HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 1997-10-07mom
TOWN OF ITHACA PLAINNING BOARD
OCTOBER 7, 1997
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, October 7, 1997, in Town Hall,
126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Chairperson Fred Wilcox, Candace Cornell. James Ainslie, Robert Kenerson, Herbert Finch,
Gregory Bell, Jonathan Kanter (Director of Planning), John Barney (Attorney for the Town), Daniel Walker
(Director of Engineering), George Frantz (Assistant Town Planner).
ALSO PRESENT: Donald Stephenson, Laura Cohen. Paul Carroccia, Elsie McMillan, John Yntema, Liz
Hilker, Christine Balestra, James Sharp, Paul Vidovich, Ronnie Pelusio, Chris Gulick, Sue Poelvoorde,
Elizabeth deProsse, Robert Avery, Nancy Avery, Yarrow Nelson, Gerry Stasavage, Mary Russell, Dan
Hoffman, Nancy Istock, Michelle Rothman, Phyllis Baker, Dan Lamb, John Schroeder, Romania Mohammed
James Sigman.
Chairperson Fred Wilcox declared the meeting duly opened at 7:32 p.m., and accepted for.the record,
the Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in Town Hall, and the
Ithaca Journal on September 29, 1997, and October 1, 1997, together with the Secretary's Affidavit of Service
by Mail of said Notice upon the various neighbors of each of the properties under discussion, as appropriate,
upon the Clerks of the City of Ithaca and the Town of Ithaca, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of
Planning, upon the Tompkins County Commissioner of Public Works, and upon the applicants and /or agents, as
appropriate, on October 1, 1997. (Affidavit of Posting and Publication is hereto attached as Exhibit 91.)
• Chairperson Wilcox read the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as y
required b the New York
a
State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control.
AGENDA ITEM: PERSONS TO BE HEARD:
Donald Stephenson, 936A East Shore Drive, stated that he would like to call to the Planning Board's
attention the possibility and opportunity to receive money from New York State from the Environmental Bond
Act Fund, that was voted in by public referendum last November. That item on the ballot amounted to
approximately $400 million for the entire State of New York.
Board Member Candace Cornell asked Mr. Stephenson which grant he was thinking of.
Mr. Stephenson stated that he was thinking of grants that could improve the Ithaca basin of Cayuga
Lake. Some of his neighbors have lived along the shores of Cayuga Lake's Ithaca basin for 50 years, and they,
have seen the water go from swimable, deep, and clean to unswimable because it is filled with sediments. This
past summer the foot of the lake stunk. It smelled like rotting sewage, according to one of the Assistant Town
Engineers. Jerry Smith from the Cayuga Heights Waste Water Treatment Plant visited the water edge when it
smelled bad, and found that the bacterial contamination including E. coil was off the chart. It was too
numerous to count. This has been an especially dry summer, and the sewer plant operators mentioned they
have been running up to code. They have not done anything wrong. Admittedly, the sewer plant could be
improved. The sediments that end up filling Cavuga Lake at the foot of the lake could be minimized. Nutrients
that run off from farm livestock and from fertilizers and pesticide applications could be reduced with a little
planning, possibly zoning. This might fit very well with the project that will be discussed later tonight
(Discussion on the Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan). Mr. Stephenson stated that he is proposing to write
a proposal for money from this account to improve Cayuga Lake water quality. To bring Cavuga Lake back to
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 2 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
when it was swimable at Stewart Park. He would like to seek the Planning Board's endorsement, and would
like an opportunity to be on the Board's agenda at a future date.
Board Member Cornell stated that there are a number of groups working on this problem. Ms. Cornell
asked Mr. Stephenson if he has contacted any of those groups.
Mr. Stephenson stated that he has been in touch with just about everyone and that he has been given
names of others to network with about this. So far nothing has come up in a way of a competing grant.
Board Member Cornell asked what about a grant for those groups to work together.
Mr. Stephenson stated that would be satisfactory.
Board Member Cornell asked if this would need a tax exempt status.
Mr. Stephenson stated that depends upon %which agency does this. If it is in the $10 million range, like
what he would be proposing, it should be a municipality or an established environmental organization to
administer the grant.
Board Member Cornell stated that she applauds the interest in this issue. A cooperative effort with
other groups and Mr. Stephenson's ideas 1,vould be a good way to successfully receive the grant.
Mr. Stephenson stated that he lives in the Cayuga Lake basin, and does not want the Planning Board to
confuse his motives. He wants to work with as many people, and a better application can be achieved by
including as many different groups as possible.
Board Member Cornell stated that in terms of sedimentation load, there are a number of groups that are
working on that issue because they work on the farms, building, etc.
Director of Planning Jonathan Kanter asked Mr. Stephenson if there is a time frame for applying for the
current round of grants.
Mr. Stephenson stated that would be October 20th.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that this issue would be a whole agenda item to discuss. It would be
a good idea to discuss it more fully, but there is a full agenda for tonight. Persons to be heard is for fairly short
topics, and this is obviously a very long discussion item that the Planning Board does not want to short change.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Planning Board has responsibilities to others who are scheduled for
tonight's agenda.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the time frame involved with the grant seems like a very
difficult task to coordinate with the different groups involved and interested to apply for this round. Mr. Kanter
stated that the Town of Ithaca is participating with all of the Cayuga Lake Waterfront Communities, County,
City. and all the other municipalities along the lake on the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. This
seems like the type of thing that would be best coordinated by the County as well, but it is also something that
• the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program will be getting into in terms of studying the overall lake
characteristics in terms of the water quality and land uses.y
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 3 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
Director of Engineering Daniel Walker stated that currently in place is a Watershed Steering
Committee that is coordinated by the County Health Department that is setting up guidelines for watersheds.
The Cavuga Lake water supplies most of the Town of Ithaca. It may also become more important to the City of
Ithaca as time goes on. That study is set up to look at the water sedimentation problems. and that would be a
good place to start. Mr. Stephenson should contact John Anderson at the Health Department for further
information on this Committee. The Tompkins County Sewer /Water Conservation District may be taking an
active role in that issue. They are looking at specific projects being funded on Six Mile Creek for the sediment
problems in the Town of Danby, Town of Dryden, and Town of Caroline, which impacts the City's watershed
significantly. There has been a lot of coordination for protecting Cayuga Lake as a viable watershed source.
Mr. Stephenson stated that he would like to use all the information he could gather, and come up with
something for the October deadline; just to call their attention for the next allocation. This would also start
getting the kinks out of the procedures. There have been quite a number of studies that were relevant and are
ready to be applied. This grant is for projects only, not for plans. There have already been a number of plans,
so now there should be a project to get underway.
Board Member Cornell stated that the project to clean up the water quality would help the homeowners
and the natural environment. The Planning Board applauds Mr. Stephenson's concerns.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that it would be impossible to get something together before the October
20th deadline.
Mr. Stephenson stated that he would do whatever he can, but he would work with whoever he could put
something together.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that for the Town of Ithaca to officially to endorse a grant
application like that it would need to be authorized by the Town Board, and the Town Board does not met again
until November 6th.
Mr. Stephenson stated that some of the agencies that administer the grants are very cooperative at
working with not - for - profits and municipalities. Thee would like to see the money go to the best things. For
them to have something on the table when they start allocating money during this round would be helpful for
the next round. Thank you for your time and attention.
AGENDA ITEM: SEOR DETERMINATION. CARROCCIA SUBDIVISION, 104 ENFIELD
FALLS ROAD:
Chairperson Wilcox duly opened the above- mentioned matter at 7:45 p.m., and read aloud from the
Agenda.
Paul Carroccia, 104 Enfield Falls Road. stated that the subdivision is to divide some land from the
house. He has been trying to sell the whole parcel, and has been trying for years. He decided to subdivide 2.5
acres with the house and sell the 15 acres separately. There is no project or building to be constructed at this
time. As far as he is concerned, what he is proposing v* 111 not create any environmental problems.
MOTION made by Herbert Finch, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 4 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of environmental
significance in accordance with the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act for the above
referenced action as proposed and, therefore, neither a Long Environmental Assessment Form, nor an
Environmental Impact Statement will be required.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the environmental report indicates that the property consists of
abandoned agricultural lands. The property is located across from the Robert Treman State Park entrance,
which is an important area to consider in terms of any future development that may occur, but again there are
no proposals at this time. This subdivision would create one new lot where one new house could be built.
There being no further discussion. Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote.
AYES - Wilcox, Cornell, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Bell.
NAYS - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
(NOTE: The adopted resolution is hereto attached as Exhibit 92.)
Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the SEQR Determination for Carroccia Subdivision at 104 Enfield
Falls Road at 7:48 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF PRELIMINARY AND FINAL SUBDIVISION
APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION OF TOWN OF ITHACA TAX PARCEL NO. 33 -1-
9.2, +/- 17.14 ACRES IN SIZE, INTO TWO LOTS, +/- 14.62 ACRES AND +/- 2.515 ACRES IN SIZE
RESPECTIVELY, LOCATED AT 104 ENFIELD FALLS ROAD RESIDENCE DISTRICT R -30
PAUL AND CLAIRE CARROCCIA, OWNERS/APPLICANTS:
Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 7:49 p.m., and read aloud from the
Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above.
Attorney for the Town, John Barney stated that the purchaser (Mr. Brown) of this property is being
represented by his office.
Chairperson Wilcox opened the Public Hearing.
Elsie McMillan, 812 Elmira Road, stated that much of her farm adjoins the property of Paul Carroccia.
She has some concerns about the rumors she heard about Mr. Brown's (new owner) intention of the property.
She sees this as a picture book of what the problems are for the Town of Ithaca's Planning and Zoning. Mr.
Carroccia 's property is close to the road and kept nicely moved. It is a nice piece of open green space. It used
to be farmed by Mr. Osburn. The Planning Board is here to discuss an Open Space Plan. To her the Town
Planning Board and the Town Board need to be very conscious of what is going to happen there. This property
is exactly across a small two lane road from the new entrance to Robert Treman State Park. The property is in
clear view of the Route 13 traffic. There is also water and sewer past it, and it is expensive to hang onto the
property to have it just be lawn. She is very sympathetic to Mr. Carroccia in having to sell the land. Whoever
• purchases the property needs to do something with the property to realize a profit or to make it pay for itself.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 5
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
OCTOBER 7, 1997
• Board Member Cornell asked if the Planning Board is just looking at a subdivision with no project in mind.
Chairperson Wilcox responded. yes.
Ms. McMillan stated that she thinks this is like a text book case that the Planning Board is presented
with. Ms. McMillan stated that she was curious to kno« when the property is purchased by Mr. Brown, if it
would come under close scrutiny.
Attorney Barney stated that only if Mr. Brown builds more than one house.
Ms. McMillan stated that this is a perfect example of what this is all about.
Chairperson Wilcox asked if anyone else from the public wished to be heard. No one spoke.
Chairperson Wilcox closed the Public Hearing, and asked if anyone was prepared to offer a motion.
MOTION made by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
1. That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby waives certain requirements for Preliminary and Final
Subdivision Approval, as shown on the Preliminary and Final Subdivision Checklist, having
determined from the materials presented that such waiver will result in neither a significant alteration
• of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board, and
2. That the Planning Board hereby grants Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed
subdivision, located at 104 Enfield Falls Road and encompassing 17.14 +/- acres in area, into two lots,
14.62 +/- acre and 2.515 +/- acre in size respectiyel�., as shown on the survey entitled, "Proposed
Subdivision and Survey Map of Lands at 104 Enfield Falls Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York" prepared by Howard R. Schlieder, N.Y.S.P.E. & L.S. dated July 29, 1997, and amended
August 29, 1997; subject to the following condition:
a. Submission to the Town Planning Department of a Mortgagee's Certificate: a certificate signed
and sealed by the mortgagor(s), if any. to the effect that the mortgagee's consents to the plat
and the dedications and restrictions shown on or referred to on the plat.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board hereby xN aive
fee in lieu of such land dedication, in regard to
presented that a proper case does not exist for
proposed plat, and that such waiver will result
s the requirement for any park land reservation or payment of a
this subdivision approval, having determined from the materials
requiring that a park or parks be suitably located as part of the
in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision
control nor the policies enunciated or implied by the Town Board. The Planning Board reserves the right
however, to consider such park land reservation or payment of the fee in lieu thereof in regard to any future
subdivisions of either parcel which are the subject of this approval.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that condition 2a" for a mortgagor's certificate should be deleted.
Mr. Kanter asked Mr. Carroccia if the land is free of any loans.
•
U
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 6 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
Mr. Carroccia responded, yes.
Director of Engineering Walker stated that on the survey map it shows a little parcel by the stream in
the back of the property. Mr. Walker asked Mr. Carroccia if that is a separate parcel or was that the wav it was
surveyed in the original deed.
Mr. Carroccia responded, yes.
Director of Engineering Walker stated that the deed description had it as two separate parcels, and
asked if this was all one tax parcel now.
Mr. Carroccia responded, yes.
Attorney Barney asked Mr. Carroccia if Mr. Brown was to receive the little strip of land to the west.
Mr. Carroccia responded, yes.
Attorney Barney stated
eliminate the line between "Par
the property denoted "N /F Jane
1" and "lands to be split ", such
the Planning Board."
that a new condition "2a'' should read "The survey map should be redrawn to
gel I" and "Parcel 2" as presently shown so that the .286 acre parcel adjacent to
R.F. Mead" is included with Parcel 1 and there be shown only two lots, "Parcel
redrawing to be accomplished before signing of the plat by the Chairperson of
There being no further discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote.
AYES - Wilcox, Cornell, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Bell.
NAYS - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
(NOTE: The adopted resolution is hereto attached as Exhibit #3.)
Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the Carroccia Subdivision Approval at 7:59 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN OF
ITHACA TOWN BOARD REGARDING THE DRAFT TOWN OF ITHACA PARK RECREATION
AND OPEN SPACE PLAN (MARCH 10, 1997)•
Chairperson Wilcox declared the above -noted matter duly opened at 8:00 p.m., and read aloud from the
Notice of Public Hearings as posted and published and as noted above. Chairperson Wilcox opened the Public
Hearing.
Tony Ingraham, 113 Nelson Road. stated that he is the Conservation Educator for the Finger Lakes
State Park, and he would like to address the State Parks in the Town of Ithaca within the draft Park, Recreation.
and Open Space Plan. First of all he would like to say that this is an excellent plan, and the motivations behind
• the plan are outstanding as the Town looks at the 21 st Century looming. The County is only going to get more
developed and populated. The State Parks (Robert Treman State Park and Buttermilk Falls State Park) are
located within the Town of Ithaca. They have been here a very Ion; time, and Town residents and residents
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 7 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
. from the County, ev(
foresight of the Treman
for the initial acreage
to the public, and al
have become more a
grown. The State Par
1920s and 1930s. Th
that there are the State
parks. These parks
and playgrounds. These
general recreation has
fields, picnic areas, b
resources that the pa
and is in the recommended
purchased and planned
agricultural and rural.
1915 while the build
accessible and the need
the Tremans' comments
and waterfalls, and they
area, but they could I
Park people could lit
There is a real strong
• Board Member
not be on private land
buffer around the park
Mr. Ingraham
literally throw a stone
land is that close.
in throughout the region. state, and the world, do visit these parks. The Parks were the
family (Robert and Laura Treman) approximately 80 years ago to donate those lands
for the parks to the State for public preservation so these places would become available
so preserve their unique charms as they do still today. The Town, County, and the City
and more dependent upon the State Parks for recreation needs particularly as population has
Parks have grown a little bit. but not very much from the early days of park acquisition in the
The State Parks have been adding land ever since. The County Board of Representatives feel
Parks, so why do they need County parks. The same thing could be said about Town
were preserved because they were great areas for general recreation needs like ball fields
are really scenic parks that have natural treasures. The development of these parks for
s been very conservative. The State Parks have camping, hiking, swimming, football
but they are secondary goals to the preservation and protection of the scenic and natural
parks were created for. The upper section of Buttermilk Falls is within the Town of Ithaca
Conservation Zone area. The Parks are narrow corridors where lands were
in the County early in this century when most of the lands around them were
The population was much less at that time. Robert and Laura Treman saw this back in
building of roads and the general availability of automobile that these areas would be more
to protect them and preserve them as development moved out in the County. Some of
could be used now in regards to these parks. There are corridors around the streams
are not very wide corridors. Subsequently people could walk for miles through a wild
iterally be within a stone throw of private land. In fact, in upper Buttermilk Falls State
literally stand in the boundary of the park and toss a stone to land on the trail by the lake.
need to protect and create some buffer areas.
Corn
ell stated that Mr. Ingraham mentioned that there is no place where people could
and then throw a stone on the park land. By definition even if there was a 100 acre
it could still be done.
stated that what he was stating. for instance, at upper Buttermilk Falls people could
that would reach a park trail where people are. It is not obvious on the trail that private
Board Member Cornell stated that the other criticism she hears is why doesn't the park purchase
buffers or plan for them.
Mr. Ingraham stated
slow process, and with State
acquisition. It is not a real
easements that the Town mig
that the State Parks needs help from the Town. Park land acquisition is a very
cut backs in funding there is a priority list State wide of open space for park land
practical approach to wait for the State to buy all the lands or perhaps get the
ht be able to do in this open space plan.
Board Member Cornell asked if it is as ease to do as people may think.
Mr. Ingraham stated that it is not ease. He is not involved in park land acquisition, and some of the
staff may be able to speak to that better later on in the meeting. It is not a practical goal in terms of the needs
of these areas. He has lived here since 1955. and just watching what has been happening in Buttermilk Falls
State Park, it seems to be within the area that is the most development pressured. Some of the development and
• plans are closing in on the State Parks, and it is inevitable that the development will be right up to the park
boundaries. Indeed some of the proposed developments had names that reflect the closeness to Buttermilk
Falls. Everyone loves to go to the park with a wonderful experience of walking in the nature and seeing
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 8 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
• wildlife. People feel that it may be nice to live next to one of the State Parks, so that becomes a selling point.
The State Parks are being endangered of being loved to death by people that want to live right next to the park.
A developer or land owner would say it is a selling point that the property is located next to a State Park. That
would be okay if there was an adequate buffer for such people living near the park so they would not be so
close to the park. For instance in upper Buttermilk Falls around Lake Treman if there were people living up to
the boundary of private land as it exists now, there could be lawnmowers, cars, radios, dog barking,
construction happening, etc., throughout much of the year. It would take away some of the special experience
that people could have at the parks. People could walk around the trail of Lake Treman and get a feeling so
close to the City of Ithaca that they are in the wilderness. Some time ago Buttermilk Falls started some walks
to Lake Treman to see beavers. So many people have not seen beavers in the wild. These beavers are not shy
of humans, and they've seen a lot of people walking around the lake. It is a special experience. Years ago he
took a group of people to Lake Treman for a "Leave it to Beaver Walk ". There were approximately 80 people.
Some people were concerned that the children would make so much noise that the beavers would be chased
away. At the top of the hill before going to the lake, he told the children to be real quiet if they wanted to see
the beavers. The children were very quiet, and all 80 people saw the beavers. There are other wildlife around
Lake Treman. The recommendation of the State Parks extends the Town's excellent recommendations of
Conservation Zoning as well as the Purchase of Development Rights from the current recommendation here
which is approximately equal to the eastern park boundary to Route 96B to King Road. That is the area of most
probable heavy development considering the proposals that have come through in the last few years.
Board Member Cornell asked Mr. Ingraham if he was asking for buffers around all the State Parks.
Would that be the best place in a park plan or another planning instrument.
• Mr. Ingraham stated that he is not a park planner; but a Conservation Educator. The Town has an
opportunity right now to take an action with the Open Space Plan to increase the area around these sensitive
resources that could create a buffer area. As it has in other parts of the plan this a widening of the buffer that
the Town is already proposing, which he thinks the Town has an opportunity right now to do. This is not
something that could be easily done by the State Parks. This is also important in terms of protection of wildlife
habitat. The variety and the diversity of wildlife in Buttermilk Falls State Park is one of the greatest in all the
parks in the region. Not only do people see things like beaver, water fowl use the lake for migrations, there are
coyotes that live here. Occasionally there is a bear seen near Buttermilk Creek that comes out of Michigan
Hollow Forest, and Buttermilk Creek is wild most of the way right down to the park. In fact some of the areas
up stream are wild. The best wildflower trail was renamed the Bear Trail because bears have been seen there.
It is a wildlife corridor that goes through the Town in this area. The Bear Trail is the premier wildflower trail
in all of the parks. Every Mother's Day there is a wildflower walk. There are many sensitive aesthetic values
as well as ecological values that are represented in this area, and to maintain their integrity and quality they
really want the Town to consider expanding the buffer zone through Conservation Zoning and Purchase of
Development Rights provisions that are in the plans to Route 96B to West King Road. In 1999, it will be the
75th Anniversary of the State Parks, and the 75th Anniversary of the Buttermilk Falls State Park. Wouldn't it
be a wonderful birthday gift to give the park more protection. Thank you.
Board Member Gregory Bell stated that on the eastern boundary of the park shown on the map supplied
in the letter from John Clancy, it is showing some areas as Conservation Zoning and other areas for Purchase of
Development Rights. Mr. Bell asked why is Mr. Clancy making that distinction.
• Mr. Ingraham stated that he cannot answer that for Mr. Clancy. The State Parks planner is here tonight,
and perhaps she may be able to answer that question.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 9 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
• Sue Poelvoorde; Natural Resources Planner for New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and
Historic Preservation in the Finger Lakes Region, stated that she could followup with Mr. Ingraham's
presentation. The Finger Lakes State Parks mailed a letter to the Town that John Clancy wrote. Mr. Clancy
was requesting a few changes or modifications to the Open Space Plan. As Mr. Ingraham stated the State Parks
would like to see the Town of Ithaca consider extending the Conservation Zone area out to Stone Quarry Road
and Route 96B. Also onsider looking at the area south of West King Road between West King Road and Route
96B as an area to consider for the Purchase of Development Rights. Ms. Poelvoorde stated that in response to
Mr. Bell's question, that distinction that actually focuses in on that area is because of the Lake Treman area and
the upper area of Buttermilk Falls State Park. Much of that area is not developed yet. Moderate to large scale
development whether it be clustered or just conventional zoning could have a significant impact on the upper
area of the park. The Planning Board and the State Parks have received many letters on a subdivision that has
already been approved or is in the process of being approved by the Town, that the concerns are concentrating
such large development by a park could have some significant effects on that, not only environmental but also
the quality of experience that park patrons could have at upper Buttermilk State Park. This is why the State
Park has requested an additional layer at that particular end of the park to be considered by the Town Planning
Board and the Town Board. (John Clancy's letter is hereto attached as Exhibit 94.)
Board Member Bell stated that does not actually answer his question. He totally agrees with Ms.
Poelvoorde about preserving the buffer. His question is more technical than that, and that the State Parks is
proposing two different legal statuses for the two pieces of land. Mr. Bell asked Ms. Poelvoorde why she sees
one appropriate for one part of it and not the other.
. Ms. Poelvoorde stated that it could be done for both. The Stone Quarry area could be less developed
than the area off of Route 96B and West King Road. which is flatter at the top and could be more intensely
developed. In response to Ms. Cornell's comments. the State Parks does try to purchase property when they
can, but there is not a lot of resources. The Environmental Protection Fund is now available, so it is a Bond
Act, but that is spread across all of New York State, so they need to compete for the dollars, too.
Board Member Cornell stated that a lot of people mentioned that the State Parks should buy the buffers
that they need.
Ms. Poelvoorde stated that it is not that easy. The other issue is that we would like to be able to work
with the municipalities. When the State Parks purchase property they are often criticized for taking property
off the tax rolls. There are mechanisms that the Planning Department and Planning Boards have found to be
able to protect the resources of Towns and communities; and retain property on the tax rolls, so if there are
ways that the State Parks could work with the ToNvn thev would like to do that in addition to being able to
purchase property. There is a combination of things that could be done. The State Parks does support the
proposals in the Open Space Plan, and encourage the Town Board and the Planning Board to adopt the
mechanism and resources.
John Schroeder, 618 Stewart Avenue, stated that he would be reading a resolution from the Citizen's
Planning Alliance. The consensus of the people in the organization was that this was an incredible job of
planning the Open Space Plan. (Prepared statement that Mr. Schroeder read is hereto attached as Exhibit 95.)
Chairperson Wilcox asked Mr. Schroeder ho\� many people put this resolution together.
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 10 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
• Mr. Schroeder stated that the resolution was prepared by a subcommittee that the Citizen's Planning
Alliance Committee has that is concerned with issues related to Sprawl. There are probably 12 active
members, and it was considered by the entire core group of the Committee, which would be 20 to 22 people.
Wilfred Drew, 301 Sheffield Road, stated that he knows what the gentleman was talking about when he
was talking about Buttermilk Falls State Park. because that was his grandfather's farm before it became a park.
Mr. Drew stated that he was at the Open Space Plan meeting at the Alternative School. There were
approximately eight people there, and there was only one person that spoke in favor of this park draft as it is
drawn up. Everyone else was against the draft plan in many ways. For example, West Haven Road has two
proposed parks in the Open Space Plan within a mile area with beautiful homes with big back vards, why would
they need a park. They have lots of places to play. His children all played in the back yard for years, and all
the neighbors played baseball there. The big thing that bothers him is the people that would get the least use
out of this program are the people who it is going to hurt the most, and that would be the retired people. The
Town is only saying that it will cost everyone $35.00 a vear. Well when the retirees only receive two to three
percent increase a year in income, and groceries and medical bills are going up, that he asks the Town to take a
big deep thought in where they would be going. In the coming years, it is going hit the elderly harder than it
hits the elderly right now because Social Security is getting in bad shape along with Medicare. Mr. Drew stated
that he is asking the Planning Board to please consider what it is going to cost the elderly. Thank you.
Yarrow Nelson, 327 West King Road, stated that he agrees with Mr. Schroeder's comments about
commending the Board for considering this plan, and for all the good work that was done. It is great that the
Town is going this plan. He thinks even given economic considerations, it is important for everyone to
• radically look at where development should occur, and what are the special places that need to be set aside. He
is in favor of the plan and looked at the map with the green lines, and it looks good, but there are a couple spots
that he has particular experience with that he would like to convince the Town to include in this Open Space
Plan. One is the head waters of Owl Gorge, which is a very special gorge.
Assistant Town Planner George Frantz pointed out on an enlarged map for the public where Owl Gorge
and Holly Creek are located.
Mr. Nelson stated that Owl Gorge is probably within the Town of Ithaca the place that feels most like
the wilderness of any place that he has been to in the Town of Ithaca, and it is a very special spot. The head
waters of it as far as he knows are not protected by the current map that is being shown to the public. Mr.
Nelson stated that the map he has at home does not show any open space buffer planned along the eastern
portion of the Buttermilk Falls State Park boundary. In other areas there are buffers proposed, but as far as he
knows there are no buffers there. The State Park boundary is the boundary of the Conservation Zone. It seems
a little odd to him because it seems like there is credit for setting the park aside as a Conservation Zone when it
is already a State Park. It makes it look like this plan is protecting that corridor. but that land is already in the
State Park.
Board Member Cornell stated that the enlarged map represents protective lands that are protected from
a number of sources.
Assistant Town
boundaries of Buttermilk
head waters of Holly Cref
Mr. Nelson asked
Planner Frantz stated that Holly Creek north of West King Road is within the
Falls State Park. The issue at hand is the fact that south of West King Road to the
hk is no longer within the boundaries of the State Park.
if there is any buffer along that border in the Open Space Plan.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 11 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
• Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that there is a proposal on Map 8 -1 that actually extends
Conservation Zoning at least up to and to the other side of Holly Creek south of West King Road.
Mr. Nelson stated that approximately ten years ago, when David Auble proposed a development for the
corner, that the land was walked to check out the head waters of Holly Creek there. There is quite a bit of
wetland area around the creek there, and it is very appropriate that be included in a Conservation Zone of some
kind as a buffer to the park, and to extend it as far as possible. Then going further south it gets more into the
areas that Mr. Ingraham was speaking of, where it encroaches upon Lake Treman. In any case that entire
section along the east side of upper Buttermilk Falls State Park seems as though it does not have adequate
buffer zones. He would like to the Planning Board to consider this section.
There is another area, that is a global planning idea for him, which is the really excellent the way Six
Mile Creek corridor is protected and the Buttermilk Falls corridor is protected so people could hike from the
City of Ithaca into the Town of Ithaca. A dream would be that there be a spoke and wheel arrangement for a
way to connect these areas further out, and it is not completely unfeasible to think of a corridor that goes from
upper Buttermilk Falls State Park to the Six Mile Creek area. What he did not see on this map was something
to connect to the Eldridge Preserve to connect to the Six Mile Creek corridor, and then work on getting set
asides as development occurs on the other side. so there would be corridor to Buttermilk Falls State Park.
Board Member Cornell asked Mr. Nelson for biological reasons or for hiking.
Mr. Nelson responded, both as a wildlife corridor and in terms of green ways for hiking.
• Chairperson Wilcox stated that Mr. Nelson expressed his appreciation to the Planning Board for the
draft Plan. The appreciation really belongs to the Planning Staff, especially Mr. Frantz who did the work.
Barbara Wilcox - Thuesen, 203 Hampton Road. stated that she thinks the Town has done a great job in
protecting the watershed into Cayuga Lake. She is really concerned about Cayuga Lake and taking care of that
and keeping the integrity of that. She hopes the Planning Board would very vigorously and aggressively pursue
any regional planning that is done in regards to Cayuga Lake. The other thing she hopes that the Planning
Board would put into place is the process where the Town could work with and educate the different property
owners on possible solutions, so there is no adverse effects particularly the farmers who have planned to make
use of subdividing as part of their inherence and estate plans. The Town should not add additional costs to
them by dragging things out three or four years. Thank you.
James Sharp, 319 Second Street, stated that he is a native of Ithaca and he is also the President of the
Ithaca College Environmental Society. From both of these perspectives, he strongly support the current draft of
the Open Space Plan. The Conservation Districts that are being proposed are indeed important areas to
preserve. He also supports the development of a bike path network. The existence of such a network would
simplify the task of getting to school, work. to his parents home on South Hill, and downtown to shop. He is
also a member of Ithaca College's Traffic Policy Committee, and from that perspective, making bicycle
transportation more convenient would help reduce the extreme pressure that car owners are putting on the
administration to replace campus open space for parking lots.
John Yntema, 993 Danby
(Mr. Yntema's prepared statement
• Phyllis Baker, 411 Bostwi
may be the most wonderful plan in
Road. stated that he has a prepared statement to read the Planning Board.
is hereto attached as Exhibit # 6.)
;k Road, stated that she is one of the farmers that cannot pay for this plan. It
the world. but they cannot afford it. Unless there is some way to finance
n
�J
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 12 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
this plan other than through property taxes, there is no way that their farm would be able to exist. Ms. Ross
informed her that she has farmers every where that cannot pay their school taxes. She knows that they cannot
pay any add on. She read the Ithaca Journal today that stated that $35.00 or $38.00 for the average house,
which is probably $80,000 to $100,000 homes. She has not been able to find out on what basis of their
assessment that they would be expected to pay for this. Ms. Baker asked if this would account for land use
values or full valuations. If people stop and think about it there is no way that they can pay what would be
required of them for this Town plan. The Town is more ingenious than she is, and she has all she can do to
keep their ship a float without knowing the Town cannot finance this, but as the Town knows there are very few
farmers in the Town of Ithaca. Another farm is going out in April, and that will leave two farms left. Thev
have already made their donation when the Town stole the open space five years ago. and she does not think
that they should have to pay again. She hopes that the Town could come up with another way to do this that
would not extract one or two families their livelihood and life. Ms. Baker stated that she stood before the
Board before to tell what is really going on with agriculture. and had great difficulty. Everyone was fat and fill,
so they do not want to listen. In a few years there will probably not be any farms in the Town of Ithaca, and she
thinks if the Town wants the open space, the Town should not run the farms out by taxing so much for the park
plan. If this was to feed hungry children or clothe them. the Town would probably receive more support. In
the booklets about parks, it states that the Town would have such an affluent population that they want
recreation. She does not understand why they should have to pay for most of it. Please consider that. Thank
you.
Board Member James Ainslie asked if the sales tax revenue pays the Town Highway Department to
keep the Parks that are now in existence.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that lie does not know the details of the budget, but yes, the Town
Parks Department now has a staff of four people. The funding comes out of the General Fund, which is a
combination of sales tax and property tax.
Ms. McMillan stated that she is a member of the Agriculture Committee. She wanted to remind
everyone that the recommendation of Purchase of Development Rights, that a lot of people seem to think it is
the right answer to solve people's problems. When it came down to naming figures and what the purchase
price of development rights might be it really did not amount to enough to be very attractive to the people she
talked to or to her. It was considered that the Purchase of Development Rights would be voluntary. She can
conceive of people owning a significant amount of propem who would be comfortable enough to be happy to
do that, but there are quite a few people who are not. To offer Purchase of Development Rights does not
automatically take that property out of the room of development because it is a voluntary program.
Dan Hoffman, 306 Giles Street, stated that he is here to represent the Six Mile Creek Advisory
Committee. This Committee was established b%- the Cite of Ithaca that includes slots for City Officials,
residents, and representatives from the Town of Ithaca. He would be advising the Planning Board of the Six
Mile Creek Natural Area that includes the watershed and other lands adjacent that lie mostly within the Town
of Ithaca. Mr. Hoffman stated that he would be reading from a prepared statement from the Six Mile Creek
Advisory Committee. (Mr. Hoffman's prepared statement is hereto attached as Exhibit 47.)
Board Member Ainslie asked if there is any money at this point for any development rights.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz asked Mr. Ainslie if he means in the Town Budget.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 13
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
OCTOBER 7, 1997
• Board Member Ainslie stated that he means available within the next year. Mr. Ainslie asked if there is
any money that the Town could get their hands on.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the first step is for the Town Board to set up a program if the
Town decides to go with it. The State Department of Agriculture and Markets has funding available both from
State and Federal sources. The Federal allocation for this year is $35 million. The State Environmental
Protection Fund he believes has $40 million available for Purchase of Development Rights programs.
Board Member Ainslie asked if that would be for all of New York State.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, yes. However, the Town of Ithaca is well ahead of the curve
in terms of the Purchase of Development Rights. There are several counties that have had it for several y ears
where they have funded it themselves. Other counties are considering it.
Board Member Ainslie asked Mr. Frantz if he feels confident that the Town is in a good position of
receiving these development rights.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that he does not think it is fair to ask Mr. Frantz if he feels confident
or not. The Town Board would make sure that the Planning Staff vigorously pursues any possible outside
funding. The money is there, and this is the time to tn- and get the grants for that money.
Paul Vidovich, 429 North Geneva Street, stated that he wants to express his appreciation for the Park
• and Open Space Plan as it exists. He regularly bikes up to Ithaca College where he goes to school. Some
people here have done that before, and find it a healthy alternative to gasoline powered transportation. The
roads are not very safe and they do not feel comfortable on Route 96B from the Commons to Ithaca College.
Hudson Street is an unsafe street especially in the beginning from Route 96B as there are a row of cars parked
there normally which is not very safe. Going up and down Hudson Street could be hair raising some times, but
he enjoys it in some ways. Mr. Vidovich stated that he wanted to express his support for the proposed bicycle
paths, especially the one that parallels Aurora Street from Buttermilk Falls to downtown Ithaca, and also the
bike path from East King Road to the Six Mile Recreationway. He also agrees with the rezoning of the area
east of Treman Lake and Upper Buttermilk Falls State Park for Conservation Zoning. He does not know
whether the land has been sold for development rights if a subdivision is proposed there. If it is the case that
land cannot be rezoned then purchasing development rights for the back lots that would be adjacent to the park
is important in preserving the natural integrity of the area. He agrees to the sentiment for rezoning Eldridge
Wilderness Area along with Holly Creek.
Board Member Bell asked Mr. Vidovich if he has any thoughts on the Planning Alliance's comments
about the draft Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan as to whether it should reach the western entrance to
Ithaca College, and is the draft adequate or not.
Mr. Vidovich stated that he was not fully aware of the plan until it was read before, and he does not
think as it exists now that the bike access up Route 96B and Aurora Street is sufficient. Something there is not
quite right. He is for making that more accessible for bikes if that makes commuting from downtown to Ithaca
College more accessible.
• Board Member Bell stated that it is preen- hard to make Route 96B accessible for bicycles.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 14
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
OCTOBER 7, 1997
• Mr. Vidovich stated that was correct because the houses are right on the road, so the road cannot be
widened. Bicycles are not allowed to ride on the sidewalk, and it puts the bicyclists in an awkward position.
They either ride the sidewalks and get people's anger for using the sidewalks, or riding unsafely on Route 96B.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the Planning Alliance Committee raised the issue that the
proposed bike paths shown in the draft plan are recreational facilities. One of the next big projects that the
Town is looking at is the Transportation Plan, which would address more transportation type linkages. such as
the connection to East Hill Plaza. The Planning Staff could look at the Plan to have a spur off Aurora Street to
Upper Buttermilk Falls State Park that connects the Ithaca College entrance. It will not be a direct route but it
may still be far more attractive.
Mr. Vidovich stated that would be a good idea for a bike commuter.
Chris Gulick, 325 Cascadilla Street, stated that he is speaking on behalf of the Transportation
Alternative Group (TAG) of the Ithaca College Community. He also bicycles to work and Ithaca College. He
agrees that the draft Plan is good, but there are a few things just as everyone else mentioned. There should be
adequate spaces for bicycles on all Town of Ithaca roads. Suggestions from people mentioned the
Transportation Plan that extends sidewalks to City sidewalks especially near Ithaca College and Coddington
Road. He strongly supports having a bike path along the eastern side of Ithaca College from King Road
connecting to Coddington Road. Also TAG would like to support the proposed bike /pedestrian path from
Aurora Street to Upper Buttermilk Falls State Park. Another suggestion would be the extension of Purchase of
Development Rights to undeveloped lands that are shown as existing or proposed agricultural zones. The areas
• targeted for the Purchase of Development Rights programs are also to be placed under Conservation Zoning
while the program is being implemented. Mr. Gulick stated that when the Town discusses the Transportation
Plan he would like to help out.
Kara Hagedom Member of the Town's Consen-ation Board, stated that she was asked to read the
Conservation Board's comments to the Planning Board. Ms. Hagedorn read from a prepared statement. (Ms.
Hagedom's prepared statement is hereto attached as Exhibit # 8.)
Elizabeth deProsse, Member of the Town's Conservation Board, stated that this is her own statement.
She would like to mention the fact that home owners /home purchasers need to be protected from developers
that neglect the fact that there are wetlands. Ms. deProsse stated that her next door neighbor cannot sell her
house because it was built where there used to be ice skating a generation ago.
Board Member Ainslie asked why couldn't the neighbor sell their home.
Ms. deProsse stated that her neighbor's house was built in a bog where people used to skate.
Ms. McMillan stated that a number of people have made the recommendation that since it may take
some time for the Purchase of Development Rights Program to start, in the meantime everything should be
zoned Conservation, so nothing could possibly go wrong until that program gets in place. That sounds like a
little taking to her, and it bothers her that something like that could be done. She especially does not want
people to think that is it possible to do if it is illegal to do it.
• Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Purchase of Developments as proposed is voluntary.
n
U
0
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
15
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
OCTOBER 7, 1997
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that Ms. McMillan's question is whether or not the zoning
provisions might constitute the taking.
Ms. McMillan stated that she heard several people suggest that, and she just wanted to clarify it.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that he received a phone call from Rodrick Elston of Fiddler
Road in June. Mr. Elston's home happens to be located roughly between the two parks of the Inlet Valley park
complex. Mr. Elston expressed his concerns about noise generated by the proposed baseball, soccer, and other
organized type athletic facilities in these parks. Mr. Elston's house happens to be at the top of Fiddler Road on
top of a hill in the middle of Inlet Valley. Just because of terrain conditions he could actually distinguish
individual voices and words spoken by persons who are either spectators or playing sports with the playing
fields being a half mile away at Buttermilk Falls State Park. Mr. Elston's concern is when the Town develops
the park, that the Town takes into fact that there are noise impacts.
Chairperson Wilcox asked if anyone else from the public wished to be heard. No one spoke.
Chairperson Wilcox closed the public hearing, and brought the matter back to the Board for further discussions.
Board Member Bell asked what is the Planning Board's role in adopting this recommendation to the
Town Board, and is the Town Board expecting the Planning Board to do a lot of revisions.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that if the Planning Board felt that there were any distinct revisions
that need to be recommended that would be okay, but another option would be to discuss it now and come back
to another meeting to address the concerns. The time frame on this draft plan is as follows: get a
recommendation back to the Town Board in time to set a Public Hearing with the Town Board to consider
adoption at their December meeting. Also the staff needs to put together any revisions people suggest, and the
environmental review needs to be put together between now and the Town Board's meeting in December.
Board Member Bell stated that there are so many comments suggested tonight that it is hard to deal
with the whole process tonight without looking into it further.
Board Member Ainslie asked if any entity in the Town had taken their adding machines to come up
with an amount of money needed for any specific item that is going to be presented.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, yes.
Board Member Ainslie asked how much money is it.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that it is listed in Chapter 9 of the Draft Plan for an idea of what
the Town may have to spend.
Board Member Ainslie asked if that includes the Town buying farmland for Purchase of Development
Rights, or is there a grant being proposed for that.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that there are no grants at this time.
• Board Member Ainslie asked how does the Town know what type of grant to propose unless there is
participation first.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 16 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16. 1997
40 Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that his recommendation to the Town would be to go for as much
grant money as possible, and the best thing to do is to anticipate 100 percent participation in the program. For
budgetary reasons it would be far better at the outset if the Town is making an application for a grant to tell
people that the Town expects $4 million for the Purchase of Development Rights Program. This is how the
Town expects to pay for it, and this is how much money the Town would like in assistance from the State of
New York or the Federal Government.
Board Member Ainslie stated that it seems like a lot of this is contingent upon whether the money is
there or not.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the cost of this plan including $38 per homeowner anticipates
the Town picking up the full tab for purchase of development rights. In any sense if the Town does not get the
100 percent participation it would be less than $38 per home owner per year. If the Town happens to get a $1
million grant, that would substantially reduce the cost of the program. It may be that the Town will receive a
grant for reimbursement of the cost of individual transactions. The State could say that the Town could have $1
million, but it is on a 50 -50 basis, and if the Town in 10 years has only acquired $700,000 worth of
development rights then the State is only going to pay the Town $350,000.
Board Member Ainslie asked if the Town has a grant in process.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, no. One primary reason is that the Plan has not been
adopted by the Town Board. The Town Board would need to adopt the plan and then further set up the
• program.
Board Member Cornell stated that the plan is essential to any grant money.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the grant application for this round of funding, which is under
the same umbrella from the State monies mentioned before for water quality, the deadline for the current round
is October 20th. The Town does not have the plan adopted yet, and are not able to officially apply for grants
yet. The Town knows what the programs are and what kinds of monies are available, there will probably be
two opportunities for applying for those type of grants each year for the next several years. There will be more
opportunities after adopting the plan to pursue those type of grants. The adoption of the plan is the first step
and then the Town could pursue grant monies. V1r. Kanter stated that he thinks the Town could receive a fair
amount of money from the grants, but the Planning Board needs to tell staff to pursue the grant.
Board Member Ainslie stated that his only concern is that the agricultural lands are left agricultural
lands by doing the Purchase of Development Rights program. That is on going as of now, and if people are
going to be allowed to sell their lands or building lots it cannot be ten years from now. S.ome of these people
need to have action pretty soon. y
Board Member Cornell stated that does not prohibit anyone from selling their land.
Attorney Barney stated that this does not sa}r that someone in that area cannot sell their land. This
would be a voluntary program that would allow people in those areas to transfer that privilege.
• Board Member Ainslie stated that the Town would not want someone to sell 250 acres of land above
(beyond) water and sewer and put in a development.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 17
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
• Chairperson Wilcox stated that if the area is zoned that way.
OCTOBER 7, 1997
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the Purchase of Development Rights is only one part of the
proposal. Another part is to modify the agricultural zoning on West Hill.
Board Member Ainslie stated that they turned down Alfred Eddy on agricultural land.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that lie is not talking about rezoning from Agricultural. He is
talking about taking what is currently zoned agricultural which is a large part of the West Hill, and the current
agricultural zone is basically like R -30. It is not much different from R -30. The Town Board just adopted a
law a few months ago clarifying that the Agricultural zone goes by the R -30 lot size and dimensional
requirements for all purposes. Right now, any lands in the current Agricultural zones could develop a
subdivision under R -30 density and lot size requirements. There is nothing in the plan that would stop that.
Board Member Ainslie asked if that would be only on road frontage.
Director of Planning Kanter responded, no. N/Ir. Kanter asked why would that be any different than
another parcel.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that the Town is not taking anything away from the farmers.
Director of Plar
• zoning, to change it so
agricultural zone would
related to farm activities
water into those areas to
•
ning Kanter stated that another proposal for the plan is to strengthen the agricultural
that there would be lower densities overall in agricultural areas. In other ways, the
be further strengthened to help farmers by allowing other kinds of uses that would be
that are not currently allowed. The Town would not intend to extend public sewer and
put further pressure for developing those areas.
Board Member Ainslie stated that the Town should not want a lot of houses on these agricultural lands
with septic tanks and wells.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that it will not be. but nonetheless these people own that land and have the
right to use that land consistent with the existing zoning. Thev are not going to be put on hold while they wait
to get money.
Attorney Barney stated that the Town Board in their current budget is allocating funds for potential use
as seed money for grants towards Purchase of Development Rights or for acquisition of lands through park land
depending upon whatever opportunities are there. Thee are starting to take budgetary steps to allow something
like this to happen. It is not a lot of money this year. but it is a beginning.
Board Member Kenerson stated that the Town needs to have a plan to make this system work. The
Planning Board has talked this plan rather heavily, and it is subject to change at any time.
MOTION made by Robert Kenerson, seconded by no one:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 18 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
isThat the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends to the Town Board that it adopt the draft
Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan, dated March 10, 1997, with the following suggested modification(s)
to said Plan:
a. Map 5 -1 be revised to show the Woolf Lane to Cass Park path referenced on p. 47 and
elsewhere in the Plan being located xNest of the Cayuga Medical Center;
oard Member Cornell stated that the overwhelming majority of all the comments that the Planning Board
received in terms of written comments, and some of the verbal comments received at various open meetings
that were held at the different schools is that there is a concern for extending some of the Conservation borders.
She knows the first versions of the map in this process. that there were conservation lands in the South Hill area
and in a few other areas, but they were taken off during the process of going through committees. She thinks
that the Conservation Board, for example, does a good job of outlining some of the ones that the Planning
Board should put back on again. If the Planning Board recommends this to the Town Board, it should add the
comments of the Conservation Board. She thinks that the Wiggins Development woke up a lot of people to the
fact that there could be developments next to the State Parks. She likes the plan, and she thinks the plan will be
a ticket for a lot of grants in the near future. This is the third Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan the Town
of Ithaca has had. Ms. Cornell stated that she would like the Planning Board to recommend that some areas be
added back on the map for Conservation Zoning. The Planning Board could go through that or leave it up to
the Town Board to do that.
Director of Planning Kanter asked if there are any specific areas that the Planning Board feels strongly
about to flag in particular.
Board Member Cornell stated that the lands around the State Parks need to be looked at for buffer
areas, and those areas should be expanded where appropriate. The Town should look at Cayuga Inlet more.
The Town should look at the bike /pedestrian path going to South Hill from downtown. Ms. Cornell stated that
she just returned from Germany. They do not like people to drive cars. They have very wide sidewalks that are
paved in red brick and plain brick, and red bricks are for the bicyclists and those areas are not allowed to be
walked on.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that the purpose of the paths in this plan is to get to and connect the
recreational areas and that needs to be separated from the Transportation Plan.
Board Member Cornell stated that some of the main purposes of the recreation ways are to transport
people to these areas.
Board Member Ainslie stated that he has talked to many people in his age group who cannot use this
type of thing. He does not know how it could be implemented, but they think there should be a user fee. Most
of the State Parks people need to pay to get in. Mr. Ainslie asked if anyone knows the proportion of the
number of people for the Town of Ithaca that use the bike paths and trails against the total population of the
Town of Ithaca.
Board Member Kenerson stated that it sounds like the Planning Board needs to rework this, and this
proposed resolution will not be passed tonight.
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 19 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED DECEMBER 16, 1997
• Board Member Cornell stated that there is a huge rise in senior citizens using recreation ways for health
benefits, such as riding bikes or just walking.
Board Member Kenerson stated that this is a nice general statement, but what does the Planning Board
want to do to change the plan so the Board could vote on this.
Board Member Ainslie stated that people could walk the mall at any time. The biggest concern is the
money to do these projects. There are four full time people to take care of the parks.
Board Member Cornell stated that hopefully the Town will receive a lot of this money from grants.
Board Member Ainslie stated that there is that segment of the population who cannot use this one way
or another, and they feel that there should be a user fee.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that he would like to translate Ms. Cornell's suggested
amendment to the proposed resolution, which would be a modification to the draft plan. Map 8 -1 be revised to
extend Conservation District Zoning eastward from Buttermilk Falls State Park to Danby Road to include those
reaches of Holly Creek upstream of West King Road, and extending eastward to include undeveloped lands in
the vicinity of Eldridge Wilderness. The key word is undeveloped land because there are a lot of house lots in
that area and that it would not be practical to include them in this plan.
Board Member Cornell stated that would be correct.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that this Board has to come to an agreement on some amendments to the
motion that requests the Planning Staff to look in more detail at the Six Mile Creek area and the area around
Upper Buttermilk Falls State Park. By asking the Planning Staff to review those areas based upon the
comments that were heard tonight, and the comments at the four previous public meetings, that the Board relies
upon the staff who did a wonderful job of putting this plan together in the first place to come up with any
changes to it based upon either the public comments or written comments from before. He thinks that this
Board could come to an agreement on something like that.
Board Member Finch stated that he does not have any problem asking the Planning Staff to do some of
that work. He is not willing to forward a plan to the Town Board until this Board sees what it is.
Board Member Kenerson asked Mr. Finch if he was putting conditions on the plan.
Board Member Finch stated that he wants to see the plan at a more refined stage. He does not have any
objections to these things, but before he votes to send this to the Town Board he wants to see the plan revised.
Board Member Bell stated that procedurally he thinks that Mr. Finch is right that this Board does not
empower the Planning Staff to incorporate the changes, and then this Board would not have any further
direction.
Board Member Kenerson stated that this Board should tell the Planning Staff what needs to be done.
Board Member Cornell stated that she would be in favor of what Mr. Finch said provided that it is a not
a protracted process after that. If the Planning Staff incorporates the changes. and this Board reviews them for
approval then they could be passed on to the Town Board.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 20 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
Director of Planning
to
Kanter stated that he would like the Planning Board to be very clear as to what
they want the Planning Staff to change in the plan. The Planning Staff could do the changes, and then present
them to the Board at the next meeting.
Board Member Finch stated that he does not have any objections to the Planning Staff working on the
changes, but he does not want to be rushed into approving it.
Board Member Cornell stated that she would like to see changes in the plan to include the Conservation
Board's comments 1 -7 (Conservation Board comments v as hereto attached as Exhibit 98).
Board Member Finch stated that the Planning Staff needs to indicate the estimated cost per household
in a worse case of no outside funding. The figure jumps out at people strongly, and it needs to be there.
Board Member Cornell stated that in the Planning Alliance Comments number 3 of the Therefore Be It
Resolved, which states "Enactment of conservation zoning for the Eldridge Preserve and McGowan Woods
Unique Natural Areas ", should be included in the draft Plan.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that was included in the Precinct Seven SLUD, and it is already
considered an Unique Natural Area.
Board Member Cornell stated that in the Planning Alliance Comments number 10 of the Therefore Be
It Resolved, states "Construction of the complete "Cayuga Inlet Trail" and " Besemer Trail." Ms. Cornell asked
if this was explored at all while drafting the plan.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, yes. The Besemer Trail was actually the William and Hanna
Pew Trail. Unfortunately, from Park Lane eastward the Besemer Trail as proposed by the Greenways Coalition
is not feasible, it is people's backyards.
Board Member Cornell stated that the Plannin; Alliance recommends sidewalks along all Town roads
within the Town of Ithaca. She is not going to ask for that to be part of the plan, but that issue comes up over
and over again because people are interested in it.
Chairperson Wilcox stated that all of %Is. Cornell's comments have been addressed. Chairperson
Wilcox asked Mr. Frantz what he has for the PlanninQ Staff to review for the Planning Board.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the Town should investigate a "user fee" for park
development.
Board Member Ainslie stated that he cannot vote yes for the plan without knowing that there is any
consideration for a user fee.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that 5300.000 has been identified in the plan as an amount that
could be collected by the Town over a 20 year time span through rentals of pavilions and the athletic fields to
various athletic organizations. The City of Ithaca already collects a rental fee. That is one type of user fee.
• Board Member Ainslie stated that there are going to be people who do not want to be taxed for
something that they cannot participate in.
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 21 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the Town established a Local Law to collect fees in lieu of park
land. The Town is reviewing the current formula, which is ten percent of the current parcel. If the Planning
Board would like to pursue some other way that might be simpler and easier that could be applied in more
straight forward way that would be something. that could be put back into the plan as a recommendation. That
could be a significant revenue producer that would take some of the burden away from some of the property
taxes that would otherwise be going towards the plan. One way of setting an amount would be to provide an
estimate for any given annual budget, and if the Town Board decided that $25 000 a year should be anticipated
from fees in lieu of parkland in any given year then the Planning Board could look at an average number of new
lots or dwelling units created in that year and then divide the two to come up with an average figure. Mr.
Kanter stated that the procedure was based upon the finding of need, and to come up with some rational cost
sharing approach. The current formula does not seem to be working right now.
Attorney Barney stated that the Town cannot take money from somebody unless there is a
demonstration of need created by what they are doing. and then it needs to show that the park land is not usable.
It is a two step process.
Board Member Cornell asked if this plan could demonstrate need for the larger community parks so the
collection of money could be put into that.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that is part of the plan that shows part of that need.
• Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the Planning Staff should investigate modifying the mechanism for
collecting fees in lieu of park land.
Mr. Stephenson stated that a friend that was here earlier is about to retire, and he is worried about the
amount of money that would be coming out of what he has. Mr. Stephenson stated that his friend lives on
Snyder Hill, and he rides a bicycle, but more of the elderly do not ride bicycles where the youths do. Mr.
Stephenson stated that the Planning Board heard a lot from the pedestrian and bicycle lobby that there is a real
interest and a real need for greenways as alternative transportation routes. Before the Town goes and has
someone collecting fees from people who would use these greenways, that he would suggest very strongly
exploring all of the options including grant sources that actually, not obviously, but do effect the lake from the
amount of tail pipe emissions. Nitrogenous emission from tailpipes would go down with increased greenway
use. That is a way that this could be worked in for some money up front, and as for maintenance money some
people do consider this to be America's most enlightened city. There is that type of community spirit that has
gotten a lot of trails maintained all over the area for years already.
Board Member Bell stated that the Planning Board heard a number of comments about Map 8 -1 that
was not distinguishing existing Conservation Zone as proposed. Mr. Bell asked if there is something that could
be done to separate those things.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that what he heard was that it does not distinguish what portions
of the areas be proposed for Conservation Zoning are already protected either as State Park Lands or the Citv
Watershed Areas. To him that is probably fairly simple to do without muddying Map 8 -1 too badly. The Staff
could take the borders of the State Parks and the other areas showing these.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that the Planning Staff already has a map showing those outlines of
what is already protected.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 22
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
OCTOBER 7, 1997
• Board Member Ainslie asked if in some situations the land owner or business owner has to pay for the
sidewalk in front of their property.
Director of Planning Kanter responded, ves. While this plan is being considered, the Town Board, the
Codes and Ordinances Committee, and the Planning Committee are looking at the overall rezoning revisions.
The next Codes and Ordinances Committee would include a discussion on rezoning that would be needed to
pursue some of the zoning changes that have been proposed along with some Comprehensive Plan
recommendations, which would include things for careful consideration.
Board Member Bell stated that he was surprised to hear that Codes and Ordinances Committee is
discussing these considerations because he asked about that a number of months ago to start interjecting these
ideas. He was told that this is just for cleaning up of the language.
Director of Planning Kanter stated that this has evolved into this over the last several months largely
because of the combined efforts of the Planning Committee and the Codes and Ordinances Committee to reach
a balance on those type of issues.
Board Member Cornell stated that when the Planning Staff is considering the issue of looking at open
space around the State Parks she urges them to use the letter from the New York State Office Parks, Recreation,
and Preservation dated September 30, 1997 as one of the bases for looking at those boundaries. Ms. Cornell
asked if the proposed bike path would pass through the property of the Cayuga Medical Center. (Cayuga
Medical Center's letter is hereto attached as Exhibit 49.)
• Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, yes. He had a u
meeting with Cayuga Qa Medical Center's staff,
Y
and it was an eye opener when they started to relate some of their issues.
Board Member Cornell asked if the meeting vas after July 31st.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, no, that letter is a result of that meeting. A bike way was
planned to run along the eastern side of the hospital to integrate it with their complex so it would be available to
their patients, not knowing that some of their patients are being wheeled out there on gurneys during the
summer months. It would be mixing ambulatory patients with bicyclists, and the topography was reviewed to
shift the alignment of the path to the west side of the hospital parallel to Dates Drive. The path would run
between the hospital's parking lot complex and Dates Drive.
Board Member Bell asked if Cayuga Medical Center owns that land.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz responded, ves.
Board Member Bell asked if Cavuga Medical Center wants the bike trail running through there.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that the Planning Staff has not reviewed this with the Cayuga
Medical Center at this point. They seem to think that this would work much better.
Board Member Ainslie asked if the bike trail would be on the east side or the west side of Dates Drive.
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 23 OCTOBER 7, 1997
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that he was not sure at this point. This is a design detail that is far beyond
the plan. The bike path can go along Dates Drive, east or west is a decision to make when there is a detailed
design. Mr. Frantz stated that the list for the Planning Staff to review is as follows:
a. Shift the path to the west side of the hospital:
b. Map 8 -1 be revised to extend Conservation Zoning eastward from Buttermilk Falls State Park
to Danby Road to include the reaches of Holly Creek up stream to West King Road;
C. Further investigation of user fees for park facilities as funding mechanisms-, I
d. Investigate modification of mechanisms for collecting fees in lieu of park land; and
e. Modify Map 8 -1 to identify areas within the Conservation Districts and Agricultural Districts
that are also within existing State Parks, and other privately or publicly held preserves.
Ms. Hagedorn stated that Phil Zarriello (Chair of Conservation Board) feels that areas held privately
should not be considered Conservation Zoning, and that should be considered a different category.
Conservation Zoning should be put where the Town would actually be responsible for Conservation Zoning and
not in areas that are already protected. Then if someone looks at the amount of acreage that is in Conservation
Zoning for the Town it will be misinterpreting the lands. such as Beebe Lake and or Six Mile Creek. Most of
the green on the map is already protected lands privately.
Assistant Town Planner Frantz stated that land is not zoned based on ownership, which the
Conservation District is proposing. The State Parks are still zoned R -30 even though they are State owned
land. The Town is proposing zoning that is appropriate to the conditions of the land and landscape of the
environment. Ownership is out of this. He understands the Conservation Board's concern that it not appear
that the Town is not zoning too much land Conservation District, but that a lot of the land that is being
proposed is already protected and in the State Parks.
Chairperson Wilcox duly closed the Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding the
Draft Town of Ithaca Park, Recreation, and Open Space Plan at 10:45 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 2,1997:
MOTION made by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie:
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the September 2, 1997 Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board be and hereby are approved as written
There being no further discussion, Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote.
AYES - Wilcox, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Bell.
NAYS - None.
ABSTAIN - Cornell.
• The MOTION was declared to be carried.
•
L'
•
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 24
APPROVED - DECEMBER 16, 1997
AGENDA ITEM: APPROVAL OF MINUTES - SEPTEMBER 16,1997:
MOTION made by James Ainslie, seconded by Herbert Finch:
OCTOBER 7, 1997
RESOLVED, that the Minutes of the September 16. 1997 Meeting of the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board be and hereby are approved as written with the following correction:
Page 6, paragraph 7 that reads "Board Member James Ainslie stated that the flat land in that area is the
King Boss Farm that they are suggesting to save for agricultural purposes. ", should be changed to read "Board
Member James Ainslie stated that the flat land in that area is the King Doss Farm that they are suggesting to
save for agricultural purposes."
There being no further discussion Chairperson Wilcox called for a vote.
AYES - Wilcox, Finch, Ainslie, Kenerson, Bell.
NAYS - None.
ABSTAIN - Cornell.
The MOTION was declared to be carried.
AGENDA ITEM: OTHER BUSINESS:
Director of Planning Kanter stated that Ithaca College is proposing an Observatory near the Unique
Natural Area, and there is a site visit scheduled for October 24th at 10:00 a.m..
AGENDA ITEM: ADJOURNMENT:
Upon MOTION, Chairperson Wilcox declared the October 7, 1997, Meeting of the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board duly adjourned at 10:53 p.m.
Prepared by:
Deborah Kelley,
Keyboard Specialist /Minutes Recorder
Mary Bryant,
Administrative Secretary for the
Town of Ithaca Planning Board.
•
•
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
126 East Seneca Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Tuesday. October 7. 1997
AGENDA
7:30 P.M. Persons to be heard.
7:35 P.M. SEQR Determination, Carroccia Subdivision. 104 Enfield Falls Road.
7:40 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING : Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33- 1 -9.2, +/- 17.14 acres in size, into two
lots, +/- 14.62 acres, and +/- 2.515 acres in size respectively, located at 104 Enfield Falls Road,
Residence District R -30. Paul and Claire Carroccia, Owners /Applicants.
7:50 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board
regarding the Draft Town of Ithaca Park. Recreation and Open Space Plan (March 10, 1997).
[Copies of the complete Draft Plan or an Executive Summary of the Draft Plan are available at
the Town of Ithaca Planning Department. 126 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, N.Y.]
5. Approval of Minutes: September 2. 1997 (in packet)
September 16, 1997 (in packet)
6. Other Business.
7. Adjournment.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY MARY
BRYANT AT 273 -1747.
(A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.)
The Ithaca Journal Wednesday, October 1, 1997
T.
als
� 1 le als -' H, T_
[514m is
II `Hill be held by the Planning
e Board of the Town of Ithaca
e on Tuesday, October 7,
n 1997, at 126 East Seneca
Street, Ithaca, N.Y. at the
following times and on the Plan are available at the
s followingg matters: Town of Ithaca Planning
e 7:40 P.M. Consideration of Department, 126 E. Seneca
,f Preliminary and Final Sub Street, Ithaca, N.Y.)
r division Ap rovol for the pro- Said planning Board will at
dosed subdivision of Town of said times and said place
s Ithoca Tax Parcel No.
hear all persons in support of
c 33.1 -9.2, ± 17.14 acres in such matters or objections
size, into two lots, ± 14.62 thereto. Persons may appear
acres, and ± 2.515 acres in by agent or in erson.
size respectively, located at Individuals with visual impair -
104 Enfield Falls Road, Resi- ments, hearing impairments
dente District R -30. Paul and or other special needs, will
— Claire Carroccia, Owners/ be provided with assistance
Applicants. as necessary, upon request. ,
s TOWN OF ITHAC�, 7:50 P.M. Consideration of a Persons desiring assistance .
PLANNING BOARD Recommendation to the ggTown must make such a request not
NOTICE OF PUBLIC of Ithaca he Draft Townrofr Itha c less than 48 hours prior to the
HEARINGS 9 time of the ppublic hearings.
Tuesday, Oct. 71 1997 Park, Recreation and Open Jonathan Kanter, AICP
J By direction of the S ace Plan March 10, Director of ?tannin '1174
Chairperson of the Planning 1997. jCo 27
ies of the com- 7
I- Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY plete raft Plan or an Execu-
October 1, 1997
i
GIVEN Public H°nr'nn� five Summ ry of the Draft
1111
� , J
• TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, October 7, 1997
By direction of the Chairperson of the Planning Board, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN
that Public Hearings will be held by the Planning Board of the Town of Ithaca
on Tuesday, October 7, 1997, at 126 East Seneca Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the
following times and on the following matters:
7:40 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for
the proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33 -1-
9.2, +/- 17.14 acres in size, into two lots, +/- 14.62 acres, and
+/- 2.515 acres in size respectively, located at 104 Enfield Falls
Road, Residence District R -30. Paul and Claire Carroccia,
Owners /Applicants.
7:50 P.M. Consideration of a Recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board
regarding the Draft Town of Ithaca Park Recreation and Open Space
Plan (March 10, 1997). [Copies of the complete Draft Plan or an
• Executive Summary of the Draft Plan are available at the Town of
Ithaca Planning Department, 126 E. Seneca Street, Ithaca, N.Y.]
Said Planning Board will at said times and said place hear all persons in
support of such matters or objections thereto. Persons may appear by agent or
in person. Individuals with visual impairments, hearing impairments or other
special needs, will be provided with assistance as necessary, upon request.
Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours
prior to the time of the public hearings.
Dated: Monday, September 29, 1997
Publish: Wednesday, October 1, 1997
•
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
•
•
U
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Karen McGuire sworn, depose and say- that I am a Secretary for the Town of Ithaca,
Tompkins County, New York; that the follow -ing Notice has been duly posted on the sign board
of the Town of Ithaca and that said Notice has been duly published in the local news a er Th
Ithaca Journal.
Town
D
P.M as per attached
V p , e
Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Bulletin Board Front Entrance of Town Hall.
Date of Posting
Date of Publication:
September 29.1997
October 1. 1997
Karen McGuire, Secretary
Town of Ithaca.
STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS.:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS )
Sworn to and subscribed before me this / st day of C � C 11997.
Alotary Public.
•
•
•
ADOPTED RESOLUTION:
SEQR
Carroccia -Two Lot Subdivision
Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
104 Enfield Falls Road
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
October 7, 1997
MOTION by Herbert Finch, seconded by Robert Kenerson:
WHEREAS:
1. The proposed action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 33- 1 -9.2, located at 104 Enfield Falls Road
and encompassing 17.14± acres in area, into two lots, 14.62 ± acre and 2.515± acre in size
respectively. Up to one additional single /or two family home may be constructed as a result of the
proposed action without further subdivision approval, subject to the requirements of the Residence
District R -30.
Paul and Claire Carroccia, Owners /Applicants, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is legislatively
determined to act as Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision
Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, on October 7, 1997, has reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part I prepared by the applicant, a Part II prepared by the Town
Planning Department, a plat entitled "Proposed Subdivision and Survey Map of Lands at 104
Enfield Falls Road, Town of Ithaca. Tompkins Co., New York" prepared by Howard R.
Schlieder, N.Y.S.P.E. & L.S. dated July 29. 1997, and amended Aug. 29, 1997, and additional
application materials, and
4. The Town planning staff has recommended a negative determination of environmental
significance with respect to the proposed Subdivision Approval;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board
environmental significance in accordance with tl
for the above referenced action as proposed and.
Form, nor an Environmental Impact Statement \�
hereby makes a negative determination of
ie New York State Environmental Quality Review Act
therefore, neither a Full Environmental Assessment
ill be required.
AYES - Wilcox, Finch, Kenerson, Ainslie. Bell. Cornell.
NAYS - None.
The MOTION was declared to be carried unanimously.
ryant, )Coministrative secretary.
•
•
•
ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Carroccia- Two Lot Subdivision
Preliminary- and Final Subdivision Approval
104 Enfield Falls Road
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
October 7, 1997
MOTION by Robert Kenerson, seconded by James Ainslie:
WHEREAS.
1. The proposed action is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed subdivision of Town of Ithaca Tar Parcel No. 33- 1 -9.2, located at 104 Enfield Falls
Road and encompassing 17.14± acres in area. into two lots, 14.62 ± acre and 2.515± acre in size
respectively. Up to one additional single!
•
•
•
ADOPTED RESOLUTION: Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval
Carroccia- Two Lot Subdivision
104 Enfield Falls Road
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
October 7,1997
a. The Survey Map be redrawn to eliminate the line between "Parcel 1" and "Parcel 2"
as presently shown so that the .286 acre parcel adjacent to the property denominated
"N /F Jane R.F. Mead" is included «-ith Parcel 1 and there be shown only two lots,
"Parcel 1" and "Lands to be Split ", such redrawing to be accomplished before signing
of the plat by the Chairperson of the Planning Board.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:
That the Planning Board hereby waives the requirement for any park land reservation or
payment of a fee in lieu of such land dedication, in regard to this subdivision approval, having
determined from the materials presented that a proper case does not exist for requiring that a
park or parks be suitably located as part of the proposed plat, and that such waiver will result
in neither a significant alteration of the purpose of subdivision control nor the policies
enunciated or implied by the Town Board. The Planning Board reserves the right however, to
consider such park land reservation or payment of fee in lieu thereof in regard to any future
subdivisions of either parcel which are the subject of this approval.
AYES - Wilcox, Kenerson; Ainslie, Bell, Cornell. Finch.
NAYS - None.
The Motion was declared to be carried unanimously-.
Karen McGuire, Secretary, Town of Ithaca.
LJ
ARTICLE V:, SECTION 36, P?t^LIMT_N1RY_ SUBDI LSION PLAT C3_^.C�1cLIST
PFC� EcT NAMZ C_� //e����^ ��.G -T,�z 4
I/e7
y = ITEM CUj =%i_T'='E:
W = WA'7 J nD
N/A = NOT APpLrCA?::E
COND = CONDITION OF A?P.RCV'
The items lis.eC belcw, unless wa_'ieed by
f_l °d i^ =_'v' �v.N� p_anne_'s ce_
before an ap c:_catior_ for a pr=- _.l_-- 'r.J ��d:'i _3_. a_ Cry- ? = d= °_T.e^_"
CCTpi °_t °. These mat °_r;als S__a_; be f_leC w.. a. l_ s.
Cal eandar days prior to t.'?e P_a::n' nC' Bcar : mee =- ^c at Wh_C^
approva_ is re %ested.
1 • One c=pleteC anc s_C ^e L °'i:_^piTien. Re "J_ew A_ =_- ca._...' .
2. One Development Review Escrzw Ac_eerr.en= and Back -uc
rNithh olding Form (i . recu' -_
3. Payment of review fees.
�4• I- Deposit of escrow.
5. One fully completed and sTcned Shcrt En- ;_ronm`nta, Assessment
Form, Part I (SEA?) , or Long- Env'_ronmenta' Assessment Form,
Pa=t I (LEA=) (See Town Planner as to which to suhm = =. )
6. Nk Estimate of Costs c. site improvements (excludinc cost of land
acq.:_s4. ticn and pro.essicr_al fees) to be pr epared (pre._rahly)
/ by a licensed professional enc_aeer.
Four full size dark -line prints of ^r r- -
�._.e �_elimina_Y pea_ and 25
reduced Copies of all sheets of the preliminary plat (the
reduced copies to be no lancer than 11" by 1711) with the
following informal i cn :
a. ✓ V_c`_.i ty Map s_hcw_nc the ceneral lccation of t'
Property, 1 " =_1000, or
b._ General layout, includ_nc 1oc lines w,'th dimenS;c S;
b_Cck and 1ct ^..Jc r ; h; q' way and ? 1 1 =1J 1'- ° -� N - - 6'0
fee= wide hic._way areas to be res`_-Jed for
L'se 1n C=mcr_ by res_den.s c. the S',^d;V:S_vr_; S_.es fir
ncrres_dentia =, rcr_- .Lh =,: -ses; easements _or u.__,._es,
w,t.^_ d_mens, ores .
• C. ��i�. Ge_neral lavout of t :e c.�Ccsec - ^- .Ja1is, b coos and
lets w.th__n t. ^_c pr CCS °� 5:�d_ J_S_ Te' r.3. --Jc n_c_^_wa1J
names.
Preliminary Subdivision Plat Checklist 2
d.
A
L.
_ Contour intervals,
fee` when the slope
more than five feet
percent.
�1=
ki g.`''' AL
i . V/
k.,2AI
to USv�
da =":m
C= not
miCr °_
t_ ^_ a� two
wit:__. an(a immed_ate_y
/
.
drainage area
above
'' -s less
t a.
=Our Cerce._
adjacent
a= P_Ct
the
entering or
proposed
sucdivs:or_,
includinc par'. {s,
when s'oce
is
greater
than
four
Cultural and 1mmea;at°_ly aCjacen=
propCSed SuCd_v= S_C;_, i 1C_'id1 C D_O_Oe ZCts h gnwa,
imprcve�^ents, br�dces, cu_-rer_s, a =____y l,ne =,
pipelines, power tran sm_ss_:,r_ l_.es, ctaer s_gn_f_ca.=
Structures,
Other
significant
all
water courses Cal cola =_or_ c=
structures
wit:__. an(a immed_ate_y
.
drainage area
above
point
of entry for each water course
adjacent
to
the
entering or
proposed
sucdivs:or_,
includinc par'. {s,
wetlands,
cr,t_cai
enr_ronmen
=a_
areas, and other
Sign
=_Cant
eazures
Directior_ o
flow c=
all
water courses Cal cola =_or_ c=
.
drainage area
above
point
of entry for each water course
entering or
abutting
tae
tract.
Location and descrinJ ion of al_ SeCtlCn line CGr^_ers and
government survey monuments in or near the subd.'visicr_,
to at least Gn °_ Cf Wh'_Ca the sUzid? vislon shall be
referenced by true courses a.d distances.
Location, name, and dimensions of each existing highway
and alley and each utility, drainage, or similar easement
w ithin, abutting, Cr in t_ ^_ °_ immed =ate v1Cl._ity G. the
proposed suZdivisicn.
Natural f=eatures
proposed subdivis
of water, wccded
Identification cf
on = Flood Soun
within and immediately adjacent to the
ion, includinc drainage channels, bodies
areas, and other s_gni . -cant features .
areas subject to flooding as indicated
dary Maps, wetlands Maps.
Width
at bu'_lding line of
lots
located on a curve or
having
non- paral_e_ side lines,
when r�cui red b_. t a
/ Planr__nc Scard.
Names and addresses c own = r�e; - -;
-s cf a-- Da_�.s a..,L___nC t___
proposed subdivision.
MI
Names of recorded sucd_vi :ores abu = =i.c the proposed
subdivis ion ^_ .
Restrictive cove ants, i. any.
ft
•
r�
O. Key map, wr_e. more tha= one s eet is reculreo tc present •
plat.
•
L
Prelimina /ry Subdivision Plat Checklist
p. J Name cf subd,-r_s_or_, w�_c s:.
of a _y otner subdj.vIs_cr. i, t e ccun =.ru
• --e�ar..e
_ .e name
Q Name c. pia ... enC;neer 1 a'C
1ardsC. ace a=cb_ =ect, Cr ec er cerscn w c c_e ^a._dvt e
sketc = c i ac c cre' i m_narr C;a= -
Name ;=) and a( ess ;es, C. t ^e
.s
S. r _
Name s and accYess (mss' -r ^-
S��d_'r ,
/ subc_-r:ce= (s) is (a, e) noc:
t. �l Mac Scale in ba= form c= 1 " =,Jr') and ncr_In.
/ port.
u. V Dace cf plat, and any a=c.' _cab le re r_s_or_ da =es .
V. �� Names of towr., ccunt_r, and state.
w. �� FsC?".1= 11.^_eS LCL:_ ^_ . =nC t_'e S e °r, cite 1_^.0 f=Cm t °_ lec_
edce and one -?=a1= inch tr cm each o. the Ct er e^..Ce3; a._
information, including a;.1 plat t`-2 -C
nes
signatures and seals, sia ! be w_ =^_n chle T= der l i..
R
•
t
•
ARTICLE VI, SECTION 37. FINAL SUrBDIVISION PLAT CHECKLIST
PROJECT NAME
PRCJECT NTUMBER
PREPARER
N/ = ITEM SUBMITTED
W = WAIVED
N/A = NOT APPLICABLE
COND = CONDITION OF APPRC77_==
Cw2p(LiA Tvx i or ��tJtsierl
p`:C , 2 5/ f
The items list d below, unless Waved by the Planning Boar mu
_ st be
in the OLLiCe of t_'le Town Planner or TOW.^_ Planner S deS_gne=
application =or a final subdivision_ apc..val is deemed ccmU_e_e. T =_se
materials s� all be file at leaso 30 ca_e-dar days prior to c:_` P_a - g
Board meeting at which pr=l_m =nary apD==. is rerquest °_d.
_ _ 17 `
7-• Completed and s_c-ed Developmen� Review Apclicat�en. �` � _L
21 Development Revie;y Escrow Afire ° ^ent and backup w_thhcic_ng form
/ (if recrui red)
3. V +
s✓
0'
Payment of review fees.
Deposit of escrow.
If required because not submitted with preliminary plat aperovaI
or substantial modifications have occurred since preliminary
plat approval, one fully completed and signed Short
Environmental Assessment For-, Part I (SE_ -F) or Long
Environmental Assess;i ent Form, Part I (LEAF) (See Town Planner
as to which to submit.)
Owner's Certificate: A certificate signed by the owner(s) to
the effect that he /they own the land, that he caused the land to
be surveyed and divided, and that he makes the dedications
indicated on the pla` .
Surveyor's Certificate: A cer:ificate sigr_ea and sewed by a
registered land surveyor to he effect that (1) the plat
represents a survey made by him, (2) the plat is a correct
representation of all e: {terior boundaries of the land surveyed
and the su'bdivis =on of it (3) all monuments indiCaC °_d on th=
plat actually exist and their location, Size and material are
correctly shown, and (a) the r- �Tuirements C= these r °gulaC O's
and New York State laws relating to subdividing and Surf =v_r.c
have been complied with.
Mortgagor's Certi_ :cafe:
mor_gaaor(s), if any, to
and the dedications and
the plat.
A ce=
- �� ed and sealed
=1ca�` sign.
_
the effect
that he
co sentS to t e p!
__
restri c_ions
shown
on cr re ferred to
on
A— Two copies of the County Healt_.::epartment approval c' the water
supply and /or sewace system.
Final Subdivision Plat Checklist 2
10 . J Four full size dark- line prints of the f J.-, 1. plat and 25 reduced
cosies or all sheets of the final plat (the reduced cc^,:es to be
no larger than 11" by 17 ") with the fo'Low_ng information:
a. J Highway and alley bcunda:y or right- cf -way lines
snowing boundary, riche -of -way or easement width and
any other , n_o=, at =on needed for locating such 1? nes;
purposes C. easements
b. �_ HigLlwav ce__L °_r 1 i sec, S .cwJ (= C-
angles c= ___zerseccicn, rac__, iercths c= to =cent_ and
arcs, and degree o: curvature, with basis
data. Le�_:gChs and d_scarlces Shall be to t::e
one hundredth foot. a gees s' a"", be to the nearer=
half minute.
C. / Highwa:r names.
d. V Locaticr_, name, and dimensions of each existi-c
highway and alley and each utility, dra_nace, or
similar easement w- L. .., abutting, Or l n the i .:Lmed_a =_
Vicinity of the prCposed s,,bd'_vis'on.
e. / Exact boundary lines of the tract, indicated by a
heavy line, giving the dimensions to the nearest one
hundredth foot, angles to the nearest one-half minute,
and at least one bearing; the traverse shall be
balanced and closed with an error of closure not to
h l
exceed one to two thousand; the type of closure shall
/ be noted.
f. ✓ Location and description of all section line corners
and government survey monuments in or near the
subdivision, to at least one of which the subdivision
/ shall be referenced by true courses and di sta- ^_.ces .
g-
V Location of property by legal description, including
areas in acres or scuar=_ feet. Source o_ title,
/ including deed record book a -d page numbers.
h. `� Name and address Cf all owners of the procercy and
name and address o= a.l persons who have an
in the property, such as easements or righcs-o' -way.
Names) an addresses) of the subdividers)
subdivi ders) is (are) not the owner (s) .
. V Accurate locatiOnS and. descr_pL -ions Of all SL=iviS =On
monuments.
k. Accurate outlines and descriptions of anv_ areas to be
dedicated or reserves nor public use or accu_s_tion,
with the -purposes indicated thereon• any area to be
reserved by deer covenan= for ccmmcn us__ of a.l
property owners i_ the sur.=).5ion.
a i ; d;
Building setoac'.t Ni_ -- -- .ensior_s .
•
•
Final Subdivisi Plat Checklist 3
m. 7 Lot lines, fully dimensioned with len th
s to e
nearest one - hundredth foot and angles or bearings to
the nearest ore -half minute.
n. _ Widt:z at building line of lots located On a curie cr
having ncn- parallel side lines, when req.:' re : by the
Plar_r_inc Board.
o. Names and addresses of owners of all parcels abutting
nrcccseo surd =-r =Sion
P_ Names of recorded subdiv_siens abutting the propcsed
subdivisicn..
q The blcckS are numbered ccnsec:._ive_v throughput t =e
subdiv,s_cr_ and t o lots are numbered ccnsecl, ve v
throughput each block.
r. _ Key mac, when more than one sheet is repaired to
present plat.
S. �� Vicinity map shcw'_ng the general location_ of the
property, 1" =1000' or 111= 20001
.
t . Name of subdi vision., which shall not duplicate the
name of any other subdivision in the county.
• u. Name and seal of the registered lard surveyor or
engineer who prepared the topographic information.
Date of survey.
V, Name and seal of registered land surveyor who made the
/ boundary survey. Date of survey.
W, Name (s) and address (es) of the owner (s)
X, Map scale (1 " =50' or 1" =100') in Bar Form and north
/ point.
y. ✓ Date of plat and any applicable revision dates.
z. ✓ Name of town, county and state.
a1. Border lines bCUndinC the see =, One inc, fr^,m t:e
left edge and One -half inch from each of the of her
edges; all information, including al_
lettering, signatures, and seals, shay be within the
border lines.
b1 . 1 '� R==�r= ee Cn t le
i nc1ud_ng restri Cti ve Covena_^_:3, wh_�h d= rect1V a=zec .
/ the land 1_ ^_ the s!:(:!. .S _Cn .
• c1. V one original or my'_ar copy of t^e plat to be recorded
and t:,re_ dark-line cr_ .�s, cn cn` or <<,cre see °its.
Certif
offici
plat w
icatior_ signed
al or agent
C.
as given _`�z
�,�7�'�,,,.(1;'.
by
tL e
acny
the Cha_=a_ ^_ Cr ct er designate^
Plan.__ ~g Bcard to 7' e = =ect that the
Ova
Final Subdivision Plat Checklist 4
SECTION 38. IMPROVM4= PLANS AND RELATED INFORMATION •
1 . Where improvements are rarer -tli .re? for ` a proposed sube =y_J on t:?°
following documents shall be suhmitced to the P1a4ning De_a=_ment.
iL
- r
►t
• \t
F?ignway paving plans and s: eci =ication:
The estimated cost of:
Grading and filling,
Culverts, swales and other stcrm dra,r_ace fac,lic_e -,
Sanitary sewers,
Water lines, valves and
Paving, curbs, gutters
Any other improvements
Regulations,
fire hydra -
anti sidewalks,
reo^u? red by Town o' ltnaca Su�G_ "Iic i Jr
The plan and profile o= each proposed highway in the
subdivision, with grade indicated, drawn to a scale of 1" = 50'
horizontal, and 1" = 5' vertical, on- standard plan a. d profile
sheets. Profiles shall show accurate'_,; the profile of the
highway or alley along the highway center line and location o=
the sidewalks, if any-"
File:.are:
•
,7
construct_cn
pla.s
n
ad
tDeta_1ed
icaions for wa_er
lines
including
locations
and
descri_
tior_s
of ma_ ns
valves,
hydrants
,
,
appurtenances,
etc.
Deta_]
cor_structicn
p;anJ,
[��^i�
a�.:
-_?J,
san,tary
sewers
and
stor?l ara,nage fac_�iti?=
ud,_
-
_nc
-_
loca__ons
and
descr_ot_cr.s
c= p_�es,
m:.__: ^c_ es,
-
-
and
facilities.
-
other
F?ignway paving plans and s: eci =ication:
The estimated cost of:
Grading and filling,
Culverts, swales and other stcrm dra,r_ace fac,lic_e -,
Sanitary sewers,
Water lines, valves and
Paving, curbs, gutters
Any other improvements
Regulations,
fire hydra -
anti sidewalks,
reo^u? red by Town o' ltnaca Su�G_ "Iic i Jr
The plan and profile o= each proposed highway in the
subdivision, with grade indicated, drawn to a scale of 1" = 50'
horizontal, and 1" = 5' vertical, on- standard plan a. d profile
sheets. Profiles shall show accurate'_,; the profile of the
highway or alley along the highway center line and location o=
the sidewalks, if any-"
File:.are:
•
,7