect and so long as the company continues to operate as a limited profit organization pur suant to the provisions of said Article V for the limited purposej for which it was organized thereunder, namely, to provide housing for elderly persons of low and moderate income, and WHEREAS, GROPP ASSOCIATES have petitioned this taxing authority to grant the tax relief as herein described, and WHEREAS, the Town of Ithaca, pursuant to the provisions of Article V of the Private Housing Finance Law of the State of New York has the power and authority to grant the relief herein being sought, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the said real property shall be exempt from the pay ment of all local taxes, except as hereinafter stated, levied by the ifown of Ithaca (herein referred to as the Town), the County of Tompklns (herein referred to as the County), and the City of Ithaca School District (herein referred to as the School District] on real property, but not Including assessments for local improve ments, and subject to the following conditions and provisions, (1) In accordance with the provisions of Section 125 of the Private Housing Finance Law, the exemption from taxes shall apply only to that portion of the value of the property included in the project herein described which represents an increase over the assessed valuation of the real property, both lands and Imprcve- ments, acquired for the project at the time of its acquisition by the redevelopment company in this project; to the extent of such assessed valuation in effect at the time of the acquisition of the property by the redevelopment company, the property shall remain subject to the payment of taxes in the S€tme manner and at the same times as other real.property in the Town of Ithaca. (2) GROFP ASSOCIATES will pay to the Town of Ithaca in each and every year for so long as the property is exempt from the payment of such taxes, pursuant to this resolution and the provisions of the Private Housing Finance Law, an amount which shall he (a) the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) or (b) a sum which represents 13.^5?^ of the gross basic rents which the Applicant receives as rents and income from all the units in the project, whichever of the said two sums is the greater, less the amount of local and municipal taxes assessed and levied by thje Town of Ithaca, the County of Tompkins, and the School District on such part of the assessed valuation of the real property des cribed which is not exempt from tsucation pursuant to the provisioh of Section 125 of the Private Housing Finance Law; such sum shall be in lieu of all local and municipal taxes which may be levied by the said Town, County fluid School District with respect to all of the value of the property included in the project which represents an increase over the assessed valuation of the real property acquired for the project by the redevelopment company as set forth in paragraph (1) above. It is the intention of this resolution that the total amount received by the said Town, County and School District in each year from taxes which may be levied on the Applicant's real property and the said sum paid in lieu of taxes shall be (a) the sum of Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00) or (b) a sum which represents 13*^3^ of the gross basic rents which the Applicant is entitled to as rents and income from all the units in the project as hereinabove described, whichever of said two sums is the greater. (3) It is understood and agreed that nothing herein contflLlned shall be deemed to exempt in any way the real property herein described from the payment of any and all assessments for local improvements including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, assessments for all improvements and improvement districts as provided for and defined in the Town Law (Article 12, Article 12-A, and Article 12-C or otherwise) and from the payment of any sewer rents and water rates as defined or provided for in Article l4-F or the General Municipal Law, Article 12-C of the Town Law, and Article 12 of the Town Law (Section 198, subdivision 1, paragraph (1) and subdivision 3, paragraph (d), (4) The tax period for the first payment in lieu of taxes shall begin on the day and date of the following events, whichever is the earlier; (i) the date on which a certificate of occupancy or compliance has been issued by the duly authorized officer of the Town certifying that the project complies with all applicable laws, codes, ordinances, rules and regulations applicable to the use and improvement of real property in the Town of Ithaca and the construction of housing thereon, includ ing, without limitation, the zoning laws and ordinances of the Town, or (ii) the date on which the first of the units in said project are leased to a person for occupancy, subject, further to the following; A. Until such date the premises shall be subject to the payment of taxes In the same manner as other real property in the Town of Ithaca which are required to pay such taxes. B. On such ds-te, the Applicant shall pay a pro-rata amount of the annual payment hereinabove provided for, pro-rated for that portion of the calendar year remaining at that time, less the pro-rated amount of taxes and assessments pre-paid by the Applicant. C. Thereafter, such annual payment shall be due and payable at the same time and upon the same terms, conditions, interest and penalties as are Imposed upon all County and Town taxes payable in the month of January each year, beginning with . 6 - the first January follov;ing the date on which the first pro-rated annual payment was made as provided for in paragraph (A), above; the obligation to make such payment shall be deemed to be a lien on the Applicant's real property and the remedies available to the Town of Ithaca for the collection of such payment, and the foreclosure of such lien, or other enforcement of said lien or obligation shall be governed by and in the BamQ manner as pro vided by the Real Property Tax Law of the State of New York or any other applicable law governing the collection and payment of such taxes and the remedies granted to the Town in the event of the non-payment or late payment of such taxes. D. The exemption granted hereunder and the payment made in lieu of such taxes shall continue for the life of the mortgage or so long as the Federal Housing Administration insur ance is in effect and only so long as the company continues to operate as a limited profit organization pursuant to the pro visions of said Article V and for the limited purpose for which it was organized, thereunder, namely, to provide housing for elderly persons of low or moderate income, but in no event for more than ^0 years, and for the foregoing limited period, this resolution shall be deemed to be a covenant running with the land. E. The project must comply in all respects with all provisions of Article V" of the Private Housing Finance Law and all laws, ordinances, codes, rules and regulations applicable to the use of real property and the construction of buildings and other Improvements thereon including, without limiting the gen erality of the foregoing, the building codes and zoning laws and ordinances of the Town of Ithaca and the requirement that the Applicant must apply to the Town Board and/or the Planning Board, and this resolution has been adopted specifically on the representation of the Applicant that it la subject to the opera tion of such laws and to its agreement that it will comply with such laws in the construction of this project. (5) The Supervising Agency of this project shall be that officer, governmental unit, or agency of the Town of Ithaca, as defined in the Private Housing Finance Law. (6) The Town Supervisor Is authorized, with the assis tance of the Town Attorney, to negotiate a contract with the Applicant containing the foregoing provisions and such other provisions as may be reasonably required by the Supervisor and the Town Attorney to insure compliance by the Applicant with, and to give to the Tovm the rights intended to be reserved to the Town under, provisions of this resolution and the provisions of Article V of the Private Housing Finance Law, and such contract shall be reviewed by the Town Board prior to its execution. The contract shall contain adequate provisions to assure that reason ably adequate transportation facilities, whethei' public or fur nished by Applicant or paid by project, are available to the occupants of the project to and from the downtown section of the City of Ithaca, 'if the Town Board shall deteralne that such facilities are reasonably required. (7) It is understood that the Applicant is not exempt from the-payment of sewer rents and water rates as defined or provided for in Article l4-P of the General Municipal Law (Section 198, subdivision 1, paragraph (1) and sub-division 3, paragraph (d)). (8) The contract shall not be executed by the Supervisor until the consent of the County and School District to the tax exemption has been received by the Town. FURTOBR BE IT RESOLVED that approval is hereby granted for participation in the Federal Rent Supplement Program by qualified housing owners of property located in the Town of Ithaca, TompKins County, State of New York, STATE OP NEW YORK COUNTY OP TOMPKINS TOWN OP ITHACA - 8 - SS I, Edward L. Bergen> Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, DO HERESY CERTIFY, that the foregoing resolution is a true and exact copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca at its regular meeting on December 11, 1972. Dated: December l4, 1972 Sworn to and subscribed before me this l4th day of December, 1972, Public r - 5 - December 11, 1972 Zoning Officer Cowan reported that all is in order with respect to the extension for Lakeside Nursing Home. reported that the Board of Zoning Appeals had asked him to rf ^ Board for a higher fee for the Secretary ® Zoning Board of Appeals for attendance at meetings and for pre- S o minutes. Supervisor Schwan advised Mr. Cowan that the ZoningAppals has budgeted monies as does the Planning Board and that money has heen allocated for secretarial fees. The Board can determine what the fee should be. +v!' Cowan pported that it is now definite that he will be leaving ° ^973 and that he will, therefore, noIpger be eligible to hold the position of Zoning Officer of the Town of Ithaca. All Town officials must be electors of the Town of Ithaca. Mr. Cowan will be moving into the Town of UlysseS. GROF^ ASSOCIATES - HOUSING FOR THE ELDERLY that at a regular meeting of the Planning Boardon November 28, 1972, and following a public informational meeting on this matpr on November l4, 1972, the following recommendation was adopted for presentation to the Town Board: "As f'ar as ped iS concerned, the majority of the Planning Board (6-1) feels that there is a need for additional housing elderly in the Ithaca area, and that the whole Board VJ"92,there is a demand for housing for the elderlyat Jhis rent level, and that the location is acceptable if the problem of public transportation is solved or an alternate is provided, and it is further recommended that the spelling pt of the way in which transportation shall be provided shall l^po^po^^-ted in the contract entered into between the Town and the developer." Mp. Holpmb reported that additional discussion was held concerning the propep which would arise when and if the loop road is built. The following statement was agreed to as a guide for future Town action: When the proposed loop road is constructed attention must be adequate road crossing facilities from the housing pte to the commercial site. This could be provided by a traffic signal, underpass, or other appropriate solution." Schwan then read the following statement to the Board (statement dated December 8, 1972) from Barbara Holcomb, Planning Board Chairman: "As you know from the paper, the Planning Board did find a need for additional elderly housing in the Ithaca area and also found that the proposed site is acceptable provided certain conditions are met. This full recommendation will be made to you at the Board meeting on Monday, but I thought it might be useful to summarize for you ahead of time the information which we were able to gather and on which we based our recommendations. "First, in re "Need" !• Titus Towers - 165 units - low income elderly housing - income limits are $4,000(s)7^4,800 (couple). Rent = 25^ of annual income. As of November 20, 1972, 110 units were occupied. Mr. Armstrong, Director of Ithaca Housing Authority, said at that time 155 total were committed. Mr. Alexander, Chairman, IHA, says he knows of at least 10 which have been committed. A third set of figures from Barbara Blanchard, member of IHA Board, are closer to Mr. Armstrong's. This is the only area in which we have a discrepancy of figures. However, all three agreed that IHA still has applications on hand which are being processed and that new applications are still being received. - 6 - December 11, 1972 2. McGraw Hpuse. 105 units - mixture of low, moderate and fair market rentals. McGraw is full and as of November 10, 1972, had a waiting list of 10. Present occupancy is as follows: 27 pay full market rent; 64 are moderate income under the 236 program; 13 are low income rent supplement. McGraw did not even begin to fill up until the 236 program was made available for McGraw. (April, ^ 1972)i I 3. West Village and Maple Avenue - total of 32 units allocated ror elderly. As of November 10, 1972, 8 units were occupied and they had no applications. Letter from Mr. Bannet of HUD stated "Pof your information the one bedroom units in the UDC sponsored project are not designed for elderly occupancy," Units in UDC elderly section can be rented at low, moderate or fair market levels, 4. Copy of letter from Mr* Bannet, HUD, attached. 5. Population figures from the County Planning Department show that in 1970 there were 8,280 people over 60 in Tdmpkins County. Projections for the future are as fellows: 1975, 8,886; 1980, 9^663; 1985, 10326; 1990, 11,086. 6. We tried to get median income figures for residents of Tpmpkins County who are 65 and older - this information can not be extracted from the 1970 census data. 7. Groff Asspciates proposed project would be required to provide 10 or 20$^ housing for low income elderly (rent supplement); balance 6f 80 or ^0% would be for moderate iwr income elderly. No units could be rented at the fair 1 market rate. I 8. Income levels for Moderate Income elderly are $4,800 - $6,48o (plus a possible 10^ on a complicated formula which could increase upper limit to $7,128). This is for a : couple. Single person limits are $4,000 - $5,400 (plus possible 10^ or $6,000). 9. If you accept the principle that approximately 25% of annual income can be spent for rent, then the mid-point of the moderate income range ($5>600) says that persons should be renting for about $116 per month. 10. An informal survey of real estate brokers in Ithaca was conducted - they were asked for their information about apartments appropriate for older persons (either first or second floor or in a building with an elevator, either reasonably close to shopping or on a bus line) in the $125 per month range. Consensus was that such an animal is quite rare. 11. The Senior Citizens Housing Committee was vim-jilllng to take a stand in re the need for more elderly hoijs^ ing. They felt that they did not have any special information in this area. - Second, In re "Location" 1. There is available in the immediate vicinity Discount Department Store Grocery Supermarket with Snack Bar-Restaurant Laundromat Drug Store Bank Bowling Alley and Pool Room Restaurant - 7 - December 11, 1972 2. Health facilities, libraries and theatres are not avail able in the immediate vicinity. 3. Two Protestant churches are within a mile of the site. 4. There is at present no public transportation available at the site. The closest city bus stop is at the corner ^ of Cornell and Maple Avenue. ! There are no sidewalks or walkways. 6. The proposed loop road will separate the housing site from the present commercial area, " Mr, Robert Groff, Attorney, Groff Associates, made the following statement: "l want to say that Mrs. Holcomb did a very thorough job of eliciting the facts as they could be ascertained applying to this project. We met with your attorney shortly after the Planning Board meeting to discuss their recommendations. We have revised the resolution presented to the Board on the previous occasion to reflect these recommendations. As Mr. Buyoucos will tell you more thoroughly than .1, we have en deavored to provide that the contract will contain adequate provisions to assure reasonably adequate transportation facilities, whether public or furnished by the applicant or paid by the project if the Town Board shAll detemine that such facilities Are reasonably required." Town Attorney Buyoucos stated that a provision was added to the original proposed resolution to the effect that . . , "The contract shall contain adequate provisions to as surd that reasonably adequate I transportation facilities, whether public or furnished by Applicant L or paid by project, are available to the occupants of the project to and from the downtown section of the City of Ithaca, if the Town Board shall determine that such facilities are reasonably required," He said, therefore, that when the time comes to sign a contract, he and the Supervisor will be able to put into the contract what provisions they think are necessary. Mr, Groff said he had been asked what would happen if the project were discontinued. He said in that case one of the provisions of the law is that the taxes which have been abated will be paid back to the municipality plus interest at Further, any profit made on a sale or transfer or dissolution will be paid to the municipality after repayment of the investment. The profit is limited to 6% and the developer cannot dissolve without obtaining the consent of the Town Board, Groff Associates books and records are available for the Town*s inspection continually. Supervisor Schwan called for questions from the floor. Ms. Lydia Wahl made the following statement; "I am a homeowner and taxpayer in the Town of Ithaca. I have several points I would like to make with respect to the Groff Associates project. I am very pleased that the Town Board , has indicated a sincere interest in the older people in our community. They are a valuable resource. I am concerned that the particular project proposed will draw older people out of our community and segregate them from the other age groups away from community facilities and services. Older people are important to the total community, to our own lives, and the lives of our children. We need the older people to give our children a sense of the continuity of life. I am afraid that the Ellis Hollow project is not in the best interests of older people specifically nor in the interest of the larger community generally. I would like to see the Town take the lead in increasing - 8 ^ December 11, 1972 the upper limit from $5^000 incoihe to $6,000 (eligibility for tax relief). I believe this would demonstrate our concern for the 61derly directly* It would help to ease the tax burden on older owners who want to remain in their homes as long as possible, I would prefer to see us in volved in additional, services such as the health serv3.ces discussed earlier this evening family Practice Clini^c/fOr the elderly before we consent to spend our tax monies for the benefit of privato developers." Ms. Wahl was concerned about transportation and whether Groff could rent to other than elderly should the project not be fully rented. Mr. Groff said he felt the Town was adequately protected by the con tract with regard to the matter of transportation and that with regard to renting to other than elderly he said Groff is strictly limited to renting to elderly persons or handicapped elderly persons over 62 years of age and who come within the rent ranges stated. Mr. Buyoucos said if they could not fill the project it would be foreclosed. If there is a foreclosure and someone else acquires the property, then the tax abs.tement ceases. Supervisor Schwan called for other comnients. Ms. Livesay made the following statement; "l attended the Planning Board meetings with regard to the Groff project. I Went with an open mind about this as a location for the elderly. I can see advantages and disadvantages. My conclusion was that unless the Town is willing to make a real commitment for development in this area for walkways, for crossroads> for transportation, for a park — then this is not an adequate site for the ielderly. I believe the Federal government has issued guidelines on housing for the elderly and I am wondering if these guide lines have been figured into this." Supervisor Schwan noted that the project would not have the reached the point it has without complying with Federal guidelines or with-^ out the approval of HUD and the FHA. Ms. Livesay referred to the announcement of 75 units of housing for the ambulatory elderly and she wondered if this would change the figures or recommendations of the Planning Board. Ms. Holcomb said the Quarry Dorm project is a different type than Groff. It is not an independent apartment concept. It is a room rent with maintenance in terms of social services, cleaning services, and meals provided. It is group operated, as she understood it, with the contract with the Social Services D^artment of New York State. The State antici pated that roughly 90^ will be public assistance people under license with New York State. They may draw these people from a seven county area so this is something which will encompass people out of our area in a much lower income level than Titus Towers. In the Groff project these people could only be included, perhaps, in the 10$^ or 20% but not the moderate income. When Ms. Livesay spoke again of the Federal guidelines it was noted that what was under consideration at this time is tax abatement. Many other matters will be covered in the contract which is eventually drawn and in the final approval of site plans and in the issuance of a building permit.^ Mr. Buyoucos said the tax exemption does not begin to operate until the project has complied with all applicable conditions, rules and regulations, building permits, and all conditions of the Planning Board and the Town Board have been met. That is the control we have. Ms. Livesay asked if the project was to be built specifically for the elderly. Mr. Groff said it was and that it meets Federal guide lines. Supervisor Schwan assured Ms. Livesay that the Planning Board recognizes her concerns, the Town Board recognizes her con cerns and has made provision for them in the resolution and will have them in mind when the final contract is drawn and the site plans are approved. - 9 - December 11, 1972 Mr, Arthur L. Berkey expressed concern about who would be responsible for transportation and what it would cost, Mr, Groff explained that according to the proposed contract it can be paid for by (1) the developer, (2) the project, or (3) p^lic transportation. He said he understood that a transportation/was going on at the present time. They are projecting l8 months into"*the future and it makes it diffi cult to pin down at this time. It would be a matter to be taken up by the Board, Robert L, Bruce, County Representative, noted that all figures indicate thdt the Town of Ithdca does not have a popula tion density large enough to support public transportation on the basis of what people in this area are accustomed to pay, Mr, Buyoucos stated that the resolution provides for a contract which will assure reasonably adequate transportation available to and from the project to the downtown Ithaca area. The resolution envisions a study of public transportation and if transportation is not available at a certain point in time, then the Board can require the developer to furnish the transportation, Mr, Groff did say that if the developer was required to furnish transportation the tenants might have to pay more rent, ^ Ms, Wahl, referring to Groff»s profit being limited to 6^, said that the real benefits of such a project to the developer have to do with the rapid depreciation that is involved arid the fact that there is a tax abatement, Mr^ Groff said he had beeri waiting for this question to come up and that he had had their accountant prepare an analysis for them. It is called 200^ depreciation* It means that in the early stages of the development a higher depreciation can be taken. This is something that is available to any developer, not simply to Groff Associates; He said that their accountant is going to look into it and it is quite possible it may not even be beneficial in their situation. It mi^t not make much sense to pay a big bite at the tail end of a 40-year mortgage, Mr. Robert Bruce said he understood that this resolution is for tax stabilization and that the Town was hanging its approval on the approval of the County and the Ithaca City School District, Mr, Buyoucos said the Town is saying that the exemption is given un conditionally, but that no contract will be signed with the developer until the approval of the County and the School District has been received on the tax abatement and that if the County does not approve no contract will be signed, Mr, Bruce felt that the Town was hanging its approval on a very shaky limb if it depended upon the approval of the County, Mr, Bruce said the County is in clined to look suspiciously at tax abatement — from whatever source, Mr. Bruce said he was at the meeting to find out what kind of a "baby you are leaving on our doorstep" if this resolution is adopted. Councilman Powers wanted a clarification of what is meant by "basic" rent since this was originally called "annual" rents, Mr, Buyoucos explained that there is economic or basic rent, the rent which the tenant pays and there is another kind of rent which is called shelter rent. That is the basic rent minus the sum total of the cost for utilities and heat. Since no further comments were forthcoming Supervisor Schwari called for action on the resolution. Councilman Del Rosso said he wanted to make a statement before the vote was taken. His statement follows: "I think this project has been kicked around now for about four months, I would have to say it was very poorly pre sented, I think it was poorly documented. We requested supporting information after the first time it was turned down. It was presented a second time and the information was not much better. We returned it to the Planning Board to dig out information to see whether or not we had a legitimate need for this housing, I think we have done our homework in this regard and I think the Planning Board L - 10 - December 11, 1972 has certainly done a lot of digging on it. I am inclined to accept the Planning Board's suggestion that there is a need for this housing and I hope, if this project is approved that it will do the good it is intended to do for our elderly and that we will be able to resolve what ever fears remain as to whether or not this is a good or a poor location. At the present time I would look with favor on this proposal and will vote accordingly," There being no further comments or discussion, the following action was xaken s Motion by Supervisor Schwan; seconded by Councilman McElwee, (See attached resolution) The members of the Board were polled on the resolution, with the following result; Councilman McElwee i Aye Councilman Del Rosso ... I Aye Councilman Powers ....1,1.,.,,. Aye Councilman Desch 1 Aye Supervisor Schwan .... i.. Aye The resolution was thereupon duly adoptedi APPROVAL OF WARRANTS Motion by Councilman Del Rosso; seconded by Councilman McElwee, RESOLVED, that the warrants dated December 11, 1972, in the followine amounts, be approved: General Fund ^ 1^^097.95 Highway Fund $ ^,078.73 LOCAL COURT SYSTEM - PROPOSED LEGISLATION Unanimously carried. pare was brief discussion of proposed legislation to abolish the local court system of the State of New York. Supervisor Schwan circulated a letter to the Board written by the New York State Association of Magistrates (dated October I9, I972) in regard to this matter. The letter requested Town boards, if they are convinced that the effort to abolish the local courts constitutes serious in roads on local home rule and operates as a deprivation of opportunity £or the citizens, to pass resolutions to that effect and send them to their local Legislators with a copy to the office of the New York State Association of Magistrates. Ms. Holcomb recommended that the Board table this matter until the January meeting of the Board, She explained that the Governor of the State of New York has appointed a special Commission of 15 members to look into the entire court system for New York State. They were commissioned to study the court system from the justice level up to the Court of Appeals and to make recommendations to the legislature and the Governor. The Commission has completed its report as of now but it has not in any form been made public. No body knows what it is going to say. The report will be available in early January. Ms, Holcomb, therefore, strongly recommended that the Board not take any action in this matter until the Board sees what the Commission has recommended. If the local court system is to be abolished the Board should wait to see what is recommended in its place and how it is to be financed. She felt the Board should have something to react to before taking any action. Supervisor Schwan noted that if the local court system is abolished the Town would lose what amounts to a fairly substantial revenue, and, further, if the local justice courts are abolished, where do people go then? Based on Ms. Holcomb's recommendation, the Board tabled the matter until the January meeting of the Board. - 11 - December 11^ 1972 FOREST HOME BRIDGES Edward P. Riley, 300 Forest Home Drive, noted that the Forest Home bridge has been closed almost exactly one year and asked if the Town ^ard had been in communication with the State in this regard. Super- ^sor Schwan reported that the Board had not been in touch with the State since being advised that the State was going to bring in steel and that the bridge would be opened by Christmas. Mr. Riley recom- mended that the Board get in touch with the State in order to push action in this matter. He said it was a situation which should not j Supervisor Schwan said he would look into the matterand thanked Mr. Riley for his recommendation. NORTHEAST WALKWAY Ms. Livesay, Snyder Hill Road, asked what the status of the Northeast walkway is. Supervisor Schwan said he had not heard anything about this recently but that the Town was expecting the School District to take some action on it. The matter is being considered by the Town Attorney and also Attorney Armand Adams, attorney for BOCES. PERSONS TO BE HEARD Mr. Arthur L. Berkey, Christopher Circle] inquired whether any of the Northeast standpipes had been cleaned and whether any additional looping around Warren Road had been done to provide additional pres sure for that area. Supervisor Schwan said that the Town had only recently been granted permission by the State Health Department to clean, paint, and sandblast the standpipes and that the next step is to put the Job out to bidfe. When Mr, Berkey questioned the length of time that this project had been in the WoJbks, Mr. Schwan explained that the Board was not tbo upset by the time lag sincb it has had the engineers very busy with the Bolton PCint project. The matter was further held up because the Town wants to have bids on all the \ projects go out as one bid. Mr. Berkey said he had hoped these projects Would be done in the year 1972 because they had been listed as possible items of expense when the dissolution of water and sewer districts was proposed. Mr. Berkey said he was pleased that the Town Board and the Planning Board were concerned with "need" in respect to the Groff Associates project for elderly housing, and wondered why "need" had not been considered with regard to the Beacon Hills rezoning. He also wonder ed what criteria the Planning Board and the Town Board had used to make the judgment that the character of the area in the Beacon Hills development would not be adversely affected by the rezoning. Super visor Schwan said he felt that the subject had been well covered in the public hearing on the Beacon Hills request for rezoning. Ms. Hblcomb said there was no evaluation of need with respect to Beacon Hills and no attempt was made to evaluate the need. Councilman McElwee suggested that it was not the Board's function to legislate where people live. Mr. Berkey noted that the Town had a petition from some l80 people opposing the project and rezoned the area in spite of that. He asked again what criteria had been used in judeJu(T that the character of the area would not be adversely affected. Supervisor Schwan said he did not see that housing of about the same kind and character would adversely affect the area. Cluster arrange- ^ ment simply put the available land to the best use. After continued reiteration of the same question with respect to criteria by Mr. Berkey, Councilman Pow^s made the following state ment: "I am a person who would like to^eard and to state to Mr. Berkey and those present that I object strenuously to having my time wasted by Mr. Berkey's evening meetings with us in which he goes back to something that was done a number of weeks ago, or months ago, or a year ago and ressurects things which were explored very thoroughly at the time the decisions were made. I am saying to you again that I object very strenuously to a waste of my time." - 12 - December 11, 1972 Mr. Berkey said he did not want to waste Mr. Powers time, but he question with regard to "criteria". He said the Board nad heard the people's comments; they saw the petition against the project. He said he had not, however, he^rd one criterium as to why the property was rezoned or on what specific grounds. Mr. Berkey complained that he had not been permitted to speak at the November 9, 1972 meeting of the Board. It was explained to Mr. Berkey that he had not been permitted to speak on the subject of the dissolu- 2^4.? i water and sewer districts, a subject which the Supervisorand the Board felt had been sufficiently explored in pulic hearing, in special neighborhood meetings, and in the press, and on radio. At any rate. Supervisor Schwan advised Mr. Berkey that he was being heard at this meeting on any subject. Passing on to another subject, Mr. Berkey said the State audit of Town funds showed that there was an illegal use of the water and sewer funds in that there were not sufficient funds collected to pay for the South Hill area. He also said there was no mention made at he time of the dissolution of the districts of the 2^ sewer surcharge. He said the Town mailings at the time of dissolution also indicated possible charges based on a possible lawsuit. Supervisor Schwan said^there was no way the Town of Ithaca could force anybody to pay !?• t" explained that each property owner concerned inthe dissolution was mailed an estimate of what his benefit charges would be under dissolution and under failure of dissolution. With regard to the audit report. Supervisor Schwan said he considered the article which appeared in the Ithaca Journal to be very explicit and detailed and saw no reason to belabor the subject further, ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Edward L. Bergen Town Clerk