Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1988-05-03 FILED TOWN OF ITHACA Date TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD34= Clerk MAY 3 , 1988 The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday , May 3 , 1988 , in Town Hall , 126 East Seneca Street , Ithaca , New York , at 7 : 30 p . m . PRESENT : Chairman Montgomery May , James Baker , Carolyn Grigorov , Virginia Langhans , Robert Kenerson , Robert Miller , John C . _ Barney ( Town Attorney ) , Robert R . Flumerfelt ( Town Engineer ) , Susan C . Beeners ( Town Planner ) , George R . Frantz ( Assistant Town Planner ) . � ALSO PRESENT : Noel Desch ( Town Supervisor ) , Town Board Members , Robert Bartholf , Thomas Cardman , Shirley Raffensperger , Patricia Leary , Jim Linton , Beth . Campbell ( WVBR- FM ) Chairman May declared the meeting duly opened at 7 : 30 p . m . APPROVAL OF EXCERPT OF MINUTES - KYONG PROPOSAL - APRIL 5 , 1988 MOTION by Virginia Langhans , seconded by Robert Kenerson : • RESOLVED , that the Excerpt from the Minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board Meeting of April 5 , 1988 regarding the Kyong development , and to be presented to the Town Board prior to the Town Board Meeting of May 9 , 1988 , be and hereby are approved as written . There being no further discussion , the Chair called for a vote . Aye - May', Baker , Grigorov , Langhans , Kenerson , Miller . Nay - None . The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously . At this point , Assistant Town Planner , George Frantz , addressed the Board with preliminary figures that show the distribution of where residential growth has been in the three planning areas - East Hill , South Hill and West Hill areas . Mr . Frantz stated that he had researched material from 1980 , ( which is the last Census ) and by going through the Building Permit records had calculated the number of dwelling units that had been constructed in the Town from 1980 through 1987 . Mr . Frantz noted that the total number of dwelling units was 622 , adding that that number is for single family residences , apartments in existing homes , and apartment complexes , such as Summerhill Apartments , Mr . Frantz remarked that each dwelling unit that was constructed in the Town was • counted , outside the one dormitory at Ithaca College , and also the new apartments constructed by Cornell on Jessup Road , Mr . Frantz pointed out that development has been concentrated in the East Hill Planning Board - 2 - May 3 , 1988 area , which is defined as being from Six Mile Creek , north . Mr . Frantz stated that 670 of the dwelling units built since 1980 were built in the East Hill area , followed by 21 % for South Hill , and 12 % for West Hill . Mr . Frantz noted that there is a shift , at this point , from East Hill to South Hill . Mr . Frantz noted that the projected dwelling unit construction for 1988 is based on the number of building permits issued this year , as well as the number of approved development units expected to be completed in 1988 . Mr . Frantz stated that 93 new dwelling units are expected in 1988 for East Hill - 88 dwelling units on South Hill - 34 dwelling units on West Hill , Mr . Frantz noted that it was almost even between South Hill and East Hill in 1988 , and commented that South Hill has been increasing as far as the percentage of dwelling units that have been constructed since 1980 . [ Mr . Frantz ' s study is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 . ] Chairman May wondered about Grandview Subdivision , with Mr . Frantz responding that Grandview was included in the building permit figures , noting that most of the seven permits issued for East Hill were for Grandview . Mr . Frantz mentioned that there were 24 - 26 lots approved for Briarwood Subdivision , and eight of those are expected to be constructed in 1988 . Mr . Frantz stated that Eastwood Commons is approved for 65 lots , and it is assumed that half that number would be constructed in 1988 . • Robert Miller asked about College View Park , with Mr . Frantz responding that that is the ten units in the trailer park . Carolyn Grigorov asked about Westwood Hills , with Mr . Frantz answering that the final approval had been given for 21 units . Mr . Frantz offered that the average annual construction growth in the number of dwelling units for the last two years ( 1986 and 1987 ) was 3 % . Mr . Frantz commented that he assumed that that 3 % per year growth in the number of dwelling units will continue for the next five years , which is a total of 6 , 679 , and noted that was an increase of about 1 , 000 dwelling units . Mr . Frantz noted that the projected construction rate of 3 . 4 % increase was based on last year ' s rate ( 1987 ) for the number of dwelling units , adding that , by 1993 there would be an increase from 5 , 761 to 6 , 809 . Mr . Frantz noted that the average annual construction rate of 2 . 1 % for 1983 - 1988 is based on the last five years , which is the lowest projection per year ,, adding that that is an increase of approximately 600 or so dwelling units between now and 1993 . Mr . Frantz presented a study prepared by Kathy Evans of the Department of Planning and Development , City of Ithaca . The study shows a housing need in 1990 , based on population growth and the size of a household . The study also showed a total housing need for the Town , excluding Cayuga Heights , of 990 dwelling units . Mr . Frantz stated that , at this point , we are at 622 , and given the existing rate of construction , will have surpassed 990 units by 1990 . Robert Kenerson wondered about the Northeast section of the Town . Mr . Frantz stated that the approximate amount of acreage • available for development on East Hill is approximately 170 acres of R- 15 zoned land that is left open for development , and adding that that would add approximatley 2 . 2 units per acre , with single family Planning Board - 3 - May 3 , 1988 • housing only . Mr . Frantz noted that two - family housing would be 4 . 4 units per acre maximum , and that would be about 680 - 700 dwelling units . Town Supervisor , Noel Desch commented , if you lose the golf course , that changes the ball game . Robert Kenerson offered that there are a lot of variables , but it is interesting to look it . Mr . Frantz stated that there are about 1300 acres of land zoned R- 30 owned by Cornell . Mr . Frantz noted that out of 170 acres it was estimated that about 370 - 740 dwelling units would be constructed . Mr . Frantz mentioned that on South Hill there are about 150 acres of R- 15 zoned land , and that calculates out to about 330 - 660 _ dwelling units . Mr . Frantz stated that there are also about 1400 acres of R- 30 land on South Hill , and the potential number of dwelling units on that 1400 acres can range anywhere from 1100 dwellings units , which is based on no water and no sewer , to 3200 dwelling units . Mr . Frantz indicated that the estimate for South Hill is between a capacity for 1500 homes and up to 3800 . Mr . Frantz noted that R - 15 zoned land on West Hill constitues approximately 500 - 600 acres , noting that there was 170 acres between Mecklenberg Road , Elm Street Extension , and West Haven Road to the City line . Mr . Frantz stated that , assuming there would be about 600 acres available in the R- 15 zoned land , there would be approximately between 1300 and 2600 dwelling units . Mr . Frantz noted that there were about 1300 acres of R- 30 zoned land , excluding the area around Coy Glen Road , noting that the 1300 acres includes some of the slopes on the west side of Inlet Valley , which may not be developable . Again , Mr . Frantz noted that the scenario is without water and sewer for the 1300 acres , but could accommodate about 1000 dwelling units , or 2000 if everyone went with a two - family home . Mr . Frantz noted that with water and sewer serving the entire 1300 acres there could be between 1500 and 3000 homes . Mr . Frantz commented that the extimates for West Hill range between 2500 homes to approximately 5000 , at the most intense development under the existing zoning . Ms . Beeners stated that some of the major areas were discounted that were considered to be undevelopable . Robert Kenerson wondered if the figures led to any kind of correlation with the needs for business areas . Mr . Frantz stated that that had not been viewed at this time , but 20 square feet of commercial area is recommended for each dwelling unit within a given area . WORK SESSION - DISCUSSION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN [ The document under discussion is attached hereto as Exhibit 2 . 1 Susan Beeners , Town Planner , addressed the Board and stated that the first section of the Comprehensive Plan draft was discussed at the February 16 , 1988 Planning Board Meeting , and, noted that some revisions were made . Ms . Beeners stated that the first seven pages , • as a combination , make up essentially what has been called for as a " Preamble " . Ms . Beeners noted that the second portion of the document to be reviewed tonight involves the basic comprehensive plan Planning Board - 4 - May 3 , 1988 • guidelines . Ms . Beeners mentioned that the three planning areas are East Hill , South Hill and West Hill . At this point , Ms . Beeners appended six large maps to the bulletin board . Ms . Beeners pointed out the different uses on the colored Land Use map , and noted that , essentially , this is what exists at the present time . Ms . Beeners indicated on the map that the " pink " was public or institutional lands , " lavender " areas being commercially zoned lands , " yellow " being low density residential and the Northeast appearing as more of a orange color , which denotes medium density residential . Ms . Beeners stated that there are a couple of hamlets - one being Forest Home and the other Kennedy Corners , which are identified as residential hamlets . Ms . Beeners noted that the Multiple areas were indicated as sort of an " orange " . Ms . Beeners offered that the Cluster was sort of a " flesh " tone , and noted that one gets into interpretation as to whether it is a low density project that should be colored " light yellow " , or is it a cluster that should be set out , as there is a great amount of variation in the densities . Ms . Beeners noted that the " brown " areas are inactive agricultural , and the " green " areas range from brush to forested areas . Ms . Beeners stated that the forested areas were picked up , along with several other items , on what Ms . Beeners hoped would be a Natural Resources Map that could be adopted soon , so that the Planning Department could show prospective developers some of the items that are of concern . Ms . Beeners stated that the Residential Map showed what had been constructed over a twenty year period ( 1968 - 1987 ) . Ms . Beeners pointed out the Topography Map of the Town . Continuing , Ms . Beeners pointed out the County Agricultural District Map , which shows the County agricultural districts in the Town . Ms . Beeners noted that about half of those County District lands are in the Town Agricultural zone , and about, half of them are in R - 30 lands , with some of them in R - 15 . Ms . Beeners stated that , in viewing what is actively farmed within these districts about half of the land in the County appears to be actively farmed . Ms . Beeners stated that new 1988 aerial photos are to be completed in late July of 1988 . Ms . Beeners , indicating on the map , noted that the " brown " areas shown are inactive agricultural , which might be set aside for a year , and then put back into cultivation . Ms . Beeners mentioned , as a matter of clarification in response to William Lesser ' s concern as to the need for what lands on South Hill are in agricultural districts , and whether they should be kept in agricultural district status , and whether they are suitable for farm land , that most of the lands in the Coddington Road corridor appear to be forested land or brush , and do not appear to be actively farmed , as there are some slope problems , which would rule out farming . Mr . Beeners offered that there are two active farms , which are nearby on West King Road , • and stated there should be some clarification and recognition that those lands would be reasonably expected to remain as viable farms for a considerable time . Planning Board - 5 - May 3 , 1988 • Ms . Beeners , indicating on the Water / Sewer map , noted that the " long dashes " were existing water lines , and the " short dashes " were sewer lines . Ms . Beeners noted that the lines that are currently under construction are the sewer lines indicated :in " red " , with the " green " being water . Ms . Beeners also appended the large newly adopted revised Zoning Map to the bulletin board . At this point , there was discussion on the Comprehensive Plan Draft , Town Board Member Shirley Raffensperger spoke from the floor and asked , since some of the members present were not involved in the prior discussion , and had not been involved over a long period of time , perhaps ever , in this particular draft of the Preamble to the Comprehensive Plan , if there could be general comments . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that in reading the minutes she had not seen any general comments , at least not since 1986 . Mrs . Raffensperger stated she would be interested in an update as to what was intended to be accomplished in this particular two - section document . Chairman May responded that he felt there was a feeling that somewhat of a wrap - a - around statement was needed to begin the comprehensive plan from which was developed each of the individual neighborhoods in more specifics , adding that this was the Planning Board ' s best ideas of the Town as it is today , and what was expected • of the Town in the next 10 - 20 years . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that the maps were perfectly wonderful , and a great part of what she thought a comprehensive plan should be . Mrs . Raffensperger expressed a concern that the first seven pages , ( which she understood were reviewed quite thoroughly ) were a little too general , and she felt that some of it was not specific enough . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that she felt on the other hand that the second portion - - the Sections on South Hill , West Hill , and East Hill - - were overly specific . Mrs . Raffensperger noted that she was concerned about specific pieces of land being discussed as appropriate for commercial , etc . , commenting that the second section was much more specific than she had anticipated . Mrs . Raffensperger wondered if the draft orginally came from previous Town Planner Peter Lovi , with Chairman May answering , no , it is only a relatively small part of it . Ms . Beeners stated that there are pieces of Mr . Lovi ' s statements , adding that the ones that she thought were viable , were put in . Robert Miller offered that he thought the first seven pages had to be generalized . Mrs . Raffensperger felt it was vague as to how the present neighborhoods are dealt with , and if we value ' what they are , how do you preserve those while looking at a full range of housing in the future . Mrs . Raffensperger felt that that was very important for the Town , and in fact , felt it was at the basis of much of the difficulties encountered every time a proposal and hearing comes before the various boards , adding that it is a kind of tension between what the Town already has and what is seen as being needed in the future . Mrs . Raffensperger , commenting that she did not see that • being addressed , stated that she noted problems with. the road system , but had not seen enough comments about the values . Planning Board - 6 - May 3 , 1988 Town Board Member Thomas Cardman stated that he was in agreement with Mrs . Raffensperger , Mr . Cardman noted that when he reviewed the first seven pages he did see a Statement of Purpose , goals and objectives , but did not see a well developed philosophy that notes additional sections which should be built upon , adding that he felt that very important for someone who would not be as familiar with the document as the Town . At this time , the Board referred to Page 4 , Paragraph " 4 . " The Town will continue to respect not only the interests of its neighborhoods but also its neighbors , through government policy that influences density of development , streets , drainage , and recreational and conservation open space " . Mr . Cardman stated that he could see the philosophy of it not: being capable of being contained within a paragraph that small , or even two pages , but it is the basis of the document when discussing a Comprehensive Plan or Master Plan , Chairman May noted that , therein , lies one of the major problems , and in the Comprehensive Plan , Definition and Statement of Purpose , Chairman May felt it should be short and concise . Chairman May felt that it could be followed up with additional information that expands on it , but a Statement of Purpose needs to be as short as possible , in order that people will read it , and know what it ' s about . Robert Miller stated that there is going to be growth , and you cannot maintain the status quo . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that , unless we address some of these tensions that are seen all the time between established neighborhoods and development that we really wish to encourage , and set up mechanisms • to deal with that , the Town is going to end up like some other municipalities with a non - thinking no growth philosophy . Mrs . Raffensperger felt that some revisions should be made to the Zoning Ordinance so that people and developers can really trust what the Town is going to do . Chairman May responded that he thought the revisions belong in the Zoning Ordinance , and not in the Comprehensive Plan , Chairman May referred to Page 5 , Paragraph 6 , which states : " Town Planning and land use policy will respect the protection and rights of individual property owners and be sufficiently flexible to respond to changes in community need . " Chairman May noted that throughout the Comprehensive Plan it is noted that protection of the neighborhood , etc . , is the philosophy of the document , and wondered how anything more could be done . Town Supervisor Noel Desch offered that perhaps the floating zone concept could be eliminated , and it be decided exactly where all commercial and multiple family zones were going to be . Chairman May stated that that goes back to the Zoning Ordinance . Mrs . Raffensperger commented that there are people living in established neighborhoods on oversize lots in single family residences , adding that , all at once , right up against their back doors are constructed two - family houses on 100X150 - foot lots , noting that it is permitted in the Zoning Ordinance , but pointing out it is part of the conflict , because the homeowners do not see it as being in the character of their neighborhood . Mrs . Raffensperger remarked that she did not agree that the Zoning Ordinance is the only vehicle to address the issue , commenting that she would like to see it addressed in the Preamble to • the Comprehensive Plan , Town Attorney , John Barney , responded that the Zoning Ordinance Planning Board - 7 - May 3 , 1988 . is the law , adding that the Comprehensive Plan is a device by which you operate the floating zones , but , in terms of enforcement and in terms of how to proceed , the Ordinance is what governs it , and has to govern it . Mr . Barney noted that if the Ordinance states it is permitted , you cannot , as a Planning Board or any other board , raise something up and say , no , we are not going to let: you do it . Mrs . Raffensperger noted that she understood the Zoning Ordinance was the law , however , what the law is should reflect goals . Mr . Barney commented that everyone is always remarking about a Comprehensive Plan , and that the Planning Board should be operating with some kind of overall scheme . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that she did not anticipate the Zoning Ordinance staying as it is presently written forever and ever , but felt that an intent in the Comprehensive Plan , which would implement a change in the Zoning Ordinance , would be in order . Mr . Cardman stated that the Comprehensive Plan cannot be construed , or should it be thought that the Zoning Ordinance is cast in concrete , adding that the Plan comes first . Chairman May stated that the Comprehensive Plan was constructed totally independently of the Zoning Ordinance , noting that the Zoning Ordinance can be viewed as to how it reflects the Comprehensive Plan . Chairman May stated that one of the concerns was with the elderly population in the Town of Ithaca , noting that another concern was with a part of the population that is outgrowing their living structures in the Town of Ithaca , Forest Home being a perfect example - single people living in big homes , and the number of residents limited in the homes . Chairman May noted that there are a lot things of the above nature , and the present Zoning Ordinance really is very inflexible . Mrs . Raffensperger felt that it was a matter of opinion whether or not that kind of flexibility should be , in a sense , institutionalized or part of the flexibility of , for example , the Special Permit process . At this point , Mrs . Raffensperger referred to Page 4 , Paragraph 4 , which states : " The Town will continue to respect not only the interests of its neighborhoods but also its neighbors , through government policy that influences density of developmemt , streets , drainage , and recreational and conservation open space . " Mrs . Raffensperger stated that she could implement the above in fifty different ways , adding that she did not want it so specific as to implement it only one way , however , she was concerned that there were so many scenarios that it was scary , which may not :reflect the Town ' s goals . Town Attorney Barney wondered , taking Paragraph 4 as an example , how the goals would be characterized . Mrs . Raffensperger responded that she felt it was possible to be much more specific about the kinds of values that are placed on present neighborhoods , and also the value placed on innovative and housing of different types in the Town . Mr . Barney responded that the problem is that whatever the Planning Board and Town Board do ultimately may wind up in court , and may be tested , commenting that if you have a plan that is very specific in terms of what it will , and will not permit , you may be locking yourself into a situation where you go to court and ' a document is produced that indicates this is completely opposite to what the Plan states you are going to do . Mrs . Raffensperger stated Planning Board - 8 - May 3 , 1988 • that she read that argument in the 1986 discussions , noting that , mostly , previous Planning Board Member Edward Mazza made that argument , adding that she understood there are always legal dangers any time there are statements made about philosophy or plans . Mrs . Raffensperger felt that this was a poor reason not to do it , noting that she did not think it had to be so specific that it is , right on the surface , legally dangerous . Mrs . Raffensperger mentioned the character of a neighborhood , and noted that Mr . Barney defined the character of a neighborhood [ Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting of March 9 , 19881 purely in terms of the lot dimensions that are in the neighborhood . Mr . Barney responded that , quite frankly , he did not remember the specifics of it , and was not sure the minutes quoted him accurately , but the Iacovelli proposal was being discussed , and there was quite a bit of difficulty defining what lot size was appropriate , and what the measurements of the lot size were . Mr . Barney offered that , if the above was what was being discussed in terms of character of the lot size , it was with reference to the lot size being discussed . Mr . Barney agreed that character is certainly more than lot size in the general context of things , but there is still the question of what is going to be permitted and not be permitted , noting that if something is said in the plan that is very very specific as to what is permitted , and the Ordinance states something different , or in a Special Permit process , or in a Multiple Residence , or site plan review for rezoning , something is permitted completely different , that creates a conundrum for the lawyers . Mrs . • Raffensperger responded that , obviously , she was not suggesting that , noting that one should not suggest anything go in here that one could not envision the implementation of in the Zoning Ordinance . Attorney Barney stated that the Planning Board had reviewed the language in some detail on a number of items , commenting that he was probably , as much as anybody , responsible for maybe making it a little more general than specific because , when read specifically in a couple of instances they were in conflict with what the Town Board had done in the last year or two , in terms of authorizing certain types of rezoning . Mr . Barney stated that he was concerned that a document would be created , not so much a shield from the Town ' s standpoint , but a sword from the other side to use to challenge some of the activities that had gone on in the Town . Mr . Cardman wondered , where in the first section of the Comprehensive Plan the goals were . Mr . Cardman noted that he was having difficulty with the way the document is constructed , noting that he was looking for an introduction , statement of purpose , statement of philosophy , and some goal statements . Chairman May answered , Page 1 indicates Definition and Statement of Purpose , Page 2 indicates the Introduction , and Page 3 on indicates Statements of Philosophy . Mr . Cardman stated that , hopefully , when a document , such as the one in question is constructed , it is a relatively easy document to read from a style point of view , adding that he was looking for a more subjective analytical tool in the beginning of the document . Mrs . Raffensperger offered to review Paragraph 4 , Page 4 , • of the plan and illustrate the sort of thing she meant , and present it to the Planning Board . Mrs . Grigorov commented that it would be a good idea to write up some type of explanation of what the Planning Planning Board - 9 - May 3 , 1988 Board and Town Board does in relation to land developments , so that people who are upset about something could , at least , get a real background of what is going on , noting that some of the letters in the paper start with such false premises . Mrs . Raffensperger responded that , perhaps that was part of what is not in the subject document , but would be very helpful . Mrs . Langhans felt that most of the problems were with new development in established neighborhoods . Mrs . Grigorov offered that many people have unrealistic expections , with Chairman May responding that they are unrealistic because people who own land have a right to use it . Ms . Beeners stated that in each section of the document , [ South Hill , East Hill and West Hill area ] , the things that influenced the general character of each large area were mentioned . Ms . Beeners remarked that , perhaps an inclusion of the actual description of the " neighborhoods within each planning area would be appropriate , which was actually done in another document called Comprehensive Plan that Peter Lovi put together , and which noted that the Pennsylvania Avenue / Kendall Avenue neighborhood is comprised of a certain type of housing makeup , etc . Chairman May commented that not one of the neighbors in that area would agree with that definition . George Frantz , Assistant Town Planner , agreed with Ms . Beeners that , perhaps there is a need for some sort of historical context , not so much a description of the neighborhoods , but maybe describing the neighborhoods through their history , such as when they were developed . Continuing , Mr . Frantz noted that a portion of Forest Home is exceedingly old , compared to probably every other neighborhood in the Town . Chairman May commented that South Hill is probably one of the oldest neighborhoods in the Town . Ms . Beeners stated that when the question of consistency and character of a neighborhood , existing or potential , arises , the options are to go with the general description of the entire areas , as set forth in the subject document , or break it down to be able to say that the Northview Road area of Coddington Road , constructed in the mid 1960s is comprised of single and two - family homes . Chairman May noted that he felt the character of the neighborhoods throughout the Town are in a changing evolution because of the age of the population , and changes in the demography . At this point , the Board discussed South Hill [ Page 8 ] . Carolyn Grigorov referred to Page 13 , Section 4 , of the proposed Comprehensive Plan . Mrs . Grigorov wondered if formal recreational land should be in the Six Mile Creek area . Ms . Beeners responded that active and passive is what the intention is , adding that it should be developed in a combination of active and passive recreational land , and other types of open space . Ms . Beeners offered that there is an ample amount of land on the creek side , and there seemed to be some receptivity in discussions with the City of • Ithaca that the Town of Ithaca could have some ballfields down in that area , and still maintain the wildlife habitats and forested open space that the City is particularly interested in . Mrs . Langhans Planning Board - 10 - May 3 , 1988 • wondered where the low density residential area would be . Ms . Beeners responded that the possibility of extending the sewer line out the NYSEG right - of -way would make it possible to have lots on the lower side . Ms . Beeners noted that the economics of it , considering the fact that not all the land on the other side is wildlife habitat , would make sense to plan for some limited development on the north side . Ms . Beeners offered that the statement could be reworded so as to reflect more of the current discussions with the City concerning a combination of active and passive open space use in the area . Ms . Beeners suggested changing the first sentence of Section 4 to read , " The area on the creek side of the railroad right - of -way might be appropriate as formal recreation . . . " . Virginia Langhans wondered about the need to eliminate long deadend streets such as Pennsylvania Avenue and Juniper Drive . Supervisor Desch responded that that was part of the highway plan . At this point , Mr . Desch referred to a letter addressed to the Members and Staff of the Planning Board from Planning Board Member William Lesser ( absent from tonight ' s meeting ) dated May 3 , 1988 , and attached hereto as Exhibit 3 . Supervisor Desch stated that he felt Mr . Lesser made a good point concerning roads , due to the fact that if the Town has an official highway plan it should be kept up - to - date , so the Town would not end up , twenty years from now , without a road network that , probably , would be needed . Mr . Desch , again referring to Mr . Lesser ' s letter , noted that it was conceivable • that there are a lot of roads that should be considered , and noted that the roads cannot be planned now because of the large open areas , particularly on West Hill , and parts of South Hill . Mr . Desch stated that if an integrated official highway map were available , up - to - date , and which reflected the circulation needs , one would be much closer to constructing the roads where one wants them , as that development takes place . Virginia Langhans was concerned with traffic circulation , and development on South Hill , Supervisor Desch mentioned the Aurora Street by -pass , which is referenced on Page 11 of the Comprehensive Plan Statement , Mr . Frantz offered that , perhaps instead of having 60 foot wide rights - of -way on an Official Highway Map , have designated corridors within which the Town believes a future road would be necessary . Chairman May responded that that sounds like an excellent idea , but questioned how wide , realistically , the corridor would be in some of the big parcels of land . Mr . Frantz responded that 200 feet wide would be appropriate in some places . Robert Flumerfelt , Town Engineer , felt it was important to update the Highway Master Plan because he felt that where there is heavy pressure for development in a certain area ( Troy Rd . /King Rd . area of South Hill ) the Town may be looking at those major developments , and the street systems of those developments , with the developer attempting to direct the traffic to existing roads , and that may not be the best location for major traffic carriers . Mr . • Flumerfelt stated that it would force the traffic from the developments to use that perhaps substandard corridor . Mr . Flumerfelt also felt it was important to map the desired major Planning Board I - 11 - May 3 , 1988 • traffic carriers and provide the routes to get from points " A " to points " B " in the various areas , and commented , as the development comes forth , particularly from larger parcels , if the Town needs to alter the alignment of the major carriers to accommodate the proposal it could be done by separate actions , as long as the intent of the main route is kept intact . Mr . Flumerfelt mentioned the road network around Cooke Cadillac , the Small Mall , and Uptown Road , which are in the Town and Village of Lansing , noting that those roads parallel Route 13 , and - vehicles have to make right angle turns to get around . Robert Kenerson wondered if it should be outlined in the Plan that road developments equate to development as part of the Highway Plan , Mrs . Raffensperger mentioned Impact Fees . Attorney Barney noted that there has been some discussion on Impact Fees , adding that Impact Fees are in ligitation concerning the Town of Guilderland versus developers . Supervisor Desch stated that , somehow , there had to be a mechanism regarding Impact Fees for developers , because if the City turns down Plan B or C [ referring to Route 96 and the Octopus ] , something has to be done to exit from West Hill . Mrs . Grigorov noted that mobile homes on South Hill were referenced on Page 8 , Section 1 of the Comprehensive Plan Statement , and felt that was a good idea . Ms . Beeners stated that there is a need for mobile homes or low / moderate cost housing on South Hill . Ms . Beeners noted that she would feel confortable in deleting the following portion : " Several sites were identified in the 1985 study prepared by the Town staff , a number of others are also possible . The suitability of such sites for development is heavily dependent upon the availability of public water and sewer . " Ms . Beeners noted that most of the sites that were shown in the study were not immediately accessible to water and sewer . Mrs . Grigorov commented that the idea was to secure some more low cost housing in the Town . Mr . Kenerson agreed . Town Board Member Patricia Leary offered that affordable housing did not necessarily have to be mobile homes . At this point , Ms . Beeners suggested that the wording be as follows : " It is probable that there will be a need for low/ moderate housing such as , mobile homes and other manufactured homes . " Ms . Leary noted that every time the Town requires certain contributions or certain costs to be taken over by a developer , the Town is raising the price of the units . Chairman May mentioned that the Beautifiction Act stated that any subdivision required underground utilities , which added $ 6 , 000 . 00 ton average ) to every lot in the countryside . Mrs . Raffensperger wondered if underground utilities were required for all houses , or just all subdivisions . Robert Kenserson answered that it was for anything new . Chairman May noted that handicapped access was only for Multiple housing . Supervisor Desch stated that the per unit cost for Multiple Housing • or infrastructure is always lower . At this time , the Board discussed West Hill [ Page 171 . Planning Board - 12 - May 3 , 1988 Robert Kenerson wondered about the need for discussion concerning Inlet Valley as a corridor , and if so , how much it affects the description of South Hill and West Hill , with the Board concurring that it may be best to keep it general . Chairman May referred to Page 19 , and noted there is a pretty specific statement on West Hill in regard to a Mobile Home Park district , or units affordable to persons of low and fixed income . Chairman May commented on the other side of low income subsidized housing , which would be the elderly living on fixed income , noting that there is impacting when the taxes are increased . Mrs . Raffensperger referred to Page 24 , under " Tompkins Community Hospital and Tompkins County Biggs Center " , and expressed a concern about a neighborhood shopping center being needed on West Hill , similar to East Hill Plaza . Mrs . Raffensperger stated that that is the kind of specifics that concern her . Chairman May suggested that East Hill Plaza should be taken out as a description of the neighborhood shopping center . The Board agreed . Ms . Beeners stated that the business zone on East Hill Plaza is about thirty acres , and the designated business zone on South Hill is about thirty acres , adding that she would check on Barbara Holcomb ' s notes , as far as commercial development standards . Ms . Beeners wondered if perhaps thirty acres should be designated on West Hill , commenting that this was somewhat tempered by an unofficial draft resolution that was never passed , but was considered by the Town Board that 25 acres maximum be permitted to be commercial on West Hill . Ms . Beeners , referring to neighborhood shopping center , wondered what the definition was . Ms . Beeners wondered if it was the three major areas , plus supplemented by some smaller areas in the future as was in the Greater Ithaca Regional Plan as six or more , instead of the three that would be potential . Supervisor Desch suggested changing " can " to " may " , then it does not have to be limited to 30 , commenting that , if there is a demand or need for it maybe it should be 35 or 40 . The Board concurred and also agreed to the deletion of the sentence " It is quite possible that such development may be a near mirror image of the East Hill areas of the Town . " The Board concurred that low/ moderate cost housing would be in order for West Hill . Town Board Member Patricia Leary wondered what would happen to the large houses in the Town when the elderly move out . Robert Kenerson mentioned that probably there would be three families instead of one living in the house . Ms . Leary felt that this should be kept in mind . Chairman May stated that it was recognized in the Plan that there are changes regarding the elderly , and the need for low/ moderate housing . Attorney Barney stated that , constitutionaly , that would be a little difficult , noting that it was allowed to have six persons over the age of 65 live in a single house , but it is not allowed to have six persons under the age of 21 living in a house . Patricia Leary offered that , if the trend proceeds , it will have to • apply to younger persons , noting that not everyone is going to want to live in a mobile home , and something will have to be done with those houses , as they cannot all be subdivided for the elderly . Ms . Planning Board - 13 - May 3 , 1988 • Leary noted that , after the elderly leave the house , younger persons cannot afford to purchase the house . Mrs . Langhans commented that there would be big houses in single family neighborhoods , and there should not be a problem finding people to purchase them if the zoning is strict . Chairman May stated his concern was with the older person who wishes to remain in his or her home , but does not have the resources to pay for the upkeep of the property , adding that that is one of the things that should be looked at in the Zoning Ordinance . Ms . Leary mentioned the tax burden problem , and noted that there could be creative ways to ease the tax burden on the elderly . Chairman May remarked that he was not sure taxes were the right way to alleviate the problem . Assistant Planner , George Frantz , wondered if it would be appropriate to have a section within the Comprehensive Plan that outlines various housing options , and perhaps makes recommendations , both in terms of which ones would be appropriate to the Town in various neighborhoods , and what would be good locations for various types of housing alternatives . Mr . Frantz commented that the question with respect to large houses is are they concentrated in certain neighborhoods , or are they spread out . Mr . Frantz stated that one of the suggestions in the Housing Forum was congregate living , which is another variant of Multiple Family . Mr . Frantz stated that , in his opinion , this was a very important aspect to be considered , and perhaps would eliminate congregate housing from Forest Home , adding that he did not think it would be wise to have congregate living quarters on a relatively small lot . Chairman May offered that six senior citizens could live there , noting that probably none of them would have automobiles , as contrasted to six younger persons . Mr . Frantz noted that there could be a problem with age discrimination . Chairman May felt that this was a good idea , but suggested not trying to use one of the hills ( South Hill , West Hill or East Hill ) because there is such a diversity that would never end , adding that , perhaps a location like Forest Home would be good . Susan Beeners wondered if one could discriminate in. a special permit format . Attorney Barney stated that a Special Approval process allows more than three unrelated persons to live under certain circumstances , i . e . , number of cars , parties , etc . Attorney Barney offered that you could not discriminate on the basis of age . Continuing , Attorney Barney stated that the State Housing Finance Law does authorize that , if you want to be a limited profit or non - profit entity to develop and build homes strictly for the elderly and low income elderly . Attorney Barney noted that the New York State Civil Rights Law states that you cannot discriminate on -the basis of age , sex , etc . Mr . Frantz stated that as he was going through the building permits he noticed that there seemed to be a large number of permits for two - family homes . Mr . Frantz wondered if it was a good idea to count how many two - family homes were built since 1980 , and further , to do a survey of the homeowners to find out exactly who is renting • that second unit . Chairman May responded that there is a great deal of turnover and change . Susan Beeners suggested that prior to meeting again , perhaps it would be a good idea to have a discussion Planning Board - 14 - May 3 , 1988 • with the City on this issue , noting that perhaps there are places for joint housing programs . Mrs . Raffensperger wondered if it were important enough to think about seeking outside help with the Comprehensive Plan . Chairman May felt that the Board was at a point now where it is just a matter of hammering it out , and stated that outside help , in his opinion , would not do a lot of good . Mrs . Raffensperger noted that there are consultants for sewer and water - - why not planning ? Chairman May stated that there has been tremendous help from staff . Attorney Barney wondered if Mrs . Raffensperger was thinking in terms of someone like Tom Neiderkorn , with Mrs . Raffensperger answering , something like that . Supervisor Desch noted that one way to do that would be on the Highway Master Plan , adding ` that it almost has the advantage of someone being a little distant from the issue . Chairman May stated that he agreed with Supervisor Desch , but to do it right would take a tremendous amount of staff time and Planning Board time and input before handing it over to a consultant . At this time , the Board concurred that discussion would continue on the Comprehensive Plan on Tuesday , May 31 , 1988 at 7 : 30 p . m . ADJOURNMENT Upon Motion , Chairman May declared the May 3 , 1988 meeting of • the Town of Ithaca Planning Board duly adjourned at 10 : 15 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Mary Bryant , Recording Secretary Nancy M . Fuller , Secretary Town of Ithaca Planning Board . • 0 NEW HOUSING UNITS - - TOWN OF ITHACA 1980 - 1987 WAR EAST HILL SOUTH HILL WEST HILL TOTAL No . % OF TOTAL No . % OF TOTAL No . % OF TOTAL 1980 39 83% 3 6% 5 11% 47 1981 15 56% 7 26% 5 19% 27 1982 17 68% 4 16 % 4 16% 25 1983 53 707o 17 23% 5 7% 75 1984 43 73 % 7 127o 9 15% 59 1985 61 '707o 19 22 % 7 8% 87 1986 101 76% 24 18 % 8 67o 133 1987 102 56% 51 28 % 30 16% 183 TOTAL 417 67% 132 21 % 73 12 % 622 � ME & Town building permit records 1980 - 1987 Does not include additional student housing constructed by Cornell or Ithaca College since 1980 . • Exhibit 1 + U) � � C+ C+ (Db� ro C+ C O � x w o � o o . . H• o y x x al cxo N `�° sz v o (tai U) c N• a m u o (D b o _ ¢ b 0 a F-'aq N CO I N N W N N i N I1 e (D U1 I O C31 I C31 �l I I + �1 07 W �A 00 O G7 N H d DC FP O x y O ¢ d - . U) iH-J • • H OF H CA) o I m 00 x 00 H tij o° �aa ( U1 �+ (n y U) } (I) U) �� JJ C•} (+ C+ Ct C+ C'f Cf ('f' C+ Cf" x x x x x x x x x E- + F • N• N N N h—' He F-+ F-•r • N CJS �? PROJECTED DWELLING UNIT CONSTRUCTION 1988 - 1993 ( 1 ) Based on Average Annual Construction Rate of 3 % for Last Two Years ( 1986 and 1987 ) . 19884 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Units Constructed -- 215 173 178 183 189 195 :c ;c Total Number of Units 5 , 761 51934 6 , 112 6 , 295 6 , 484 61679 ( 2 ) Based on 1987 Annual Construction Rate of 3 . 4 19884 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Units Constructed -- 215 196 203 209 217 224 4Total Number of Units 5 , 761 5 , 957 6 , 159 6 , 369 6 , 585 6 , 809 • ( 3 ) Based on Average Annual - Construction Rate of 2 . 1 % for 1983 - 1988 . 19884 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 Units Constructed -- 215 121 124 126 129 131 4. 4. "Total Number of Units 51761 5 , 882 6 , 006 6 , 132 6 , 260 6 , 392 41988 figure based on projection of dwelling units and development plans approved by Town and expected to be completed in 1988 . 4040 4Based on Building Permit records , there were an estimated 5 , 546 dwelling units completed or under construction as of December 31 , 1987 . GRF/ nf 5 / 3 / 88 - 1 - EXHIBIT 1 rl J _ ;,, i ,a Ji L" _r: U 5l uli ru 'Ia n cl . . T" ru 2 r t t w t w = ,co e STI e 5u 1 i�Dp 7 I 1' V: , �. 1 t•-� . . 1 • i+ :E It It It �. n O i .I v - '� .� ••� t i I 1 fit E � err iI r? 1. r It Ln i z ># Q r+ � . :a _ i I (�-` ;i �` -" /:1 .'. fP er1 ►' x'F X l.� Lt Jv I c 3 � Fa ; G 1 t ' r! A- pi O £ I C" in f roIt as t '+ av- . > .�1 ! 1 �#_., 2 ° F+ Z i'r; U'• rT i i C No 0 r- fDr G . r- �: r= wz .. 0.1 LO tz t0 7 tl I rr r a • rr f- r - L r rY ' '. 2 ! LlLil -1 r J1 L m . fp L^ • � i I z nn. ' t• 14 m %n W tw I C^ 1 1 r• W JI i 11 7 . e " v t t Q Q {r €7 I I qa 5 .;tr ., �. I ? I- 1 Ul H s... 1 �t UP `< "S r I r SO 1 13I E 4 R, LnI A I , '. ki �t it .. K. '.�... t ISA: ... Fgr ray :a ft 1 ' + u F-• � It A IW a ; ,eIt ILI w' tC I CO % i r3 ra r.� i • POPULATION PROJECTION Based on average annual growth rate of 1 . 67 % / yr . between 1940 and 1980 , as calculated by Southern Tier East Regional Planning and Development Board ( STERPDB ) , the Town of Ithaca population , outside the Village of Cayuga Heights , is projected at . 15 , 200 (+ 18 % ) in 1990 ; 18 , 200 (+ 19 . 7 % ) in 2000 ; 21 , 500 (+ 18 % ) in 2010 . Total increase between 1980 ( 12 , 852 ) and 2010 is projected at 8 , 650 persons . GRF/ nf 5 / 3 / 88 • EXHIBIT 1 - 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 3 - The Town of Ithaca was founded in 1821 from a portion of the Town of Ulysses . Until 1888 the Town encompassed the Village of Ithaca . The strong natural ties with both Ulysses and the . City . of Ithaca have continued to influence life in the Town . In the 167 years of its existence the Town has - : evolved as a . financially , educationally , culturally , and operationally strong . municipality . . Its people have actively participated in the establishment . and. modification of planning doctrines that have consistently promoted the health , safety , morals , and general . welf are of the community . It is anticipated that this commitment and the recognition of the . need for a small but capable staff of administrative , planning , engineering , code enforcement , and public works personnel , Will continue to enable the people of the Town to meet , the , challenges that the dynamic Ithaca and . regional economy, will bring in the decades. ahead . Twenty years from now the population of the Town may reach 25 , 000 people who will enjoy the same high . quality of . , life enjoyed today . . With proper implementation of current _ planning policies , there .. . will be less congestion in the streets , more safety -from fire and . other dangers , adequate light , air , and open space , an avoidance of overcrowding of land, and adequate transportation , - water , sewerage , schools , parks , and other public improvements . The current balance . of residential , commercial , industrial , and educational . land uses will , be maintained . Statements of Philosophy -The,.-philosophy of government in the Town . of Ithaca will continue to + be. positively influenced by both rural and urban forces and interests , such that the Town , ; . will continue to be an , increasingly • desirable place to live in a quiet , uncongested environment replete EXHIBIT 2 • v„ , Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement with many natural and cultural amenities . The following specific® statements of philosophy are interwoven in the fibre of the Town ' s planning decisions . ( 1 ) The Town of Ithaca recognizes the City of Ithaca as the County Seat and the traditional center of commercial and business activities in Tompkins County . ( 2 ) The economic viability of the City is an important influence on the land use policies of the Town , which sees • the City as the central business and cultural node for the Ithaca area . A failure of the City to sustain a strong commercial and business , climate would clearly shift the need for such services by Town residents to the Town . ( 3 ) In such areas as youth services , fire protection , and waste disposal , where services • � are needed by , ` the people of the general community , irrespective of municipal jurisdiction ; the Town government will continue to seek to develop a joint relationship with its neighboring governmental jurisdictions to ` provide such services where shown to be cost - effective , provided that - the interests of the people of the Town are protected . ( 4 ) The ` Town - will continue to respect not only the % interests -of its neighborhoods but also its neighbors , through government policy that influences density of development , . streets , drainage , and recreational and conservation open space . ' ( 5 ) The Town recognizes the . need for a full „ range of housing opportunities • in the Ithaca area , ' and will seek further coordination .. with the City of Ithaca , Cornell . University , • Ithaca College , and other agencies in the provision of such . It is the intent of the Town to provide housing types for a balanced range of economiclevels ar� Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 5 - • needs , including one - family , two - family , multiple - family , and mobile home park residences , with full consideration of the need to safeguard the quality of - . residential life in the community while providing for the evolving needs of the population : ( 6 ) Town planning and land use policy will respect the protection and rights of individual property owners and be sufficiently . flexible to respond to changes . in community need . ( 7 ) - Town policy recognizes the responsibility of the. Town to be a participant in the solution of regional and national needs including parks , highways , health care , child . and elderly care , military installations , educational and industrial research facilities . ( 8 ) Until such time as the industrial , si:tes . in" the City and at the Cornell Research Park are developed , the Town w.-ill approach requests for the zoning of additional land for industrial development cautiously . New industrial development proposed for the Town will be evaluated for its complementary relationship with other industrial sites ", ' as well as for its compatibility with adjacent land uses . Light industry is encouraged to develop and diversify in the Town . ( 9 ) It is reccgnized '. .that new neighborhood commercial areas will develop in existing or potential new Business Districts . Any such areas will be fully considered for their complementarity with the services and products provided by the downtown Ithaca central business district - and other commercial areas , for . their suitability . and service to the local -area population , and their minimization of impact to adjacent areas . ( 10 ) The Town recognizes the importance of reinforcing and enhancing • a local - agricultural economy . Efforts shall continue to maintain EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement significant areas of active agricultural land and to minimize pressures for non - agricultural development . Commercial and industrial activities related to agriculture will be encouraged . ( 11 ) It is recognized that the diversity of Town geography poses both constraints and opportunities with respect to development . Conservation of open space , constructive use of the prevailing site terrain , and efficiency of infrastructure is encouraged . The reuse of existing physical facilities for functions compatible with their surroundings is also encourmaged . ( 12 ) In any land use decisions , the Town shall consider the effect of a proposed development on the wide range of elements , features , and needs of the local . neighborhood as well as of the Town . The protection- of the natural . environment is a valid planning objective which is balanced with economic considerations when land use decisions are made . ( 13 ) Long -standing Town policies requiring developers to construct water , sewer , roads ', and drainage improvements , and to provide open space , will be continued as an element of - the Comprehensive Plan in order to control the costs of municipal infrastructure and . to provide for efficient land % use . * , ( 14 ) Public water and sewer will ultimately be provided , pursuant to the Water and Sewer Master Plan , in. all . - areas where such service is economical and consistent with a general , plan of development , and where . capacity and circumstances permit . Water and sewer extensions will primarily be constructed by developers . Where it is desirable to serve property that is already developed , ' . or to make , general area improvements for water quality and supply and . for fire protection AD Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 7 - • there may be justification for Town expenditure . ( 15 ) Through the Subdivision Regulations and the Official Highway Map the Town controls the location and design of new roads as development occurs . The Town recognizes the extent of public involvement in the solution of traffic problems as they may exist and as may accompany continued growth , and seeks to minimize undue public costs . A cooperative effort involving Tompkins County , the Town , and other municipalities and agencies must continue . ( 16 ) Comprehensive planning elements , including the Zoning Ordinance and Map , open space , highways , water and sewer master plans , shall be updated continually with official review intended to occur not less than biannually . The Town of Ithaca , because of its topography , is comprised of • three areas , each with its own features , interests , and influencing forces . These areas are West Hill , South Hill , and East Hill . Within each area there are a number of neighborhoods , some more defined than others , each with a commonality of interests . , _ The following guidelines provide both a reference to these unique features and a statement of the parameters that will influence future land use decisions . • EXHIBIT 2 nM tv I Hn uj T w; , T Od aj ar ' OV Di ]v T\ ac aM 50 a0 uj s aN, aM !b b uj 'oj SM - M ] , f ao aT ' ui 8 ; Li aT aT ro c 80 Dj � J 80 ui T am aT Alli aT J� OEC °i '" c nM 6 \ U , a , u la ui j � . Q1V / T ai 1M R ' �' av �•� � h aT i Uzi a uj ^N aT ' I r la w ' 4a b am � � HG ! 1 u L] / Mh : am, r c ul J f r All A]/4 N ;J aT 'T ai i 60 a&., C �T r ON NM a0 80 ai ap Al aj ' ac uj aT M as IV r al 5. a ! a u; ao Q , aj d:A:i T a r: All °i aM T ^] 3 14M �W ai M M LJ w s� s� !T a � ao all zi ai , • �, A nN aT aj u3 uj ac H ° ON. a iH ay !T aj ai J , ad M ••y (IVOVn i Sa 31 A 063 aj VN u d a a0'. a aM am' ,y T � b a] j J u ON, S0 am SD 63 . . ro a I Ad d 0 063 j av . ON sm✓ '� 063 ` a I ul a3 Y Uzila . . d/ 3 a n63 •J aj tl a� SM ... I aj .N a3ad ay a3 a 1 z u �+ uj b ILI I 3 ai aj I dj =j j dd ,y / j d u3 UZId.4 Ito U;i J / Ito IV IV Gy C�_J I IIAA Uzi =1 CIA r N. py � fV UA 63 n r C.7 1 "U 'r dd IV . 3 OV = IV LY �UJ di CJ 'j •a,• U� Q�� 7j dry � via U� Uj . � j =3 U, U.4 UA Ltv j p Q } s �'\ rV UA pj M . Ia . =j Owl 1� IV7 w d4 aj UnIV as YY 11!! �r M : Um U iV Jj Uj h'. rt tlj dj r Uj • V pV ,t IV iljj t D4 U2 c 43 Uzi on LN J� Jr d j sn Y ] J Uj Uj a , Uj -i:1 LX uj • uj '" J UA I © V j • • pj dj ` JS JIV tia DnU� • �j • 1j t r • \Uj ✓j Uj dN. •D py Cj I � I pN,'V nt uj V IV � � • an', U j � � p I I j V • r �• I _ 1 Uj. t , '' _ZI Id U SM �,(t,� y , i C,ozi 80 Uzi N �� 7 Uj s: Uj LU 31 IF �f z � punoq j • •M pj i „ �. Slli J T -edzotunW _. _. .- .. Uzi 'j Uj a — d i � d ,_ d .zpepunoq ro \\ sd6a I poou .zoqu2zau . • . . . • �� !a . ' Itl un QOOHUOEHD I HN \ p rIrlIH HEMS - aSIl QNVrgi U� u.,7 e 6d -r!NY r Uj ou86d 7� w a 0 pm S F4 Y' �Y V) a bb c •� 7 / • t - A Y aLL 01 Or IF U) O • t z a zOf I �:• t S y rCL YIf iS T . y � . � .. d • s r s Ot OF 6F Olt. ILI, Y Y d Or 000 \v7 OILQ- r Ot H � 0 ¢ r d L�Q. Y & M IL cr r__ ' a d Or Ja F LLii ` a Y P o a . i e � IF A y' a a — Y J y Y g $ O a r Y 4u M Y d z•' u g ' d .r a • W ¢c Y � . •s`• LL Y Y a v � A Y �` ` y .y � ., c, • a u .y g i � • •,a or r a .y n` y Y r x Y A o 1 Y r 8 Y Y •o Ol EXHIBIT 2 4 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement . 8 - • SOUTH HILL South Hill consists of the geographical area between Six Mile Creek and the Cayuga Inlet extending from the City of Ithaca line to the municipal boundaries of the Towns of Newfield , Danby and Dryden . Major natural features include a portion of the Six Mile Creek , Buttermilk Creek , Lick ' Brook and Cayuga Inlet watersheds , and the South Hill Swamp . Development is influenced by the siting of the Ithaca College Campus , NCR , Morse Industrial , and the Therm facilities . Planning Hypotheses Housing South Hill offers the opportunity to provide for the full range of housing needs for the next several generations . The attractiveness of the area , . as well - as its proximity to Cornell , Ithaca College , and local industry , will foster modest growth which , coupled with a similar desirability on West Hill , will reduce the pressure on remaining open lands on East Hill , 1 . It is probable that - there will be a need for a mobile home park on South Hill . Several sites were identified in the 1985 study prepared by the Town staff , a number of others are also possible . The - suitability of such sites for development is heavily deperident ' upon ' the . availability of public water and sewer . 2 . It is probable ' that the 29- acre ± multiple residence district on Danby Road north of - East King Road [ Herman ] , the 30 . 56 - acre ± multiple residence district on East King Road • near Ridgecrest Road [ former Beacon Hills site , now EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement = 9 - ButterField ] , and the 17 . 9 - acre ± multiple residence district • west of the business district lands on Danby and West King Roads [ Urciuoli ] , will be developed within the next decade . 3 . The need . for additional multi - family housing may be identified in the longer run and may be a more likely use for some of the lands zoned light industrial on Danby Road . Moderate density cluster subdivisions similar to Cayuga Vista may be a more suitable use of this land , if an integrated road network is provided and the delicate drainage , natural features , and scenic view points in the area are afforded maximum preservation through creative use of buffer , recreational , and conservation open space . 4 . The standards required by the Town Zoning Ordinance under Article XI , Section 51A , Paragraph 5 , Article X-IV , Section • 77 , Paragraph 7 , and Article XIV , Section 78 , shall be applied when considering such proposals . Commercial Areas 1 . . A neighborhood shopping center is _ needed on South Hill either on currently . . zoned business district lands at the intersection of King Road and Danby Road or along the Coddington Road corridor . Locations closer to the City than King Road would . compete with shopping areas on The Ithaca Commons as well as cause possible traffic congestion in already developed residential areas . 2 . . Limited mixed use districts , such as La Tourelle and the Monkemeyer Plan at the intersection of East King and Danby Roads , will take advantage of both neighborhood and regional Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 10 - needs without stimulating unacceptable levels of regional traffic , noise , or other elements which may be undesirable . While specific locations for additional limited mixed use zones cannot be predicted , in the longer term proposals of comparable quality could complement the overall development of South Hill including portions of the Town of Danby in which the effective reuse of school facilities has taken place . Industrial Development South Hill contains the only significant number of undeveloped industrial and light industrial sites in the Town . The . particular sites. on Danby Road and off Route 13 / 34 along the Cayuga Inlet are not likely to '• develop in the next decade because of , the availability of s1 tes • in the City Industrial Parks and the , Cornell Research Park near the Airport in -' the Village of Lansing . Site development costs are . a major deterrent in the development of . industrial sites in the. Town . . Proposals for industrial development on these sites . should be prepared on an integrated basis, , . _ s. imilar to an . industrial park which -may combine business and industrial operations . Drainage On Sou,th• Hill, the importance of drainage management and the on - site retention ,of storm water has been recognized by the Town for many years as critical requirements for major development projects . Property owners must be alert to the effects that any significant change in : the ground cover on their property may have on downstream properties . Developers of such properties should EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 11 be prepared to provide storm water retention and carryin facilities of sufficient capacity to prevent downstream flooding or erosion when the upstream land has reached the fully - developed stage permitted under the zoning designation in place at that time or assumed as the result of area plans prepared by the Town . pr Other storm water management techniques , such as forestation and the preservation of major drainageways , may also be required by the Town . Highways Intermunicipal Needs 1 . Aurora Street Bypass There ,is a need for a highway link between Danby Road and the Elmira- Road . The only feasible location , offering utility ; drainage , and recreation trails opportunities , . is - the abandoned railroad right of way west of Danby Road , The Town and City should complete the . official mapping and design of this bypass corridor ; , and should require potential developers of involved properties to -take its footprint' intb account . Safety Improvements 1 . Vertical realignment of the end . of Stone Quarry Road at the City . line to improve visibility ; ' in the design stage as a joint City / Town project is needed . 2 . Realignment of the intersection of Burns Road and Coddington Road - is needed . 3 . The elimination of• hairpin turns on Sand Bank Road and its widening ' to standard Town specifications represent • Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement ' - 12 - • an increasingly urgent need . New Streets Area plans developed for South Hill shall recognize the need to eliminate long deadend streets such as Pennsylvania Avenue and Juniper Drive . The . review of all subdivisions fronting on existing highways shall consider access to , and through , properties located in between elements of the existing road network . Developers' may be required to reserve such access even - in those cases where construction of the entire alignment may neither be needed nor possible as a component of the specific subdivision . On South Hill , topography and natural features limit the options for new street alignments, thereby making it • critical that development not . totally foreclose opportunity to provide the road network that will be needed upon achievement of the totally developed status of the Town . * : Natural Areas South Hill is blessed with the wealth of the following ndtural areas which shall be monitored carefully in relation to all development . 1 . . Lick Brook - - a prime candidate for official designation by the Towns of Ithaca and Danby as a critical environmental area . 2 . South Hill Swamp - - sufficiently administered by The Plantations Committee of its owner , Cornell University . Nonetheless , consideration ' should be given to the formation • of a larger South Hill upland conservation area , to include EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 13 - forested areas owned by Ithaca College and private individuals . Conservation open space set aside by private agencies has included reservations at the Deer Run and at the ButterField sites , and the transfer of. the 86 . 65 acre Eldridge Wilderness on Troy Road to The Nature Conservancy . 3 . Buttermilk Creek - - sufficiently administered as a State Park . Adjacent areas shall be carefully monitored as = development proposals are planned . 4 . Six Mile Creek - - approximately 600 acres of privately held developable ., land , mostly in large parcels , exists between Coddington Road and Six Mile Creek , About 370 acres of this land are located between the 545 - acre City Watershed property and the abandoned D . L . & W . - railroad right of way , which is the probable location of . a future sanitary sewer to • serve the Coddington Road corridor up to Troy Road . The area on the creek side of the railroad right of way 7shsldbe�de-ve=ld formal recreational land to serve the Ithaca area population ' s growing needs for facilities such as soccer , softball , . - exercising , and the like . Such facilities would be linked by already planned recreation trails and streets provided by the development above the railroad right of way . Formal proposals for land acquisition by the Town and / or City should be considered . Some low density residential development may be integrated with the recreational development . 5 . The band of forest on the westerly slope of South Hill extending from the City line to Lick Brook is to be • Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 14 - . protected as a natural area to assure slope stability and visual beauty . Penetration should be limited to the Aurora Street bypass , drainage , utility and recreational trail alignment needs , all of which offer opportunitites for coordination . The forest land at the base of South Hill borders the Cayuga - Inlet Flood Plain . It is also isolated in part by the active - railroad right of way . Development opportunity in this area is minimal . 6 . There are a number of major and minor streams and glens , which are either New York State Department of Environmental Conservation protected or non -protected tributaries of Six Mile Creek , Cayuga Inlet , and Buttermilk Creek , and which should be protected and - - considered ' for public or • conservation open space when - site design and set - aside . regulations are discussed with developers . Utilities The water and sewer master plan in large part has been implemented ori South Hill . As -the population increases , additional water storage will be - required near the intersection of '. East King :Road and ' Troy Road' . The need for improved fire protection along Coddington Road also suggests completion of the water main interconnection between Coddington Roa�l. and East King Road pressure zones and should be completed within the next five years primarily -by developers . Sanitary sewer service along the remainder of Coddington `Road will be constructed by developers through connection to the . proposed railroad interceptor '. However , some localized work to EXHIBIT 2 . Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement = 25 - serve already developed property on the upper side of Coddington • Road and East King Road may be justifiably a Town cost . It may be desirable to plan for the sewering of Stone Quarry Road at the same time . The extension of public water and sewer to . - that portion of South Hill between Buttermilk Creek and Cayuga Inlet is unlikely to occur within the next twenty- years , Fire Service The combination of water extensions and the South Hill Fire Station construction will bring 7about , a several - fold improvement in fire protection on South Hill . This - improvement is expected to be adequate for the next twenty years . The area without public water will continue to be adequately served by the Danby Fire Department tanker availability . • Agricultural District The area on South Hill currently in the Tompkins County Agricultural District is ' not zoned by the Town as agricultural land nor is it actively cultivated . While the need for the - development . of this land' is not imminent , it is unlikely ' that agricultural land use represents the best . use of this land in the long run . Ithaca College � = - The • . Ithaca College Campus is . - a primary asset to the Ithaca community . Its facilities and ' human resources establish and -bring to the - community 'a level of quality . that benefits the entire region . . While the Town Zoning Ordinance , SEQRA , and Building Codes afford proper regulation of College physical Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 16 - • changes , it is imperative that Town and College officials participate in campus planning activities on an ongoing basis because of the potential impact of campus development on the environment of the Town with respect to storm water runoff and traffic - control ; and on housing and utility service needs . EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 17 - WEST HILI, West Hill consists of the area between Cayuga Inlet and Cayuga Lake , representing a semi - circle comprising about one - half of the land area of the Town exclusive of the Village of Cayuga Heights . For planning purposes , itis possible to consider West Hill as two sub - areas , namely , the part of the Town north of Coy Glen and the part south of Coy Glen . Major natural features include a portion of the Cayuga Inlet , Enfield Creek , Coy Glen , Williams Glen , Indian Creek , and Cayuga Lake . Development is influenced by the siting of the Tompkins Community Hospital and the Tompkins County Biggs Center , Planning Hypotheses Utilities The 1984 and 1988 extensions of public water and sewer by the Town in response to petitions from the owners of residentially developed properties will be a major factor in bringing about balanced growth and effective land use , rather than the narrow range of Town housing offered by single - family homes on large lots . These improvements , coupled . with the construction of a new Fire Station on Trumansburg Road , will bring the quality of life on West Hill to the same standard enjoyed by the Townspeople on East Hill , Additional storage capacity will be needed as the area grows to enhance both domestic and fire flow and to permit water extensions to the remaining areas not in agricultural districts as described in the Town Water Master Plan . The construction , in 1988 , of public sewer on West Hill , including service to properties along the Lake Shore , will improve thele " u z V - LL ' D _p Ir'I LL CQ C < U 3 3 ; 1 Q O •f--� cd Y. C� W rs ! LL a . @ 8 o V 2✓ O bD r � ' " � 2 •rl � S~ � fiMt• a I O Z A E rO ° b c/� jl■ l O • SIL W C LL Q a � r-1 � �e W u LL V y � \ ¢ ; • � � W � Q w n Q a 4.0 u \� c 5 � u LL U LJ a 5 f d u 1^ •C u ti n c S u V LA- if LL LL LL Q p Q 1. 4 1 - LL u R ♦ � 2 c O V LL � C Q • u a li a fi LL f Q S = u 4 < LCE 1 k W 1 Q p LL a 3O a I ' LL Q LLU LL V N r' y LL a _ P a y u u p LL I LL JI • LL 4 U Q V al a o $ LL � Q LL r C 1 f c I3 y c LL u 4 � J LL 1 i a � • Q LL Q 1i � - Q I i ELEu LL A LL p - S LL ¢ LZ ce) ..- - • I � LL LL y � a IIU'' u _ y LL °` bill — r i — sfififis 3. aI Y a V u 1 ' r a Q � M 1=i I 3 u ILL IL Lill co LL Q 4� li u - LL 1 y t LL Q $ y (S •N = Q I LL LL W Q L • � • o LL { LL u Y a u f LL ue015 • � � La p a a r a D o � LL Q 1 S � ^ = QQ • ' Q O • � ' Q � � I G V Q ` • ' • g a ' G � a r � 2 3 a a ,� W • fibll NL.. • u u 3 y c y LL LL LL Q y Q Q LL J u LL ❑ Q LL Q Q Q P 3' y o li LL li Q �t ' • .1 3 � Y LL �• IL Y • Q LL LL LL Q LL 1 3 z u �+ - ; 3 Q 1L Q i Q •� a u 3 3 ?i Y Y a LL 'a. a Lio Y. s LL Y Q - LL Q •LI LL � ~ � � C • TOWN OF ITHACA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATEMENT Definition and Statement of Purpose The Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan , is the set of references utilized by the Town government and the people of the Town in planning for the future growth and development of the Town to assure adequate facilities for housing , transportation , and utilities , for the protection , comfort , convenience , public health , safety , and general welfare of its population ., with the long - term goal of promoting the community ' s physical , social , and aesthetic environment , and maintaining the character of the Ithaca area . It is the intention of , the Town of . , Ithaca , through the • implementation of the planning policies embodied in its comprehensive plan , to provide current and future generations of its citizens a well - balanced community offering the following : 1e a full range of housing ; 20 a variety of employment opportunities ; 3 * commercial and industrial facilities consistent with the needs of the Town and the Tompkins County - area ; 4 : educational institutions , health care , and day care of the highest standards ; 5 * optimal land use consistent with community needs and protective of the environment . The Comprehensive Plan includes the following references : A - Zoning Ordinance and Map • B - Subdivision Regulations EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 2 - C - SEQR Regulations D - Water and Sewer Master Plan E - Official Highway Map F - Park and Open Space Plan G - Statement of Planning Guidelines H - General Land Use Plan I - Area / Neighborhood Land Use Inventories J - Fire Service Master Plan K - Sign Law L - Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code M - Natural Resources Inventory N - Drainage Master Plan 0 - Wetland Designation Maps P - Flood Plain Management Plan • Q - Critical Environmental Area Designation Plan Introduction By virtue of its geographic location , the Town of Ithaca will continue to influence throughout the County the level of desirability of Upstate New York living : The Town of Ithaca 4in many ways is an extension of the more urban environment of the City of Ithaca while , at the same time , the Town . is strongly influenced by the independent living styles of its agricultural neighbors on its outer periphery . Notably , in four of the seven ' neighboring ' Towns there is no zoning - - a reflection of the desire of the people for the minimum possible in governmental service . On the other hand , the people in the City have high expectations with respect to their view of an acceptable level of governmental service due to the pressures of urban living . At t 4 Ft Fc tr ,OF \ 9 i h Ar bK c 1 . R Fr o Aa ° Kp L Ji ` - Y fc fe f Ft w. '. R,s".0048 � • 3 � .t K Fn F CCU CA Ai k A V . r At :N N Ws [) Fn FA WP i[ nt ' • ' i4 ' Al kWk f [ Fc h h .K F`•�`` t in Ft Fn l• Jq.�i c3 A ., Fe At [ ' A. `tel! ` J ' _ At K F k We f" A° e e f L tV \ 1 FR CA t 'C \ at At FcW Dig P •�r.� FL rm.. �°./ A� poor IC oloo El We / K At F[ Li N i4 I Aiw` �' 6 MID f At Art K b fe 4❑ Al TA ` K r Fn it >I i 1 CA T>T . f laft a Ae F f.LiINDIA t • .. At N P in Ft K K M At .FC K I Ft k AA FA k''- fe ie Al III OFF 9 P - ' � PC k Pi °° M rr K K N • K F• h fn An I s in — _ i" i" At ° k' Fn ft At in .W. FL Fn O Ft AC r �Wp K Wl K k Al, aY K A At At `� ( u ,rn F• Ali Ac A. .(V AN: u K N Fc a C � N k . . Pi n t' Fe EPA 1 y In P, k AI ' h F[ K t ' ae ' FFN N k • a Fp I ' f� At y ' FR At At I ft L[I K F[ Fe t N F K IF At CA I[ F�Ft N h Ft FR V p to K f: A- 1 `-w RAn Ft . aa. "'k11 At rr Ac R k " f �. >[ 11 t f[ Xe, Ft Ft Ik in � . . "�., a r F< h A' AL Fc In FtAi Ft M 411 F0 F` I iA N Fc A F< AL A fn Fc °0 FtU K Ft At fa a FD COy Ft K i ,. . R45 'F AD A, At it rat A' Fn • Ft k y F" F °IFm A in k At Y ° F[ At It: (i Ego Ft MID A 0. ' CA k Po K k k C' 7 [pn At Fn 4 i ' I K r, EIA r nw I a an i W At K b h I F C[ F , F Cl A +[ K a[ K ° M ° FL At to is EM At It °. A ° A Ac CC at k we t[ FL a K K a K K Fc F. ' f[ fn FA At R A. ' i a It at 0 1D A •A Li K a Fc F K h b C[ t R I O K In A CL An, DIDw an , W1A 4 k � r. Fn ' At W rAA T V 0 R k " !L CW k At r: h - � F[ X 1• A Ac Ft 6 Fn At F[ OR " Fn A< w. 4 ft FL E FM � • W. WO Kf fc he � <A. Af ° , a xA 4 on q 3 All, At A` At I F0 Al K WA A Pn. ' At Y. F. to it WA ^ v�[ K W • ; A a ADD: no FR At > A• h " °' r LAND USE - WEST HILL ° I` fn + NEIGHBORHOOD W iR • — '• m A . . . .. .. neighborhood " i r AFF Ac ,� boundary °M I. It M A K CA aw rr -- mwnicipal r :1 n c _ • wa L c - - boundary --K _ . __ 011 � •.:, i K.' U Y Y ItA}4— l< y Fc I[ - - - - EXHIBIT 2 J Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 18 - • condition of ground water and Lake water quality within the Town and City . The geographical location and water quality needs in the Town of Ulysses and , in the larger view , the Town of Enfield , may dictate the need to develop a . - West Shore Lake water supply , similar to Bolton Point , within the next .twenty years . I-n the Elmira Road area , there is am increasingly urgent need to extend public water and sewer throughout the area of the Town in the Valley . A 1986 study by the Tompkins County Health Department cites a large number of individual well water quality and supply problems in the Valley . The lack of fire " .protection is. a major concern frequently expressed by Inlet Valley property owners , including operators of • mobile home parks , restaurants , and motels , during the review of various proposals . Plans for these extensions are expected to be completed in 1989 . Construction will permit a proper balance of residential , commercial , and industrial development along the . Elmira Road corridor and . combined residential and agricultural uses . along the Seven Mile : Drive corridor , while preserving the Valley, flood plain and woodlands and avoiding development pressure in those agricultural :areas uphill from the Valley corridor . The creation of a pressure ' zone above - the Trumansburg Tank a. s described in the Water Master Plan , if required , must be financed in , large part #- by developers ' to avoid development pressure on active agricultural lands . • Housing EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 19 - There is expected to be a need for additional multiple residence and mobile home park districts on West Hill to respond to the full range of community ' needs , including units that are affordable ' to persons of low and fixed income . Consideration of such new districts should take into account the overall housing density permitted in the proximate area of a proposed district . The standards set forth in Section 51A , paragraph 5 , in Section 77 , paragraph 7 , and in Section 78 . of . the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance , need to be applied when considering such proposals . New district and site plan review should take into account compatibility with adjacent neighborhood character and permitted housing densities , the-- availability bf alternative sites , and the adaptability. of the site for the . . proposed use . The development of such housing need not diminish . the amount of acreage available* for active farming . Commercial Areas , The development of , a neighborhood shopping center on West Hill is a - strong likelihood within the next decade . The Greater Ithaca Regional Plan ' suggested such - a - facility at ' the - intersection of Bundy Road and Route 96 . It - may be more appropriate . to consider such commercial zoning within 1 , 000 feet of the intersection of Trumansburg Road and the new . Route 96 . There is also likely to be additional commercial development along Elmira Road . as the comparable area in the City becomes completely developed . - Such commercial operations may be in the form of small -mall type facilities to provide local services and support the cost of the development . The amount of acreage Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 20 - • available is limited by the Cayuga Inlet Flood Hazard Zone , Treman Park , and industrially zoned land . Improvement of the north - south road 'network on West Hill will ' reduce the need for additional commercially - zoned lands in the Town due to improved access to the - City . Agricultural type commercial activities , such as farmers ' markets , should be encouraged in the 'Town to reinforce and. enhance the local agricultural economy . Industrial Development The recent action to eliminate 70 acres of land from those lands zoned industrial responded to the reality of land use potential along Five Mile Drive , but recognized ' the need to zone additional land in the ' Town for industrial uses . The Elmira Road • area , with its access to State roads , is the best location for clean , non -polluting industrial operations . With the provision of adequate open space buffering from adjacent and nearby residential ' areas , the Mancini property is an example of land with potential for development as an industrial park . ' Because of the potential for- - gravel extraction , part of the land adjacent to Lick Brook is zoned industrial . , I Any such use should be prohibited on the steep slopes near Lick Brook , other uses should be subject to the most stringent of environmental review , as would any action were Lick" Brook officially designated as a Critical Environmental - Area . ( See the ' preceeding South Hill Natural Areas section . ) The status of -industrial development in the City Industrial • Parks , at ' the Cornell Research ' Park , and on South Hill is an EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - � 1 - element in the Town ' s comprehensive planning process during consideration of the addition of light industrial and industrial zones . Because of the locational assets of the Elmira Road / Inlet Valley corridor. , it is likely that further development in this area would complement other area industrial growth . Drainage The intent to preserve the broad band of active agricultural lands on West Hill is an important element of the comprehensive plan and the planning process involving . the design of drainage facilities on West Hill . At certain times of the year the condition of those agricultural lands can be a major contributor of storm water_ to - facilities constructed in future development downstream . While well - defined drainage swa, l-es and creeks exist throughout West Hill , the . steepness of slopes near the Lake • require such waterways to be checked for capacity to prevent mud slide problems even where the creek bottoms run on rock . Developers are to - , . be required to apply proper storm water management features in the site - plan preparation including , where necessary. , retention facilities . and conservation buffers within their development . Highways Intermunicipal Needs 1 . The construction of the new Route 96 four - lane divided highway is the most urgent need in the greater Ithaca area . The footprint of the highway will have a most profound influence on the use of the land through which it passes because of its limited access design . Land 1 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 22 - • uphill , when developed primarily as moderate density residential areas , will rely on access to Trumansburg Road . Developers of the major parcels must coordinate their site plan preparation . The new State highway will afford the community the opportunity to relieve the steep residential streets on West Hill from their role as arterial highways . Enhancement of the north - south highway network will - come about in a more effective pattern with the realization of the new State highway . Such roadways must be constructed by developers , on alignments determined by the Town . Should the City government vote against the State plans , the Town will need to arrange for the design of • an alternative located totally within the Town , perhaps as a connection to Taughannock Boulevard '. 2 . The construction of a connection between Elm • Street and Floral Avenue should be given further consideration as a joint - � City / Town project in conjunction with further rdevelopment of the Southwest . Industrial Park in the City : Such a : roadway , will - relieve pressure for the addition of commercial areas along Mecklenburg Road and Elm Street : 3 . The planned ' State improvements of the Route 13 / Route 34 intersection near Treman Park will eliminate a significant safety problem in the Town of Ithaca and bring about a major improvement to the Park entrance . • 404 Other needed safety improvements include the EXHIBIT 2 t Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 23 - intersection of Seven Mile Drive with Route 13 , the intersection of Enfield Falls Road - with Route 13 , and the DuBois Road /.Route 96 intersection which has been scheduled for construction in 1988 . While the Highway Master Plan is - an effective element , it is not possible to plan fully the alignment of all future streets , recreation trails , open spaces , and utility easements on West Hill . Particular care will be required to ' prevent the loss of the best alignment of such infrastructure needs . The owners of the . many large parcels are encouraged to work together and with the Town in the early stages of all development on their property . Street alignments must respect the many unique natural features of -West Hill . With both proper and integrated planning ofinfrastucture and conservation areas , an efficient road • network . can be developed that will not diminish the value of West Hill natural and agricultural areas . Natural Areas West Hill % . abounds with natural areas that must be protected . Coy . Glen and Treman . Park ( Enfield Creek ) - - are two such areas already recognized. as such:, ' The band of . forest extending from Ulysses to , Cass Park on the steep slope above Route 89 must be preserved except for the needed penetration of Route 96 , utility , and trail easements . While some low density development may be considered in this area , it must respect the fragile aspects of this wooded . . area and any developer . should anticipate stringent requirements for the .. preservation .of open space within his or her development . Pedestrian access under the - new State highway will • ` Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 24 - . be needed at several locations in the '.Town . Additional connections utilizing remaining portions of the abandoned railroad right of way and other links to open spaces should be delineated in the site plans for development . Williams Glen and Indian Creek are to be preserved as open spaces and considered for conservation designation or dedication to the Town as development proposals " are considered . Agriculture Active agricultural land need not be pressured into development . The Town policy with . regard to the extension of water and sewer and its support for Tompkins County Agricultural Districts will continue to suppress such development pressure . No significant changes in the boundarie 's of the Town • agriculturally - zoned districts should be permitted until such time as those developable lands served with public water and sewer have been developed . Tompkins Community Hospital and Tompkins * County - Biggs Center As the major employers on West Hill , these facilities ca n ' be expected to influence a modest development of support services I I which � be met by a ' neighborhood ' ' sh'oppi �ng center , s rn[ ar to E 1`r1 aza . The breadth of employment opportunities , coupled 'with the ' natural features of West Hill , will attract mostly residential growth in the area . Such residential growth is expected to need the full range of housing types . lrt- ate development�,�7y -be-�-rre-ar-mi-r East. 11 areas o h-e —Town EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 25 - FAST HILL East Hill consists of the geographical area between Six Mile Creek on the south and the Village of Lansing on the north and between the City of Ithaca and the Town of Dryden from west to east , Major natural features include portions of Six Mile Creek , Cascadilla Creek , and Fall Creek . Major natural resources already developed include the Arboretum and Beebe Lake . Development is influenced by Cornell University and the industrial / commercial areas in the Village of Lansing , Planning Hypotheses The development that has occurred over a thirty - year period on East Hill is a reflection of the success of the planning policies set in place by the originators of the initial . Town comprehensive plan . The attractiveness of the area , due in part to its topographic setting t and its proximity to Cornell University -, will continue to result in additional residential development . East Hill , more than any other area . of the Town is , . and will continue to be , significantly influenced by development in adjacent communities ,, particularly in the Village of Lansing , Most of the remaining open lands on East Hill are held - by Cornell University . The extensive expansion . of . academic building facilities occurring in the central campus in the City is not -likely to happen in the Town with the exception of the expansion of the College of Veterinary Medicine . As collaborative . research between university and industry expands , there may be pressure to permit the development of industrial sites in the Orchard area of the Town , similar to the Cornell Research IL /(/(/ I�L•W/I/7// / LL LL IE ¢ � LL IO LL u LL LL y CV)Q Q ••LL 4' . 4 Q - LL 4• LL W �I • 11 a ��`• V u LL u • \ p >1 Cd DO .Q Ca 6H Cd E X a z �v a � .� W A •� � •� � � Q LL. �. p• LL a / • LLe " Q N OO :C O e / • �i r� E Q a ¢ LL LL • I Y LL I'f O y V MI1 V r L • V - Yr � ^ ' 1 i a • • L L • u • a < , ,y kir. 'y � " � � a � t � 4 Q - tE < W y IY a 4 z LL ILL �` Q • Q 3 l L 4 v LL ~ y L t • 4 _ Q'� e S tY LL 4 11 to d LL a 4 /4 C • LL 4 LL u u G 4 • s JE i_ • LE • LL =: / i 4 4 Co to a a a / 4 I _ � ` � • 4 / // I LL / � , a 4 I U a Q C �N t/ _ La. A u. do 40 JT N LL V LL LL r . a 1 . 6 `L : a ! } a' LENN cc Y i } IN 0 u. c ¢ ¢ 01, I CL ' c s x 3 LL 3 p LL ; Z"�J a a• 3 3 LL I < GG u L2 1 Y a LL G C LL I p u p 1 Q . • � LL G 2 a p• c 'i i o o C LL _ Y 73ldnw Q 0 ■ ..1., LL LL LL p y IN hot a. {amu �: I M � O r. .Y \ LL �• p o c Q Y z a All; Rte. IN vo - _ 1161 � y It u ' c7 0 rites I NON 1L I I r F 1 11 ¢ IF E � � c _ IN It LIN vrim INN . It a IN NN r Rv, N Z d 1.44 ( C� e LL - LL e cr�^• N1 . ININININNNEp N c ,NNNt, NoN,N NNIN, = a 1 i Y c a z \' � c i Cy Gc fc tit W: F0 OwI • , RN h .p.0 fP ' ills OR ' 't' • fit h YY l aD \ h Fp irM (V• live F oWp I WX N t i� • Its � s ti �n h U 1 0 I ht • n FpFit {p F Y 1 niLill PI •I In • M 1 r nil F:n Ac clil 0! Po.' P' \ •n ' "'^ m PI • M— 1 i {• ■ ORIr rook is Will I9 � . I ■' Fn .wP PI M U °.• m1 > l •{ its,R ! • ' M G : A' h A,lm ' � coon{ ° Ac MR Y $ h M i ♦ l r 11 . IN in p i D[ ,Ir1 '•-' Sr• , X F �b: , U. v � • ` il�i 1 � — 1 W' pl Of pop•1 F14 1 ` " 111, F• F,PM I! r n ckit a aPit �4- Y C • ■ i • .. iP., An n m Ad m 11P•0 a Pill AV is sON a m f F fill If Wt / P i .` I • in - i� H7 q w ° Wiild : m f � O Ll • .,. • An w; •— P . oR - ft IACd '•', i...' tPK A• P I it ..lap �Wp rJ �• At i . p It 4 f 4 , �, is R30 • R Am F" 1. 9 . P ... 17 ' .' <. v II rF. Rm V , MR As . , � `� • nn p w • P7 ,p. • I Ap At > c c, C R30 Z �•n " r h W P ' a: • At fn A, K w. f ,ALNn h m ° 'A41t W him 5 At P .. 4M w Rli n f. P rn PC kit p A As fP h Ll \ —T•' t' It x a n P If k N It In Pit 1y w• • Fn P Pit O .. n \ • N t OR Ft !t A. little Fe Fir ft 4n • fCt n AO F " I k {n IUP ^ • L. m NFI A b p In Pill• Fill At • Is Is Pit �p At IN It w [ FC t \".. t 0fit n *�YMR , ill Fn At CIA. it to t A L, � fu FitL • {p Y F pp� ( A, / r lit In ,t , FX ft A. A' to Is h 4 Y i� it [ MR h Pit a ft1: Pool Fn LAND USE - EAST HILL • NEIGHBORHOOD . . . ... neighborhood boundary municipal boundary EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 26 . Park . Such consideration would be inappropriate unless those undeveloped lands currently zoned industrial in the Town are shown to be unsuited for these functions . Housing In the near term , the major additionjof housing is likely to be a Cornell graduate student housing project in the Mitchell . Street area , possibly in part as a replacement of Cornell Quarters . In the longer term , some of the remaining undeveloped lands on Maple Avenue and Ellis Hollow Road held by Cornell may be developed as the University and the Town seek to further reduce pressure on the conversion of single family homes to rental units in " established " neighborhoods . The Town Zoning Ordinance and condominium covenant restrictions on occupancy will • continue to be effective in preserving the range of housing available on East Hill . The availability of mobile home- parks in Varna and elsewhere nearby , as well as the state of development on East Hill , preclude further consideration of this type of housing on East H .111 = in the Town of Ithaca Commercial Areas East Hill commercial service -* creeds are met by the currently designated areas at the intersection of Pine Tree Road / Ellis Hollow Road /Mitchell Street and Judd Falls % Road . Modest changes in occupancy of the current 32 - acre ± - commercial district will occur in response to market forces and additional construction within the district may be appropriate . Future need for additional commercial space is expected to EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement -27 - be met by the expansion of facilities in the Village of Lansing 0 and the extensive construction taking place in Collegetown in the City of Ithaca . However , the East Shore of the Lake offers a unique opportunity to provide water - related commercial activities , consistent with the constraints of access brought about by the proximity of the State highway to the Lake . At the same time , the imminent availability of public sewer is expected ti to result in the upgrading of some of the residential units . If commercial development comparable in scale to home occupations , e . g . , crafts ; are proposed , its compatibility with the current variety of East Shore land .uses may, be realized . Industrial Development The small area . on East Hill_ zoned light industrial is held by Cornell University and utilized . for central utility and print • shop purposes . The abandonment of the - railroad reduces the potential for - use of this area for non - University industrial development . -The current uses are expected to be continued for the long term . because of the vital nature of the - services and the investment made in .. the Central Heating and Chilled Water Plants . - A portion of the Orchard is already developed by the University for low impact functions which are _ quasi - industrial in nature , such as central warehousing and library storage . Should Cornell seek major expansion of these facilities , they should be required to submit a general plan of the entire area between Route 366 and Ellis Hollow Road , Drainage The recent improvements of Route 79 by the New York State Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 28 - j Department of Transportation have eliminated many major drainage • problems . Localized minor improvements and maintenance will continually be needed , particularly in the flat areas of the Northeast and along the Lake Shore . The conservation land reservations made in cluster housing , and other development along Slaterville Road and elsewhere on East Hill , for example , the Black Oak Lane development , have mitigated additional runoff impact to Six Mile Creek . w Highways Safety Improvements There is an urgent need -to construct a highway link between Route 79 and Route 13 , preferably as a bypass of the Pine Tree Road / Judd Falls Road , Triphammer. Road corridor , • similar to that proposed in the Greater Ithaca Regional Plan . In the interim , the connection between Ellis Hollow Road and Route 366 should be constructed before the end of the decade . This , coupled with a one - way system in Forest . Home , will substantially reduce the existing safety hazards and traffic stress along this corridor . Other Safety Improvements 1 . Park Lane - - The extension of Park. Lane will afford emergency vehicle access - to -the Eastern Heights area at two points , the minimum necessary for the number of housing units located in the area . New Streets A network of new streets will be constructed in each of • the remaining large undeveloped areas , including a link EXHIBIT 2 Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 29 - between Pleasant Grove Road and Warren Road to be constructed by Cornell as a part of its traffic and circulation plan . In addition , the extension of Kite Hill Road to Tower Road should be completed by Cornell without further delay . Natural Areas East Hill abounds with natural areas which must continue tow& be protected . Six Mile Creek , Cascadilla Creek , and Fall Creek ♦ are , fortunately , already protected because of ownership by the City or Cornell . In recent years , the quality of public water supplies in . Six Mile Creek and -Fall Creek have been improved through the construction of public. sewer in several populated areas . A unified plan to provide creek bank stabilization should be developed as a regionally sponsored program . While the 90 three watersheds qualify for designation as critical environmental areas , the careful . management by their owners , in concert with the Town ' s open space policy , will assure proper preservation of these areas without , such Critical Environmental Area designation . The Cornell Plantations areas , including the Arboretum , Beebe Lake , and the various landscaped areas of the Cornell campus , provide additional - high quality natural areas available to the public . , Along the Cayuga Lake shore the proximity of Stewart Park in the City is a valuable resource available to Town residents . While the Cornell and Country Club Golf Courses are important open spaces in the Town , it is not likely , in the lor� Y Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan Statement - 30 - term , that the Town can expect to enjoy the luxury of two such facilities forever . When residential development of a portion of one of the golf courses becomes necessary , proposals should be required to include the retention of large open spaces for use by the broader community , as is the case with the current facilities . Agriculture It is fortunate that major agricultural activities have been retained in the East Hill area of the Town . Such commitment , part of planning for a multi - disciplinary campus , seems to have been solidified by Cornell ' s decision to construct a new polo arena on Pine Tree Road and by the planting of new stock at the Cornell Orchard . Also , the importance of the Equine Research • Facility to the State is likely to assure the entrenchment of this asset at its present location on Bluegrass Lane . Any non - agricultural development of Cornell ' s agricultural lands should include conservation and buffer open space near existing residential areas . � . 2 / 17 / 88 EXHIBIT 2 May 3 , 1988 Memders and Staff of the Planning Board : I regret I am unable to join the discussion of the Comprehensive Plan this evening , but did want to add the following comments. ROADS In my view , the treatment of the road system is inadequate. While the general policy of depending on developers to construct the roads is laudable, it can , and is some cases is, leading to a system of multiple cul - de-sacs but few through roads. The Plan should reflect this concern / need . Simularly, the new street sections for each section of the Town should mention the possible ,,. need for additional through streets. Much of the attractiveness of Cayuga Heights is due to the complete road system . More specifically, I oppose any plan to make Judd Falls Road one- way unless additional road work is done on alternative routes. The plan simply spreads ther traffic over a greater area and creates a further mess. AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS I strongly support efforts to continue farming in the Town. Our passive plans of not fostering development on West Hill are good , but perhaps not sufficient in the longer term. The Plan should express a willingness to take a more active role of tax abatement, buying development rights, etc. if necessary. There are numerous examples of these efforts around the country which we can learn from. I do not understand the statement that farming is not "the best use " (p. 16) on South Hill and ask that the district in that area • be given equal encouragement. PLANING The term "neighborhood shopping center " (p .9 ) is used more and more frequently. It is meaningless unless there is some attempt at a definition . This should be done in the Plan . I am concerned by such statements as , "Several sites were identified ... by the Town staff." ( p. 8 ). These recommendations develope a strong identity , as with the Bundy Road site on West Hill . I recomment strongly that the termonology be weakened substantially, as "Several perspective sites which are indicative of the criteria applied by the Town staff..." Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the proposal for further development in the already-congested Judd Falls Plaza area is but an indication of things to come. It is essential , in my opinion , that the Town identify some means of further controlling development in cases where it could easily be detremental to large portions of the residents. The exact wording would probably have to be incorporated into the zoning legislation , but the Plan should at least identify the possible need and desirability of such an objective . I hope these comments are helpful , and again my regrets for not being present. Bill Lesser EXHIBIT 3