Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1977-03-01 v ; TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD MARCH 1 , 1977 A regular meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board was held on Tuesday , March 1 , 1977 , in the Town of Ithaca Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street ( second floor ) , Ithaca , N . Y . , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Liese Bronfenbrenner , Montgomery May , Henry Aron , Jonathan Bradley , Eva Hoffmann , J . W . Reece , Lawrence P . Fabbroni ( Town Engineer ) . ALSO PRESENT : Evan Monkemeyer , Herbert N . Monkemeyer , David B . Gersh , William Downing , Town Councilwoman Shirley Raffensperger , County Represen - tative Beverly Livesay , Wayne Pollard , Seka Pollard , E . L . Rose Gostanian , Alan Goodman ( Ithaca Journal ) , John Jarrett (WTKO ) , David VanWie (WICB ) . The meeting was opened by the Chair at 7 : 30 p . m . APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon Motion by Mr . Henry Aron , duly seconded by Mr . Jonathan Bradley , and with unanimous ayes from all members present , the following Minutes of Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meetings were approved as written : July 15 , 1976 , July 27 , 1976 , September 9 , 1976 , September 21 , 1976 , October 19 , 1976 , November 1 , 1976 , and November 16 , 1976 . PROPOSED JOINT TOWN BOARD -PLANNING BOARD MEETING MARCH 15 , 1977 Mrs . Bronfenbrenner reported that she was receiving a good response from her letter of February 17 , 1977 , inviting members of the Town Board to a joint meeting on March 15 , 1977 , for the following purposes : 1 . to establish priorities for the Planning Board ' s study and consideration ; 2 . to determine what action the Town Board wants the Planning Board to take on the proposed Zoning Ordinance ; 3 . to achieve a better working relationship between the two Boards . PLANNING BOARD REPRESENTATIVE ON COUNTY PLANNING BOARD MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : RESOLVED , that Mrs . Eva Hoffmann be and hereby is appointed as the Town of Ithaca Planning Board delegate to the County Planning Board . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , May , Aron , Bradley , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . It was noted that Mrs . Shirley Raf_ fensperger is presently representing the Town Board at the County Planning Board meetings . REPORT OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR Mr . Fabbroni reported that four building permits were issued in the month of February , 1977 - - three for one - family homes in the total amount Planning Board - 2 - March 1 , 1977 of $ 122 , 000 . 00 , and one for a restaurant in the amount of $ 60 , 000 . 00 , for a grand total of $ 182 , 000 , 00 , REPORT OF THE TOWN ENGINEER Mr . Fabbroni reported on the three main items presently requiring much of his time . 1 . The ongoing construction of the new Town Highway Facility where the steel frame has been erected and the siding and roof will be erected shortly . 2 . The question of a change to the Highway Master Plan which involves a traffic study for East Ithaca . 3 . The matter of the proposed relocation of Route 96 and its alternatives . There was a meeting with the State people on February 17th and 12 alternatives were discussed . Mr . Fabbroni stated that there was heavy representation from the property owners in the West end of the City and rather minimal discussion of the 6 northerly alternates at this particular meeting . The consensus of the people in the City was that they did not like any of the alternates presented because of the impact on personal property . Mr . Fabbroni stated that there was also a meeting of an alternative group of business owners on February 25th . He noted that most of the discussion has been on the south end of the project but the Town hopes to establish discussions on the north end of the corridor . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the Town Board has scheduled a Special Meeting on March 17th at 7 : 30 to consider the Route 96 alternatives so that everybody in the Town who has an opinion will have an oppor - tunity to present it . CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL FOR MULTIPLE -FAMILY/COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IN NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF DANBY ROAD ( ROUTE 96B ) AND KING ROAD INTERSECTION Mr . Evan Monkemeyer , together with his attorney , David B . Gersh , and his architect , William S . Downing , were present to lay before the Board a proposal for a mixed -use residential /commercial development on South Hill on land owned by Mr . Monkemeyer . They presented a general site plan titled " Land Use Plan " , Owners /Developers Sky Rise Associates , Project # 77489 , William S . Downing Assoc . , Architects , dated 1 / 27 / 77 . Mr . Gersh stated that he is appearing before the Board with Mr . Monkemeyer who is presenting to the Board a general site plan prepared by William Downing Associates , said plan suggesting the outlines of the use that Mr . Monkemeyer would like to make of his land at the intersection of King Road and Danby Road . Mr . Gersh pointed out that Mr . Monkemeyer is the owner and developer of " Springwood " on East King Road which the Planning Board approved in 1974 and which is a credit to the Town of Ithaca and demonstrates that Mr . Monkemeyer has met several committments made to the Town . Mr . Gersh stated that the new proposal or project consists of several uses of the land . There is proposed an " art colony " area designed to I nclude existing structures , presently a barn and a dwelling being used as a residence for artists , somewhat akin to the " Soho " area of New York ' Planning Board - 3 - March 1 , 1977 City , Mr . Gersh noted that this residence area now exists and the Board is invited to come out to visit this very unique and very special site . Mr . Gersh noted that the concept of artists in lofts certainly is not new and mentioned a Wall Street Journal article of February 2 , 1977 , about such places . He described Mr . Monkemeyer ' s proposal as something very special and something very different being done in a very tasteful and a very desirable way . He said that it is truly worth a visit . In addition , Mr . Gersh noted that the Hayloft Art Studios in the art colony perpetuates Mr . Monkemeyer ' s mother ' s interest in the arts . Mr . Gersh stated that around the art colony Mr . Monkemeyer would like to have a shopping centre serving the needs of the neighbors and also South Hill . He noted that part of Mr . Monkemeyer ' s land is zoned commercial . He mentioned that Matt Associates commercial land is nearby and Sam Peter ' s commercial corner exists also . He noted that this area was to be the commercial heart of South Hill , Mr . Gersh stated that Mr . Monkemeyer hopes to have a really nice quality shopping centre such as exists at the Village Green or Community Corners in Cayuga Heights - - not a " strip " type of thing - - and above the shopping centre more apartments , residences , perhaps some offices , and the final stage would be seeking rezoning to multiple family . He noted that the proposed multi - family zone joins with the Hermann property and also noted that the Springwood multi - family is across the street . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that the back part of the property would be developed as single family residential . He said that this general site plan would give the Board an idea of the type of land use he envisions . He noted that except for a small part on the corner his land is presently zoned R- 15 . Mr . Fabbroni commented that the art colony is included in the ex- panded commercial area and that 100 acres remains undecided to the north , Mrs . Bronfenbrenner noted that the request is for approval of the expansion of the commercial zone up to the dotted line shown on the general site plan of the Hermann property to the .south ® Mr . Aron noted that the road shown into King Road as well as into Danby Road does not exist as yet ; it is proposed , Mr . Monkemeyer replied that basically the path has been rough graded . Mr . Gersh stated that the important idea is to permit a multi -use district - - artists living , selling paintings , offices , businesses , residences . Mr . Reece questioned the proposed entrances . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that it is beck from King Road about 7001 . Mr . Fabbroni commented that the plan indicates a good road set up . However , he stated that it is not really clear where the multi- family land is specifically , and , further , associated with that question is the intent of the Town Boards to have no more than 30 % multi - family approved in any one neighborhood of the Town . He asked what kind of market the developer has established and is this commercial zone to stay as is shown here ? He pointed out that Matt Associates commercial was approved ten years ago and nothing has been done there . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that their track record stands ; ten years is enough time to do it . Planning Board - 4 - March 1 , 1977 Mr . Fabbroni felt that a firm committment would be better . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that there is a definite need up on the Hill for independent businesses serving the needs of the College and that some of the uses in the proposed shopping centre would be independent busi - nesses . He stated that this would not be an " Elmira Road " type of thing with black top and parking lots . He stated that they would like to take Phase 1 and develop the roads and then develop independent businesses . He said that they would like a re - zoning of the whole area so that they would not have to come back for each individual business . He noted that the proposed expanded commercial area would comprise 30 acres . Mr . Downing stated that the plan here presented is diagramatic ; the parkway might not be exactly in this location . He said it would be much better for the developer to have flexibility . He is hemmed in by the Hermann property . Mr . Bradley noted that the existing commercial area that is there now is approximately 8 - 10 acres and that seemed to him to be big enough for a shopping centre . Mr . Downing informed the Board that this proposal is not your usual shopping centre type of development . Mr . Monkemeyer stated that the existing commercial area across the street is not very desirable from a contour standpoint ( Matt Associates land ) , Mrs . Bronf_ enbrenner wondered what guarantees the Town would have in case this proposed area is zoned as commercial and it could not be carried forward and then the fear is that an " Elmira Road " situation goes in up there . Mr . Monkemeyer outlined briefly a proposed " Board of Governors " type of set up , or " design board " , wherein the Monkemeyer land and wishes would be protected . This " board " would be under their control and any changes would have to be approved by them . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner asked what would happen if the property changed hands . It was stated that there would be guarantees of roads and rights of way as indicated in the " Typical Parkway Section " presented by the developer . Mr . Fabbroni asked Mr . Monkemeyer what his problems might be if this proposal were restricted to the original presently zoned commercial area . Mr . Monkemeyer commented that he would be wondering what would happen constantly if someone comes to him with a plan for farther up than the commercial zone and then each such case would have to come in for a re - zoning . Mr . Gersh stated that lots and lots of open spaces are required when you have people living within commercial areas . It was stated that an overal plan from the very outset is really necessary . Mr . Fabbroni stated that some kind of concept , however preliminary , is really necessary for the Planning Board to consider rezoning 30 acres of land , He noted that , perhaps , for example , Mr . Leonardo ( Danby Road ) might come in next week with an idea and ask for a rezoning to commercial . Mr . Downing cited the track record of Skyrise Associates , Mr . Herbert Monkemeyer stated that their one thought is to avoid any kind of commercial area on Danby Road , they want everything to be 1 , 000 ' back ; they want Danby Road to be left green . Mr . May asked what control the Town loses if it grants approval and then requires site plans for each new plan . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the Town does not lose that much control , but cited the example of a gas Planning Board - 5 - March 1 , 1977 station , perhaps , being requested and the oil company people will only build if they have four accesses of Danby Road . Mr . May said you propose only two accesses - - one from King Road and one from Danby Road . Mr . Bradley questioned the need for a 30 - acre commercial zone . Mr . Downing cited the cost of developing the Parkway . Mr . Reece and Mr . Bradley pressed for more specifics . Mr . Fabbroni asked for some specifics on the open space areas . Mr . Monkemeyer pointed out that there is proposed a 70 ' to 80 ' right of way for the Parkway . Mr . Monkemeyer indicated the general diagramatic plan showing the open areas . Mr . Fabbroni commented that if the discussion were to go to the larger area and the Town were so inclined , the developer could draw up a set of " by- laws " that meets the present commercial requirements and meets the developers general intent as to how this would be developed . Mr . Monkemeyer and Mr . Gersh felt that they could come up with such a document and noted that if Skyrise were for some reason no longer owners the document would remain and be binding upon new owners . Mr . Monkemeyer continued and stated that one side of the proposed commer - cial area would be residences with businesses below them ; the other side , perhaps , would house fast food restaurants , a motel , doctors offices . Mr . Monkemeyer distributed pictures of what his ideas might look like . He said it would be somewhat similar to a place in Maine . Mr . Bradley commented that he could see about 70 separate buildings , Mr . Monkemeyer stated firmly that that would not be the case here and pointed out that the Board would have to approve each building in any case . ® Mr . Aron noted that the developer wants commercial as well as resi - dential multi - family . Mr . Monkemeyer pointed out that the multi - family only applies to the commercial area and he commented that he would rather see this than a concrete mall developed . Mr . Aron agreed that he does not relish the idea of a concrete mile and stated that this plan is much more attractive and that he is very much in favor of it if it is done as described by Mr . Monkemeyer . The lawns , trees , bikeways , recreation , would lead toward refined shopping and refined living in a very attractive area if one could visualize it . Mr . Monkemeyer commented that the park area , the art colony , lend themselves to a visiting place that one could walk through . Mrs . Rose Gostanian , who resides across the street from the proposed development and the presently existing parts thereof , stated that the Hayloft Barn is a definite improvement over what has been there . She noted that on the corner opposite this development there is a car repair shop and cars are left sitting in the fields and nobody does anything about it . She stated that she found it absurd that Mr . Monkemeyer ' s proposal runs into such trouble when his projects improve the area so much . She stated that " Springwood " looks wonderful . Mr . Reece stated that this developer has given the Town a wonderful choice . He said that he felt that the malls such as those at Triphammer are often ugly . He said that many malls are failing . He said that this developer has come in with something really nice . He said that they want to do something for the Town ; of course they will profit from it . Mrs . Bron £ enbrenner asked for any further public comments . Mrs . Beverly Livesay stated that she wondered if this is even permissible under the present Zoning Ordinance , Mr . Fabbroni stated that a mixed use is not permissible . Mr . Fabbroni stated that it would have to be Planning Board - 6 - March 1 , 1977 researched extensively if the Board wishes to go in that direction . He noted that the PUD ( Planned Unit Development ) concept has been used as a • basis for proceeding in such proposals . Mrs . Livesay reiterated that the Board should be aware of this legal problem . Mr . Fabbroni said that he would like to see a set of by- laws whereby the expansion of the mixed use meets the existing zoning frameworks and gives the Board a sense of the density use ; then , when a specific site plan comes in , you can critique it with the by- laws . Mr . Aron asked if it would be possible to have a more specific blow- up of the commercial area - - the buildings in the area , roads , proposed dwellings , businesses - - it could be somewhat tentative . Mr . Reece said that it could show the character of the proposed area . He commented that the developers ' progress is quite crystallized since last . May. ( 1976 ) . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . J . W . Reece : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca extend and hereby does extend the thirty- day requirement for the hearing of the Monkemeyer proposal for Danby and King Roads property . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , May , Aron , Bradley , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . • The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . J . W . Reece , seconded by Mr . Henry Arons RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca schedule and hereby does schedule a Public Hearing for April 5th , 1977 , to consider the proposed rezoning of 8 . 05 acres from Business " C " and Residential - 30 to Mixed Use ( Commercial -Multi - Family ) District , and , proposed rezoning of 18 . 60 acres from Residential - 30 to Business " C " , and , proposed addition of Mixed Use ( Commercial -Multi - Family ) District to Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance ; Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 6 - 43 - 1 - 3 . 2 , Evan Monkemeyer , King Road East . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - Bronfenbrenner , May , Aron , Bradley , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL FOR GASOLINE STATION IN NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF JUDD FALLS ROAD AND ELLIS HOLLOW ROAD INTERSECTION . The Chair noted that neither Mr . Mark N . Goldfarb nor Mr . William C . Norton were present to discuss this proposal . • Mr . Fabbroni stated that at the time of the rezoning of this particu - lar piece of land to Business " D " there was always the thought that a full service gas station would be put in there with appropriate style , etc . He noted that one of the problems , however , is the intersection . It is the Town ' s feeling that there could be on driveway on Judd Falls Road as far planning Board - 7 - March 1 , 1977 back as possible . • Mr . Fabbroni read a letter from M and W . Enterprises ( William C . Norton and Mark N . Goldfarb ) to the Planning Board dated February 15 , 1977 , together with a letter to Mr . Goldfarb from Petr -All Petroleum dated February 7 , 1977 . ( See attachments ) . These letters indicate that both entry and exit on both Judd Falls Road and Ellis Hollow Road are vital to the interests of the developer . Mr . Fabbroni stated that it is his opinion that any egress on to Ellis Hollow Road is going to increase the already existing hazards at that intersection . He noted fast moving traffic on Ellis Hollow Road . He stated that anything that would complicate this intersection could lead to a very hazardous situation , Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that this Board has stated in the past very firmly that it does not want egress into Ellis Hollow Road . Mr . Fabbroni stated that he could live with only an entrance from Ellis Hollow Road , however , the best would be nothing . MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . J . W . Reece : RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca table and hereby does table the matter of the Norton/Goldfarb proposal for a full service gasoline station at the Judd Falls /Ellis Hollow Roads intersection for discussion at some future date . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . • Aye - Bronfenbrenner , May , Aron , Bradley , Hoffmann , Reece . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . REVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGE TO HIGHWAY MASTER PLAN IN EAST ITHACA WITH PRESENTATION OF TRAFFIC STUDY RELATING TO EAST ITHACA . Mr . Fabbroni presented in both verbal and written form the results of his traffic study conducted in the East Ithaca area of Route 366 , Judd Falls Road , Maple Avenue , Ellis Hollow Road , Pine Tree Road , Snyder Hill Road , Honness Lane and Slaterville Road . Four charts were presented entitled * ( 1 ) Flow Chart of Peak Hour Traffic Movements in Cornell - Slaterville Road corridor ; ( 2 ) Directional Peak Hour Volumes for Cornell - Slaterville Road corridor ; ( 3 ) 24 Hour - 2 Way Traffic Volumes as projected from Peak Hour Volumes in Cornell - Slaterville Road corridor , ( 4 ) Worst Projections for Future 24 Hour Volumes - 20 years . A Summary , Conclusions , and Recommendations Sheet prepared by Mr . Fabbroni is attached to these Minutes . In addition to describing the attachments , Mr . Fabbroni commented that the intersection of Ellis Hollow Road and Judd Falls Road is not good at all because of the jog in the roadway . He also commented that speed is the real problem on Pine Tree Road in his opinion . Referring to the Official Highway Map , Mr . Fabbroni noted that a section of the proposed " by- pass " road , or " circumferential " road , from Pine Tree Road to Slaterville Road passes through Blatchley land and others . Mr . Fabbroni stated that in his opinion that section of road that is proposed is not a good proposal for a number of reasons . 1 . The worst projected traffic does not exceed the capacity of Pine Tree Road , 4 Planning Board - 8 - March 1 , 1977 2 . It is so close to Pine Tree Road that it creates additional problems on Slaterville Road , 3 . [That is the economic mandate for a road 3001 west of an existing road ? 4 . From a long range County standpoint we should be talking about providing a way for the traffic east of Ithaca to _get to Cornell without going through neighborhoods that exist now . If you look at the Chart and consider the normal growth in traffic , the section of Judd Falls Road between Ellis Hollow Road and Route 366 will be over capacity , And then there is the problem of traffic breakdown point . If you look at the availability of funds , maybe it is feasible for the Town and the County to consider a joint venture to look toward these problems and consider a new road connecting Route 366 at Caldwell Road to Ellis Hollow Road at a relocated Pine Tree Road coming into where the Ellis Hollow Apartments are . This could be feasible locally . As a basis for construction looking to the future , that is the dotted lines ( Highway Master Plan Map ) from Ellis Hollow Road to Route 366 , Cornell University wants to eventually close Judd Falls Road to Route 366 , Mr . Aron stated that it was his opinion that the Board should get some knowledgable people , such as Mr . Fabbroni , and someone as an " ad hoc " to come back with a proposal as to what could be done in twenty years and where . The Secretary stated that a telephone request had been received in the Town Office when Mr . Fabbroni was attending another meeting from Mr . Harry Missirian of the County Planning Department to have a committee from the Town Planning Board meet with the County Planning Department before any absolute proposals are made . Mr . Fabbroni stated that the County proposals for the " loop road " do not have any traffic figures such as these with it . Mr . Fabbroni stated that his suggested concept is one that leans to improving the existing center traffic situation in the Town of Ithaca connected with an unobstruc - ted corridor outside . Working with existing roads and /or constructing new roads has to be weighed very carefully in terms of cost , Mr . Bradley stated that we are seeing a levelling off of Ithaca College and Cornell University in terms of faculty and enrollment . Also , we must consider no traffic on Campus ( Cornell ) at all - - none - - only service vehicles . Mr . May stated that there is very little justification for any possible future development of this proposed by-pass road from Pine Tree Road to Slaterville Road and it would certainly seem that that is for all practical purposes of no value , however , this Board or a committee thereof should meet with the County people , Mr . Aron agreed , stating that this Board should look ahead and plan and not come to any immediate conclusion , Mrs . Hoffmann concurred and stated that she thought that the Planning Board members should go and hear what the people at the County Planning Department have to say and discuss it with them and then come up with a recommendation . Mrs . Bronfenbrenner stated that she will explore the possibility of a meeting with the County Planning Department to discuss the by- pass question as soon as possible in order to have some detailed recommendation for the Town Board , Mrs . Bronfenbrenner noted , however , that the question at hand remains of that portion of the proposed road in Planning Board - 9 - March 1 , 1977 East Ithaca shown on the Town of Ithaca Highway Master Plan which runs from Slaterville Road to Pine Tree Road through the Blatchley land and others . MOTION by Mr . Jonathan Bradley , seconded by Mr , J . W . Reece . WHEREAS , a traffic study of the East Ithaca area relative to Pine Tree Road , Honness Lane , Slaterville Road , Ellis Hollow Road , Judd Falls Road , Route 366 in the vicinity thereof , and other pertinent roads , has been made by the Town Engineer in February of 1977 , and WHEREAS , the results of said traffic study have been presented to this Board at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 1 , 1977 , and WHEREAS , a section of a proposed road in East Ithaca area and shown on the Town of Ithaca Highway Master Plan map runs from Slaterville Road to Pine Tree Road through the Blatchley land and others , and WHEREAS , said section of said proposed road is in close proximity to the existing Pine Tree Road , NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca that in view of the traffic study and the close proximity with Pine Tree Road that section between Slaterville Road and Pine Tree Road of the proposed Town road is not justified . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote , Aye - Bronfenbrenner , May , Aron , Bradley , Hoffmann , Reece , Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . DISCUSSION OF ROUTE 96 ALTERNATIVES . Mr . Fabbroni described the first choice alternative - - the so- called Liguori plan . Mr . Fabbroni described choice 2 which involves the hospital parking lot . Mr . Fabbroni described a combination of alternatives 2 and 3 which appears to be getting the most approval . Mr . May stated that the northern routes above the hospital are unfea - sible . He stated that he did not like the left turns at all . Mr . Aron agreed . Mr . Wayne Pollard agreed that the northern routes are " garbage " . He said he , together with his neighbors , are looking to have some type of petition to the Planning Board or the Town Board whichever is more appro - priate . Mr . Fabbroni noted that the Town Board is holding a Public Hearing on the Route 96 relocation question on March 17th , and Mr . Pollard ° s comments at that meeting would be the best . Mr . Pollard continued and said that everyone is in _favor of Alternatives 2 and 3 in combination . Mr . Bradley stated that any route other than the ones to the left of the hospital as one goes up is unfeasible . The following MOTIONS were presented , duly seconded , and voted upon as noted . t Planning Board - 10 - March 1 , 1977 1 MOTION by Mr . Henry Aron , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : Department of Transportation WHEREAS , the State of New York/has proposed six northerly alternates known as R1 , R2 , R31 R4 , R5 , and R6 for the relocation of Route 96 in the Town of Ithaca , and WHEREAS , the Planning Board has discussed the matter of the proposed Route 96 relocation at work sessions held on January 4 , 1977 and February 15 , 1977 and at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 1 , 1977 , NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca recommend and hereby does recommend to the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca their acceptance of the alternates proposed by the State of New York Department of Transportation and designated as R3 to Station 135 and R2 from said Station 135 to its juncture with the existing Route 96 . Liese Bronfenbrenner voting Aye Montgomery May voting Aye Henry Aron voting Aye Jonathan Bradley voting Aye Eva Hoffmann voting Aye J . W . Reece voting Aye Carried unanimously . MOTION by Mr . J . W . Reece , seconded by Mr . Montgomery May : WHEREAS , the State of New York Department of Transportation has proposed six northerly alternates known as R1 , R2 , R3 , R4 , R5 , and R6 for the relocation of Route 96 in the Town of Ithaca , and WHEREAS , the Planning Board has discussed the matter of the proposed Route 96 relocation at work sessions held on January 4 , 1977 , and February 15 , 1977 , and at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 1 , 1977 , NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca state and hereby does so state to the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca that said Planning Board strongly recommends against the implementation of the alternates proposed by the State of New York Department of Transpor - tation in re the proposed relocation of said Route 96 in the Town of Ithaca and designated as R4 . R5 , and R6 , for the following reasons : 1 * said alternates R4 , R5 , and R6 necessitate the disruption of privately owned property . 2 . Said alternates R4 , R5 , and R6 offer poor entrance into the Tompkins County Hospital requiring left turns . 3 . Said alternates R4 . R5 , and R6 require additional distances to be travelled to reach the Hospital . Liege Bronferibreriner voting Aye Montgomery May voting Aye Henry Aron voting Aye Jonathan Bradley voting Aye Eva Hoffmann voting Aye J . W . Reece voting Aye Carried unanimously . t r . Planning Board - 11 - March 1 , 1977 3 . ) MOTION by Mrs . Eva Hoffmann , seconded by Mr . Montgomery Maya WHEREAS , the State of New York Department of Transportation has proposed six northerly alternates known as R1 , R2 , R3 , R41 R5 , and R6 for the relocation of Route 96 in the Town of Ithaca , and WHEREAS , the Planning Board has discussed the matter of the proposed Route 96 relocation at work sessions held on January 4 , 1977 and February 15 , 1977 , and at its regularly scheduled meeting of March 1 , 1977 , NOW , THEREFORE , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca state and hereby does so state to the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca that said Planning Board strongly recommends against the three alternates proposed by the State of New York Department of Transportation in re the proposed relocation of said Route 96 in the Town of Ithaca and designated as R4 , R5 , and R6 because of the proposed considerable additional length and proposed considerable additional cost of these three alternates , and , further THAT said additional length and additional cost is not justified by virtue of the fact that there is no apparent increase in benefits . Liese Bronfenbrenner voting Aye Montgomery May voting Aye Henry Aron voting Aye Jonathan Bradley voting Aye Eva Hoffmann voting Aye J . W . Reece voting Aye Carried unanimously . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , the meeting of the Planning Board was adjourned at 11 : 00 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary , M and W Enterprises William C . Norton Mark N . Goldfarb 409 Lake St . Ithaca , New York 14850 February 15 , 1977 Town of Ithaca , New York Town Planning Board RE : Ingress and egress for proposed service station ( gasoline ) at the corner of Judd Falls Rd . and Ellis Hollow Rd . , Ithaca , New York. Since our last meeting with the planning board at which it was agreed that gasoline sales should take place at the above location but that there might be restrictions as to ingress and egress to the property from adjoining roads , we have been in communication with several major oil companies and their distributers . Many of them appear interested in the location until we men - tion the potential ingree /egress restrictions . At this point in our con - • versation , the outfits that we have gotten that far with all said the same thing ; They were not interested unless proper entries and exits to the sta - tion could be obtained . To them this means both entry and exit on both Judd Falls Road and Ellis Hollow Road . In our last meeting you indicated that there was no problem with ingress and egress on Judd Falls Road or ingress from Ellis Hollow Road but you could not recommend egress onto Ellis Hollow Road . Without this egress , the oil concerns will not further pursue the mat - ter as they feel a gas station set up in this matter would not be successful . Enclosed is a copy of a letter from Mr . F . E . Borer of Petr -all Petroleum Con - sultants Corp , Inc , a local buisness with which we hope to arrive at an agree - ment with although our negotiations are stalled at this point due to the ingress / egress situation . The site plans also attached are drawn from their recommenda - tions concerning entries and exits as mentioned in their letter . These site plans should only be used for entry/exit consideration . It is our feeling that the Town of Ithaca wishes to see a prosperous operation located on the site . One that would be an asset to the Town , not a detriment to the community and further growth . With this in mind , we ask you to permit both ingress and egress on Ellis Hollow Road . gak gyouforyour consideration , niam C . Norton L �J Mark N . Goldfarb PETR -ALL PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS CORPORATION INC . 2 WEST MAIN STREET DRYDEN , NEW YORK 13053 TELEPHONE: ( 607 ) 844- 9113 F. E. BORER February 7 , 1977 PRESIDENT liz I: aha e :nont Ij . Goldfarb - 05 J ..,. e Street Ith`, ca , ,\? era fork 14850 Dx 071 " r .� ice , I; ru .� s. . yurSuant to our recent conversation concerning your property c. t the corner of Ellis TIollow Road and Judd Falls Road . This I is to ilform you that the original layout of this corner v:hich you have given us , is unacceptable . 1 �' e have attached our rec = endations for ingress and egress at this corner . ' c have had over tlraenty years ex. perie _zce in the petroleum mar � eting industry . "de have caorl� ed for major oil companies and have been involved in site layouts for development of corners like your own . The success of any retail gasoline business on this corner , r sndate s t 'r_at proper ingress and egress be achieved before we pursue this Natter any further . Unless proper entry and e ;rits can be worked out , we are not interested in putting a gasoline pumDing station on your property . ' c have a reputation in the oil industry of running represen- tative retail outlets , and are very familiar with past and present industry problems in regards to cleanliness , hours , overall appearance , and the problems of keeping a location open and functioning successfully . One of the %trays i .rivihich rive , rotect our reputation is to male sure that based on our lrnowlcdge and experience we do not e _iter into any agreement unless Fre are absolutely co _zvinced there are no drartbacks to the path of a successful operation at a particular location . If it is possible for you to rror' out the above mentioned -problems , then we feel this corner could be a successful gas - oline operation and mould be interested in further pursuing an agreement with you on the property . Sincere ir , d . E . Lorer enc . r, -o EAST ITHACA TRAFFIC STUDY Summary , Conclusions , and Recommendations : 1 . Route 366 and Judd Falls Road split -T Intersection has a high volume left turn weave crossing or intertwined with fast moving Route 366 through movements . The accident potential is very high . The traffic volumes , weaves , speeds , turning movements , and roadway capacity are presently operating at levels just short of traffic breakdown . 2 . Judd Falls Road and Ellis Hollow Road split T- Intersection also has a high volume left turn weave crossing fast moving Ellis Hollow traffic . Fortunately , the situation though hazardous , is not as critical as " 1 . " above because of a greatly smaller volume along Ellis Hollow Road , 3 . Although there is a predominant through movement along Judd Falls Road and Pine Tree Road from Cornell to Slaterville Road , the magnitude of traffic aside from the awkward arrangements of the intersections " 1 . " and " 2 . " above pose no threat to the capacity or safety of existing roads . 4 . The only short range cost- effective solution to the Route 366 and Judd Falls Road intersection would appear to be closing the north leg of Judd Falls Road and installing a traffic signal at the remaining tee but not without a great amount of local re- routing of traffic and increasing delay on the ever more congested Route 366 . Making the intersection a cross intersection would appear to be economically unfeasible with Cascadilla Creek as a major obstacle . • 5 . The short range solutions to Judd . Falls and Ellis Hollow Roads intersection are either to reconstruct it to cross at one point by realigning Judd Falls Road to the northeast or Pine Tree Road to the southwest OR relocating the Pine Tree Road to the east so as to further separate the north and south legs and separate the required driver responses by a greater time and space . The first alternative would be the better if it were not for the long range traffic growth and recommended solutions to follow . 6 . The long range traffic projections and existing magnitude and primary destination ( Cornell ) of traffic suggests that further study of the economics of a new two lane road connecting Route 366 at Caldwell Road ( and Parking Lot B ) to Ellis Hollow Road at the relocated Pine Tree Road as an alternative to recommenda- tions " 4 . " and " 5 . " could be a better long range solution . 7 . The worst long range traffic projections indicate a need for only a two - lane road in the Cornell - Slaterville Road Corridor with capacity much as Pine Tree Road south of Ellis Hollow Road now provides . In view of this , the fact that travel characteristics such as car occupancy and transit use could well lessen the pro - jections , dollars from outside sources and locally budgeted are few , the proposed corridor is less than 600 feet from existing Pine Tree Road , County " Crosstocm " crossing of Six Mile Creek is extremely expensive with local South Hill opposition , the long range solution to circumferential flow around the Town would seem to be needed twenty- five years in the future and should be planned now east of the Town before development outruns that option , the present alignment of the proposed new road between Pine Tree Road and Slaterville Road should be abandoned from the Master Highway Plan as not sensible for improved local traffic flow and misplaced for long range future demand . i-i ti i c�� Nfi N K N � �J F F i� i'l oyo l,elV i:3 /N_COIVIV4 44 - s4 ",X , ���.��' iPor9D co r-,Q163R a 43,6 tir n Ite /If 7�q �Nl�obi /, 044OW S 'ao �. Y ``^��^N �3\ o S IV1t/iF'SS � y �9 4.PF CORM(V - 5/797ZRI(g��E- ot94 Cod i4/Ook Y Q -436 q / A / ��C�Cis ko��ow i C3- Ro . ' n ! mai 1 41, ff� I rn d 1 � o ` AF ��► �► 3 DRogs ,b OP�►N 33 4_4 4 7 VJf s g 3 3 � Na 33 filo ' gam 4 ol cn x-37 ` 32ko3t 30 Rop 10 W11VTHTOP —� rgRI STOPNrR 2C N IXco cc co ye acP ¢ � IE. 3 W u49 .� 4227 -1 27� ion . �•-' �i ? cs-6 255 39 t7fa X293 %16 _c 6 3 9110 4—T 1--� - Z 65 5`I HqN S N A M! HA NSNRW P a � c c V4 ta AM - PSR K HOUR TAM R SECTiot DIPfQTioNAk coONTS r. r IN ouk- - vQkONE co S4 S4 _ � � RD COR 604 Y 1 t J 3 / Doop 9 �o o , l MIKE o � o 1� i i � 43 0 � h i N01,40c ) i o w RIO / 00 / i /o4o syti HoAtWSS I SCANS' , n � O 1 � 1 e -�G � � 4PF A/dJ t/dAtO ! - )'o ykRRS Y O . h 366 1 Px£ AV£ N ♦ 1 ♦ CL D 7 ,F�C�C � S No�CrCow � ♦ p i i 39401 sow rn f4 I 1 1 1 Development eyed by .planners . An unusual proposal to combine com- mercial and residential development on South Hill—not'currently permitted under town law—was given a preliminary look Tuesday night by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board. The project; which is expected to in- I elude a shopping center, multiple resi- dence housing, a parkway and a bike path, was presented ' to the board by Evan Monkemeyer and his attorney, David' B. Gersh. Gersh told . the board the property, owned by- the Monkemeyer family, near the Danby Road-King Road intersection, was always intended to be "the com- ! Wednesday, March 29 1.477 41PRACA JOURNAL 3 � mercial heart t South Hill. But he said people in that area, including Ithaca College students, are now shopping down- town . I . He said he recognized the zoning prob- lem the proposal ' presented , but said he thought something could be worked out whereby the developers could get special approval. This kind of mixed develop- ment, said Gersh, is becoming increas- r ingly popular throughout the country. Planning board members had mixed reactions to the project, which would start with construction of a roadway system and the shopping center. A few of them were particularly con- cerned about the developer's request that the commercial zone in that area be expanded. Most of the land is zoned R-15. What would about the possibility, asked j the board members, that someone else might later buy the property and want to put in commercial development that the board did not like but that fulfilled the requirements of the town zoning or- dinance? Liese Bronfenbrenner, who was acting chairman Tuesday night', raised concern about a potential "Elmira Road-type" development there. Monkemeyer responded that he was not planning an ugly commercial develop- inept right ori the main > roads. , There would be greenery and open space, and the shopping center would be a " tasteful" development that would have multiple residence housing above the shops. Also, the developers planned to have an architectural commission that would ov- ersee any plans for the property, he said. ! This would provide a check on develop- ment, no matter who owned the land, said Monkemeyer. Board members decided, to be safe, to require bylaws from the developers that would regulate how the property would be developed. This would include a pro- vision' for the commission Monkemeyer proposed . This is to be presented, along with more specific plans, at a public hearing on the proposal on April 5. jIn other business, the board favored the three Route 96. alternatives in the town that run south of-Tompkins County Hospi- tal. ,The board felt the northern alter.- natives would . destroy private property, provide a poor entrance to the hospital and would require additional funding --without a corresponding benefit. Atop Town Planning Engineer - Larry Fabbroni prAv&ented a recently completed traffic study of the East Ithaca area . .