HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB Minutes 2006-11-21PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
REGULAR MEETING ALE
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD DATE
"M TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2006
215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA NY 14850
The Town of Ithaca Planning Board met in regular session on Tuesday, November 21,
2006, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, at 7:00 p.m.
PRESENT
Fred Wilcox, Chairperson; Eva Hoffmann,
Members Tracy Mitrano, Board Member;
Board Members Kevin Talty, Board Member.
Board Member; George Conneman, Board
Larry Thayer, Board Members Rod Howe,
STAFF
Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning; Daniel Walker, Director of Engineering; Susan
Brock, Attorney for the Town; Christine Balestra, Planners Nicole Tedesco, Planner;
Carrie Coates Whitmore, Deputy Town Clerk.
EXCUSED
Susan Ritter, Assistant Director of Planning; Mike Smith, Environmental Planner.
OTHERS
Patricia Haines, 1519 Slaterville Road; Dan Hoffman, City Attorneys Don Smith, 1329
Taughannock Boulevard; Richard Mennen, 997 Taughannock Boulevards Bill Lesser, 406
Coddington Road; Will Burbank, 132 Glenside Road; Bruce Brittain, 135 Warren Road,
Mark Macera, Executive Director of Longview; David Corson, 5 Pleasant Grove. Lane,
Joe Crookston, 185 Westhaven Road; Katherine Beissner, 17 Chase Lane; Roger
Segelken, 114 Texas Lane; Cande Carrol, Mitchell Street; Joel Harlan, Newfield; Michael
Ben, Warren Road; Dave Schossler, Schopfer Architects; Stacey Whitney, Overlook; -Kris
Hodges, 16 Saunders Road.
CALL TO ORDER
Chairperson Wilcox declares the meeting duly opened at 7 :05 p.m., and accepts for the
record Secretary's Affidavit of Posting and Publication of the Notice of Public Hearings in
Town Hall and the Ithaca Journal on November 13, 2006 and November 15, 2006,
together with the properties under discussion, as appropriate, upon the Clerks of the
City of Ithaca and the Town of Danby, 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 November 15, 2006.
Chairperson Wilcox states the Fire Exit Regulations to those assembled, as required by
the New York State Department of State, Office of Fire Prevention and Control.
1
PERSONS TO BE HEARD
Chairperson Wilcox invited any
on matters not on the agenda
address the Board.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
member of the audience wishing to address the Board
to come forward. There was no one present wishing to
SEQR
Haines 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1519 Slaterville Road
Patricia Haines, 1519 Slaterville Road
Patricia Haines, 1519 Slaterville Road, Ithaca.
Chairperson Wilcox — Did you want to make a short statement or not?
Ms. Haines — I was delighted when the City of Ithaca approached me with the
suggestions that they would like to buy this portion of my land. I have been. in Ithaca
for 35 years. Lived at the corner of Cornell and State for 30 years. Raised my children
wandering around the Six Mile Creek Reserve and the thought that this beautiful land
that was part of the old farm that I purchased in 2000 could become forever part of the
City nature reserve has meant a great deal to me and that is why I am here.
Chairperson Wilcox — Very good. Thank you. Procedural -wise the first thing we will do
is the environmental determination and should we make a negative determination of
significant impact, then we will actually get to the consideration of the subdivision and
we will give the public a chance to speak should they so chose.. I don't think that we
have any environmental...
Board Member Thayer — No environmental...
Chairperson Wilcox — We don't have any negative environmental issues here, I think.
Board Member Thayer — So I'll move the SEQR.
Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by Larry Thayer.
Board Member Conneman — Second.
Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by? Who seconded? Seconded by George Conneman.
Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah, I was going to say to me it seems like a positive
environmental thing...
Board Member Thayer — Absolutely.
Board Member Hoffmann — ...that it will have a positive environmental impact.
2
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox - Any further discussion? There being none, all those in favor
please signal by saying aye.
Board Aye.
Chairperson Wilcox - Anybody opposed? No one I opposed. There are no abstentions.
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -111; SEAR, Preliminary and Final Subdivision,
Haines 2 4ot Subdivision, 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
56 -1 -1
MOTION made by Board Member Thayer, seconded by Board Member Conneman.
WHEREAS;
1. This is consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed 2 -Lot subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 56 -1 -1, Medium Density Residential and Conservation Zones The
proposal is to subdivide off a 4.463 + /- acre parcel from the southwestern end of
the 8.112 + 1- acre parcel, which will then be consolidated with City of Ithaca
watershed lands. Patricia F. Haines, Owners/ Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board is acting
as Lead Agency in this uncoordinated environmental review with respect to
Subdivision Approval, and
3. The Planning Board, on November 21, 2006, has reviewed and accepted as
adequate a Short Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by. the
applicant, and Part II prepared by Town Planning staff, and a plan entitled,
"Subdivision Map, No. 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York, "prepared by Allen T. Fulkerson, dated December 12, 2005, and other
application materials, and
4. The Town Planning staff has recommended a negative determination of
environmental significance with respect to the proposed subdivision;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOL VED:
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby makes a negative determination of
environmental significance for the reasons set forth in the Environmental Assessment
Form Part II referenced above, in accordance with the New York State Environmental
K
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Quality Review Act for the above referenced action as proposed, and therefore, an
Environmental Impact Statement will not be required.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Howe, Talty.
NA YS.• None.
ABSENT.• Mitrano.
The Motion was declared to be carried.
PUBLIC HEARING
Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision approval for the proposed
2 -lot subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel
No. 56 -14, Medium Density Residential Zone and Conservation Zone. The
proposal is to subdivide off a 4.463 +/= acre parcel from the southwestern
end of the 8.112 +/- acre parcel, which will then be consolidated with City of
Ithaca watershed lands. Patricia F. Haines; Owner /Applicant.
Chairperson Wilcox reads the public hearing notice.
Chairperson Wilcox — Questions of Ms. Haines? There being none, .is there anything
you would like to say at this point?
Ms. Haines - No. Nothing further.
Chairperson Wilcox — Very good. I will ask you to take a. seat and we will give the
public a chance to speak.
Chairperson Wilcox opened the public hearing at 7:08 p.m. and invited members of the
public to address the board.
Chairperson Wilcox — Professional address will do, by the way.
Dan Hoffman, City Attorney
Good evening. My name is Dan Hoffman. I'm the attorney for the City of Ithaca at 108
East Green Street. Here to speak on behalf of the City in support of this subdivision.
This issue is arising because of the City's offer to purchase the back portion of Ms.
Haines's property. The intention of the City is to add that parcel to over 700 acres of
City owned land, which serves to protect the water supply for the City of Ithaca and to
provide the Six Mile Creek Natural Area, which is a passive recreation area as well as a
preserve for natural resources. So if anybody had any questions I would be glad to
answer them. The City came before this board last spring and you approved the
subdivision of an adjacent property, which was a very similar situation albeit a
0
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
somewhat smaller property. I will also mention that the City believes that its raw water
main runs through a portion of the parcel to be subdivided and it be conveyed to the
City and we think it makes sense for the City to have ownership of that particular
corridor as well.
Board Member Howe — I'll move the resolution.
Chairperson Wilcox — I haven't closed the public hearing yet. I think we all applaud the
City for continuing to purchase lands and add them to the preserve. Anybody else?
With no one else present wishing to speak, Chairperson Wilcox closes the public hearing
at 7:10 p.m.
Chairperson Wilcox — Rod?
Board Member Howe — I'll move the resolution.
Chairperson Wilcox — So moved by Rod Howe.
Board Member Hoffmann — I'll second.
Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by Eva Hoffmann. All set over there? I have a
question. Is this the old Lowe residence?
Ms. Haines — Yes.
Chairperson Wilcox —
motion and a second.
by saying aye.
Board — Aye.
Yes, it is. I went to school with Cass, by the way. I have a
There being no further discussion, all those in favor please signal
Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody opposed? No one is opposed. There are no abstentions.
The motion is passed. We're done. Thank you very much. That is the definition of a
simple 2 -lot subdivision
PB RESOLUTION NO. 200&112: Preliminary and Final Subdivision, Haines 2-
Lot Subdivision, 1519 S/atervi //e Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 56 -1 -1
MOTION made by Board Member Howe, seconded by Board Member Hoffmann.
WHEREAS:
A
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
1. This is consideration of pi 6i irifriary acid Final Subdivision Approval for the
proposed 2 -Lot subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 56 -1 -1, Medium Density Residential and Conservation Zones The
proposal is to subdivide off a 4.463 + /- acre parcel from the southwestern end of
the 8.112 + /- acre parcel, which will then be consolidated with City of Ithaca
watershed lands. Patricia F. Haines, Owners/ Applicant, and
2. This is an Unlisted Action for which the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, acting as
Lead Agency in environmental review with respect to Subdivision Approval, has,
on November 21, 2006, made a negative determination of environmental
significance, after having reviewed and accepted as adequate a Short
Environmental Assessment Form Part I, submitted by the applicant, and a Part II
prepared by Town Planning staff, and
3. The Planning Board, on November 21, 2006, has reviewed and accepted a plat
entitled, "Subdivision Map, No. 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins
County, New York, " prepared by Allen T. Fulkerson, dated December 12, 2005,
and other application materials, and
4. The existing home is a lawful, non - conforming structure in terms of front yard
setback and the proposed subdivision will create two conforming lots and thus
not further increase the existing non - conformity, and
5. The creation of the subdivision will not change the property owners rights or
obligations under Section 270 -205 regarding non - conforming structures,
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 Checklists, 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 2 -Lot subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road,
Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56 -1 -1, as shown on the plat entitled,
"Subdivision Map, No. 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County,
New York, "dated December 12, 2005, subject to the following conditions:.
a. Submission for signing by the Chairman of the Planning Board of an
original or mylar copy of the final subdivision plat, and three dark -lined
prints, prior to filing with the Tompkins County Clerks Office, and
A
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
submission of a receipt of filing to the Town of Ithaca Planning
Department, and
b. Within six months of this approval, consolidation of the subdivided
southwestern part of Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel 56 -1 -1 (4.463 + 1- acres)
with City of Ithaca Watershed lands, and submission to the Town of
Ithaca Planning Department of a copy of the request to the Tompkins
County Assessment Office for consolidation of said parcels
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES: Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Mitrano, Howe, Talty.
NA YS None.
The Motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING
Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board
regarding the draft Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan.
Chairperson Wilcox - Welcome to the first of two Public Hearings on the proposed Town
of Ithaca Transportation Plan. As stated in the "Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan in
a Nutshell" the common theme of the plan is to "decrease the prominence of privately
owned motor vehicles and their impact on communities and the environment in part by
increasing the availability of alternatives like mass transit, biking walking and so on."
To this I would add; thereby protecting and enhancing our neighborhoods. The
Planning Board is holding this initial Public Hearing. because the Town Board has
referred the plan, as currently drafted, to the Planning Board for review and
recommendation. The purpose of the public hearing is to solicit comments from the
general public that could impact the plan and assist the Planning Board in making its'
determination and recommendation. Development of the Transportation Plan began in
the fall of 2003 when a transportation survey was administered to Town residents. This
was then followed by three public information meetings, the first in 2004 addressed the
goals of the Plan, the topic of the second, held the following year was the Inventory
and Analysis section and the third meeting, held in May of this year, focused on the
Review of the Preliminary Recommendations of the Plan. In addition to the three public
information meetings, copies of the draft Transportation Plan have been available on
the Town's website for download and review. Included are the Executive Summary and
Volumes I — III consisting of the Plan itself, Appendices and Design Guidelines.. With
your input this evening, the Planning Board will consider a recommendation to the
Town Board that the proposed Plan be adopted, possibly with some revisions.
Nicole Tedesco, the Planner who has been mainly responsible, is here this
evening. I would like to know if members of the audience would like a 3 -5 minute
7
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
presentation or not, or whether most of you are familiar ... I have. a young woman
nodding her head back there ... so Nicole...I think you are prepared.
Ms. Tedesco - There are four main sections of the Plan. The first section is the Goals
and Objectives. That part was written in 2003 and it outlines the vision for the
Transportation Plan. As Fred mentioned, .the overriding theme that cuts through the
whole Plan is to protect the quality of life in the Town.
The second and largest section is the Inventory and Analysis. That section goes
mode by mode and mode means whether it is a motor vehicle or bicycle or walking and
so on... So it goes mode by mode and examines the transportation system ... the road
system or the current system for trails for bicyclists or pedestrians. It also examines
non - tangible aspects and after analyzing those existing conditions it identifies strengths
and weaknesses in the current system and then it identifies needs.
From all of that information, there is a section called the Alternatives section
where you will find a listing of all the main problems identified.in the Plan and then for
each problem there are suggested alternatives and for each alternative there is a very
brief summary of the main positives and negatives associated with that type of
alternative.
Finally, the recommendations of the Plan go through all of, the main things
examined in the Plan from roadways and biking and walking and so on and provides
some more general recommendations, sort of guiding vision statements and then some
specific projects.
So the Plan is organized around three documents. The first one that I outlined is
the Plan document itself, the second document is the Appendices and that is where
there is a large amount of actual data and information and maps and so on and the
third document is a set of design guidelines which is a theme that came up often
throughout that Plan is that the Town currently doesn't have any vision for how a
streetscape should look or how the overall transportation network should grow and
develop and re- develop and so these design guidelines actually are three sets of
toolboxes and they include information for the streetscape; and what I mean by that is
the travel lanes and shoulders and planting strips and street trees and so on, and even
beyond that, what types of land use development will support alternate modes like
walking and biking. The second design guideline set is for bicyclist and pedestrian
design and the third is for traffic calming. Those are not meant to be actual
engineering standards, they are meant to be general guidelines of ideas and different
options that the Planning Board or the Town Board can use when they evaluate new
development or consider re- development.
And that is the Transportation Plan in about two minutes.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — I didn't want to distract from your presentation but I was going to
sit here and hold up Volume I which is over a hundred pages and Volume II,
Appendices and Maps which is about the same size and Volume III, which is the Design
Guidelines... There is probably 250 -300 pages of material here. Would any members of
Planning Board wish to make a statement before we get going? At 7:20, the next item
is a Public Hearing for consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town
Board regarding the Draft Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan.
Mr. Kanter — This has gone through our Transportation Committee for the last three or
four years and we have some of the Transportation Committee members here tonight.
Will Burbank is the Chair of the Committee, Tom Neiderkorn, a former Town Board
member is also on the Committee and George Conneman, a member of our Board is
also on that Committee and Bill Lesser, - formerly a Town Board Member, was the Chair
of the Transportation Committee for several years. These people are here also to hear
all of it and to make some comments on it as well.
Chairperson Wilcox - If it is alright with this Board, I think we will jump right in. and
give the public a chance to speak.
Ladies and Gentlemen, once again, we will ask you to raise your hand, we will
call on you, please come to the microphone, we ask that you give your name and
address, professional address works, we do not put time limits, generally on public
hearings, but we do ask that you stick to the topic and to the point and we will be most
interested to hear what you have to say.
Bill Lesser, Ithaca
Thank you Fred and thank you to the Board for this opportunity to speak. As ]on
mentioned, I'm Bill Lesser, ex -Town Board, ex -Chair of the Transportation Committee
I want to say first, as a technical document, this is excellent. Well written, well
structured and presented and a great deal of compiled information that is readily
accessible. As a transportation document, I see at least two distinct shortcomings.
One has to do with the major alternative to vehicle transportation ... I think we are all in
agreement that automobile trans ... over relying on automobiles in the Town of Ithaca,
as we are throughout North America ... and there are both community and environmental
impact as a consequence of it. However, the major alternative that is used here and
throughout the country to private vehicles is, of course, public transportation and not
bicycles and pedestrians as one ... foot traffic as one might get the impression looking at
the way the Plan is structured and the recommendations. Yet when it comes to
conclusions about public transportation, the following discussion, it says, and I quote,
"The Town may need to provide funding for TCAT in order to maintain and enhance
vital services." Well, when I left the Town Board, just about a year ago now, it seems
to me TCAT was pretty well poised to indeed ask the Town to contribute to its'
operating funds and activities, maybe things have changed a lot but probably not. It
A
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
seems to me that a plan ... there ought to.be some discussion in here about how. the
Board would consider requests for funding TCAT. This is something that impacts the
whole community and certainly the largest group of non - drivers in the, community.
Certainly if I was still on the Board, I would look to a document like this to say how do I
think about it? What's a vital service? What's another dollar contributed to TCAT
purchase for me? But yet there's really nothing beyond a statement that something
may happen in the future. I would suggest to Planning Board that they recommend to
the Town Board that that section be enhanced before the Plan is indeed finalized.
The second, I think really significant issue related to transportation is indeed the
safety matter. And of course the major problem is safety. The data is right in there.
More than a third of the accidents are related to collisions with animals which we all
know are deer. And yet when it comes to the statement about what to do about it and
again I quote, the Plan concludes "there is little it (that is the Town) can do to directly
prevent deer - related crashes." Well that is really not quite true. The Town could thin
the deer population as a number of other communities are doing and probably more
will in the future. Of course that's not a decision that the Transportation Committee
should make but I think it is a kind of recommendation that should be in the document
like this. I think we are coming to that point. I think that's a significant public safety
hazard in this area and it is just good luck that I don't believe there have been any
fatalities, human fatalities as a consequence of these accidents. Rather. there is a great
deal of emphasis on the 1.3% of accidents over the period studied related to bicycles
and pedestrians and I admit that there is something particularly vulnerable about that
group, but nonetheless, if one's looking at how a plan can serve the greatest public
good, it's in dealing with automobile crashes and not bicycles and pedestrians and yet
that's the area were I am quoted to the article in the Ithaca Journal on Monday, that
the Town Board had put it's additional money again. And so, having been on the
Planning Board for a while, it seems to me that the Plan, to a large degree, has moved
from a transportation plan to a recreation plan. I mean see the plans and designs here.
There is nothing wrong, I think in anybody's mind, in providing bicycle paths and
walkways but as the Plan acknowledges, that has really very little to do, for most of us,
with transportation. It's recreation, maybe a lot of us ought to recreate more but
again, I think it is a little misleading to present this as a Transportation Plan when,
again, most of the people, as acknowledged in here, that use those services, use them
for recreational purposes and I would hope that be judged and I have a written
statement I can leave.
Chairperson Wilcox — Would you take questions? Any questions? There aren't any.
Thanks Will.
Roger Segelken, Citizens Steering Committee of the Walk - ability Study,
Tompkins County
I would like to make some affirmative comments having read the Executive Summary of
the Program. Have to do with walking and use of public transportation.
10
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
One concerns sidewalks. I live in the part of the Village of Cayuga Heights that
doesn't have sidewalks, so that is something of an issue for me. My transportation
patterns tend to involve, where I live and where I work which is East Hill Plaza. I work
for Cornell and I walk or take the bus or drive or some combination to get to, back and
forth to those two places. About sidewalks, I recognize the problem of retro fitting
sidewalks to existing areas where they haven't been ... much the problem of who should
pay for those as to frontage on the property and so forth. Even though some of the
developers who built some of those areas are still around and looking for approval for
more developments. But I would like to say that in the future, the construction of
sidewalks and curbing for the streets and storm drainage and things like that could be
leveraged on the approval that is needed from the Town of new subdivisions. As far as
Park - and -Ride areas for bus transportation, you note in the study that there are no
existing official Park - and -Rides in the Town of Ithaca. I think everybody agrees that
Park - and -Rides are a good thing. I would like to suggest that in siting those in the
future, you look at the places where there are unofficial Park - and -Rides now and that
would, for instance, be places like the parking area of East Hill Plaza. East Hill Plaza is
owned by Cornell but it is managed by a private management firm and it has come to
their attention that people are using that parking area for Park - and -Ride and then they
take the TCAT busses to Cornell campus or whatever and ... another smaller Park -and-
Ride is I believe it is a three hour limit, it is parking spaces that serve the Town's
walking trail that serves Cascadilla Creek... people will park there all day and they are
either walking to campus or they are taking the bus to campus, there are bus routes all
through there. But that would indicate that at least in that part of Town there is a need
for the Park - and -Ride.
The final point is, and again it involves Cornell, and I would urge the Town to
cooperate with the University whenever possible when building new walkways ... the East
Hill Plaza is an example ... of a neighborhood where Cornell is putting more and more
employees and there is a new office building going there and there is probably a couple
hundred people already working there and whether you follow the cow path method of
planning where you look to see where people are already walking and formalize those
walkways but ... again, I think that whenever you have a chance to leverage some of
these improvements that Cornell might make on the approvals that the University needs
to build these things, that's a good opportunity to make more facilities for pedestrian
traffic.
Chairperson Wilcox — I will point out that that's part of the current Cornell office
building that is being constructed on Pine Tree Road behind the Ciser facility, part of
that included sidewalks all the way down to Maple Avenue, for example and we should
also point out that as part of Rite -Aid, the new Rite -Aid across the street and up the
road, we spent a considerable amount of time dealing with pedestrian traffic both on
the existing ... I can't call it a sidewalk, Jon Kanter ... the one that goes up Mitchell
Street ... the Town calls it a walkway ... and the existing walkway and into the parking lot
11
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
and then the traffic into across the street. into East Hill Plaza, so we appreciate what
you are saying and we know that we have leverage at certain times and we have to use
it. We have also started to ... we should think of the two subdivisions up on South Hill.
Both the Auble subdivision and the Simkin's one where we have
requested... demanded...
Board Member Thayer — And Nicole has included guidelines on how sidewalks should be
constructed which means that it give us more leverage to say to the developer, you
don't know how to do it, here's how to do it.
Board Member Hoffmann — I would like to comment on the Park - and -Ride lots. There
had been proposals, actually, to put parking lots right near East Hill Plaza, it was quite a
few years ago now, but to me, it looked like Park - and -Ride lots for Cornell rather than
Park - and -Ride lots for the Town of Ithaca or the community as a whole because if you
put them very close, along the edges of Cornell University, then people still have to
drive through, in their individual cars, through the City and the Town of Ithaca and
other communities from outlying areas where they live. So they don't really function
very well to cut down traffic except to central campus. So the Park - and -Ride lots, to
my way of thinking about it, have to be further out so that they capture people before
they drive through the residential areas around the university area. Then they take
busses from there and that would cut down on traffic through the areas where people
live, close to the center of Ithaca. I hope that that is what we will do.
Mr. Segelken — I understand what you are saying, I also believe that even removing a
small amount of traffic through a little bit of the Town would help everyone. Another
use of Park - and -Ride lots, besides the public TCAT transportation could be for long
distance bussing like the Shortline busses that go to New York City. Right now there is
a very limited amount of parking at the bus terminal downtown and a lot of people,
including myself, will park in the Greenstar lot and I don't know how they feel about
that, but by looking at where the TCAT routes go and where the Shortline and
Greyhound routes go, I think you could find people that would be very happy to find a
place where they could park their car.
Board Member Mitrano — I have a particular question, not meant to be incriminating,
but what is your evidence for the East Hill Plaza being a Park - and -Ride for Cornell?
Mr. Segelken — I don't necessarily believe that but the management of the Plaza has
asked everyone who works there to register their car so that they will not be ticketed...
Board Member Mitrano — Right. That was why I was interested because as far as I had
heard...there was considerable enforcement so if there was some way that this was still
occurring, not withstanding the enforcement that would be interesting for Cornell to
know.
12
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Segelken — I have no evidence ...
Chairperson Wilcox — We have heard that it has been a problem in the past...
Board Member Mitrano — But there has been enforcement so I was wondering if there
was something going on under the radar of that enforcement.
Richard Mennen, Taughannock Boulevard, West Side Homeowners
Association
This is an organization that has been recently reconstituted. We have had a couple of
meetings, 50 -some people have come, and we have divided into several committees
and I have the luck of being the Chairman of the Truck Committee. Which is about
transportation, particularly about trucks, along Route 89 and we just started doing our
investigation and trying to find out information about it at this point. But the more
information we get the more we realize that a lot of people that live along that long
stretch that of course extends outside of the Town, I have information from people all
the way up to the Taughannock Falls Park, that the truck traffic is a problem and a
danger to the residents and people that live there. I'm lucky to be there, I moved there
in 2004 and I'm not a person that generally becomes involved in these types of
activities but, once I was driving down towards Ithaca and I know that this is a bike
path, a signed bike path, and while I'm driving down there are a half -dozen kids on
bikes, with an adult supervisor, coming up. Right in the area where residents are
parking on both sides of the road and if you know the road, there is very little shoulder
there. Well, I have also been there when these huge garbage trucks, coming probably
from downstate to the landfill that's near Waterloo, I think it is the Seneca something
landfill, they come through Ithaca on their way there and they barrel up that road and
if there was a time when there was a truck coming both ways and there were bicyclists
on the shoulder, there's a tragedy in the making. It is extremely dangerous. Also,
residents coming out of that area on these steep driveways, it is very difficult to see the
traffic and in particularly in the winter time when the road and the driveway are slick,
that's another great danger and people who live down towards Taughannock, I know
beyond your geographical purview, report to me that there have been accidents there
from trucks because that's downhill and they, what's the phrase? They jack- brake ?:..but
they don't slow down much and it is extremely difficult coming out of those driveways
to turn left and head towards Town.
Furthermore, 88 -89, I don't know when, I think relatively recently, has been
made a scenic byway. I don't know if truck traffic is appropriate on a scenic byway, but
anyway, it's a problem and one of the pieces of research that one of the people on our
committee came up was I believe in 2002 a Transportation Planning Committee from
this body came up with specific recommendations that truck traffic be routed to Route
96, away from Route 89 and that signs be put up to indicate that. Route 96, ones is a
more appropriate route because it is classified as an arterial route where 89 is classified
as a collector route. Arterial routes generally have more significant traffic it is my
13
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
understanding if my research about this is correct, and that the recommendation was
that the Planning Committee or Transportation Committee or somebody connected With
the Town looked to how traffic coming to the other side of Taughannock Falls could be
rerouted away from Route 89 and that this was something that would be looked to in
the future but I don't believe it ever was. So our concern is, and then I just found out
about yesterday about this public meeting, so I want to have questions, what could
Planning or what could the document that you are sending forward do to address these
questions and concerns of excessive truck traffic and could you, also I just glanced over
the document, do more to push the State, DOT or whoever, else needs to, to address
this problem which I know is not only a problem for us here ... By the way, routing the
trucks on 96 would solve the problem on Route 89, if it could be done, but basically,
these trucks should not be coming through Ithaca at all. There's no reason why they
can't go up Route 81 to the thruway and come down t this huge landfill and there is I
think 500 of these trucks that move daily to that landfill. Of course we don't get all
500, but I think we get a significant number of them. I don't know what this committee
or what the Town can do in terms of routing truck traffic away from one area into
another area, but I'd be curious to know if there is something you can do, if you
consider it to be a problem, and how can I help.
Board Member Mitrano — I have a couple of questions. Is your team of people looking
into this aware of any particular weight limits on 89 that could be used to enforce the
truck traffic?
Mr. Mennen — No. I am making a note of that.
Board Member Mitrano - Would one of the recommendations that your group would
want to make is to establish those kinds of weight.limits? .
Mr. Mennen — Yeah. How do you do that?
Board Member Mitrano — Beats me. And then ... you said there were 500 and where ... I
wonder where he got that information...
Mr. Mennen — I believe that information came from ... Chuck Schumer, just recently gave
a quite impassioned speech about the problem of this particular truck traffic.
Board Member Mitrano - Chuck Schumer the Senator? Interesting. 500 a day?
Mr. Mennen — 500 a day coming to the landfill, mostly from downstate, I presume.
Chairperson Wilcox — Before you go, we should talk about who controls the State
highways and ...and that is the State of New York.
14
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Kanter — Also, I would like to make a clarification that that recommendation for the
shift in truck movements actually was the County's Freight Study which was not done
by the Town but it was done by the Ithaca Tompkins County Transportation Council,
which I am also a member of that committee. So there is a lot of communication
between the municipalities and a lot of the coordination of the transportation issues are
done through the Transportation Council. That's where that recommendation came and
it really is a bigger, it's a regional issue, it's not something that any one municipality can
even begin to address. It really is something that the Transportation Council as a
whole has talked about and is probably the best mechanism to address it. But, as Fred
was saying, State Routes are basically designed more for truck traffic than local roads
are and to get a change requires a big change in the way the State thinks about a given
road. So, we would have to, through a regional effort, get major changes in how trucks
are routed through the area. It's not an individual street -by- street problems it's an area
wide problem, as you've said.
Mr. Mennen — Is that something then that the Town, the Planning Commission or other
committees in the Town then, would then interface with the Tompkins County
Transportation Council to...
Mr. Kanter — It's this Board and also the Town Board and then through our own
Transportation Committee... It's kind of the central place where these things are
discussed. Again, we have very limited influence and authority over something like a
State Road,
Mr. Mennen — Right. But now, speed limits can be altered within the Town, is that
correct?
Mr. Kanter - Again, only by the State. All the Town Board can do is basically petition
the State to lower or change speed limits on a State Highway. The Town has no actual
authority over that.
Mr. Mennen — So you could petition, for example, that the speed limit be reduced from
45 to 30 throughout the Route 89 to wherever the border is for the Town.
Mr. Kanter — Yes. That is certainly a possibility, that the neighborhood could send a
petition in to the Town Board to lower the speed limit from x to y location and then the
Town Board could forward that to the State.
Chairperson Wilcox — I think our experience here, over the years that I have sat on this
Board, we have made some recommendations to the Town Board asking them to
petition the State to lower a speed limit, that is our authority. It's pretty
interesting... some roads are Town Roads, some roads are County Roads, some roads
are State Roads ... We don't even have much impact on County Roads. I am thinking of
the Rite -Aid on Pine Tree Road where we can tell the County what we would like to see
15
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
in terms of the crosswalk and how we'd like it marked so that pedestrians... so that the
walk is easily seen by the vehicles traffic so that pedestrians are safer, but eventually,
the ultimate decision is the County's because that is a County Road. Same way with
State Roads... unbelievable that the State has to approve changes in speed limits on
Town Roads, but that's the way it is.
I like your idea of it being a regional effort though. To lower speed limits on 89
to work with the City of Ithaca, the Town of Ithaca... potentially the Town of Ulysses,
depending on how far out we want to push it. I see that as policy issue and coming
from the Town Board rather than the Planning Board. And we could certainly, if we felt
it appropriate, recommend to the Town Board: That's about where our jurisdiction
ends.
Board Member Talty — Eighty -nine is a good example of bicycle traffic though. We
promote bicycle traffic up 89 and East Shore Drive too, but 89 in particular is really bad.
Parking on both sides and no way to put one in there either.
Mr. Mennen — I was struck with that this was a tragedy in the making. It could happen
at some point and well it was quite horrendous to contemplate that.
Don Smith, 1329 Taughannock Boulevard
I am one of the members of the Steering Committee of the West Shore Home Owner's
Association and I am also doing some of the research in relation to the truck issue as
one of our committees.
I wanted to give you some of the facts on this thing and I would be more than
happy, if you would give me some e-mail addresses, I will give you the specifics on
some of the sources of my information... The issue here is being driven by Seneca
Meadows Landfill, about one mile north of Waterloo. This is a huge facility, 700 acres.
They accept 6000; they have capabilities of accepting 6000 tons of garbage per day.
That is an excess of 500 trucks per day. This is primarily from the New York
metropolitan area, contracted out to various and a sundry contract trucks. Many of
these are individuals who make a living driving their truck and if they can reduce their
expenses, it goes into their pocket. They are bypassing the interstate highways for two
reasons. One, to reduce tolls, it is very expensive to drive a truck, especially an 8.1. I
saw one this morning ... a 22 -wheel truck going off 89, going left through the City of
Ithaca because they come in from 79 through our City ... these are accidents that will
happen ... this is not a question of if, it's a question of how many people these trucks are
going to kill coming through town. These are 22 -wheel trucks that cannot turn the
turns ... you've seen this happen. So some additional facts; So what they are doing is
staying off of 90 to save the tolls, and they are also staying off of 81, not just simply
because'of the tolls because there is no tolls there or on highway 80, but what they do
is eliminate the weight stations. They eliminate the safety checks.
16
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Let me give you a perspective from a quote from Senator Schumer, and this is
an issue that many, many politicians in many other areas and one of the things that I
noticed which was, I don't understand it, especially this being Ithaca, I've lived here for
almost 20 years and have lived on Route 89 for about 5 years ... It's naked by its'
absence. The Ithaca - Tompkins concern on this issue. We have concerns on 5 and 20,
that entire route is also being severely affected and all the local politicians are
impacting that. Skaneateles etc, etc. Here's a quote from the October 19, 2006 press
release from Senator Schumer.
"Truck drivers are circumventing the highway system but our local communities
are paying the price. These trucks are evading tolls, and weigh stations and are instead
driving on our neighborhood streets, taxing the roadways and diminishing the quality of
life in otherwise peaceful communities. It is time for the government to step up and
preserve the way of life in these communities."
This is awful and this is fairly recent and nowhere in your report or in your study
or anywhere do I see any concerns about this in relation to the City of Ithaca or our
county. Route 89 in particular, we are a scenic highway. I live on the road, we are a
scenic highway, we are a winery for our tourists of the wineries. Bicyclists... one of the
primary focuses of this is for getting people out of their cars, onto the sidewalk onto the
streets on their bicycles and their feet, right? This is counter ... Two of the primary
concerns in your, in relation to your report, two of your top three objectives is; One -
Safety and Two - Quality of Life. And those trucks are in fact hurting both of those
issues.
A couple of other quick points, and we cannot underestimate this organization,
Seneca Meadows, notice Seneca Meadows landfill... isn't that cool... this is a $175 million
dollar organization, it was acquired several years ago by a very large multi - billion dollar
corporation, they are extraordinarily well connected, extraordinarily well funded, they
contributed $2,000,000 to the Seneca area community tax rolls, they have huge
leverage. But there are huge numbers of organizations,. individually, that are going to
slow them down, at least. All we want to do is, we want to, from the West Shore Home
Owner's Association; 1. We want to get them off of Route 89 and 2. We should also at
the same time, get them out of the City, this is crazy.
That is about all I have ... I. have some additional facts and if you want I will e-
mail you some hyper links that might be of value.
Chairperson Wilcox — Whose email do you want to give out?
Mr. Kanter — Why don't we do mine, which is jkanter @town.ithaca.ny.us
17
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — We will write it down for you that way if you provide it to the
member of the Town Staff then they will make a record of it and they will make sure..
that we get it.
Mr. Smith — Excellent. Again, if there is anything that we can do as a Homeowners'
Association, let us ... I understand it is a regional issue but I respectfully object to our
looking at this as a regional issue. It is a local issue. Right now it is a Route 89 issue
and I can assure you that the 250 homes within the potential of out membership are
going to aggressively work to get them off of Route 89. This is a danger to our
community and our children and our area. So we are going to make it a local issue. I
think you should also make it a local issue with Ithaca. Because this is absolutely
counter to everything you are working for. This is 500 - trucks a day and I know hat you
see them, right? Is there anybody here who hasn't seen these huge trucks ... These
streets were not designed for this and now you're going to build sidewalks? Now we are
going to take that one lane on highway 86 going to the hospital, you know that they
are going to cross that road, don't you, now all of a sudden we are going to eliminate
that lane for bicycles and your going to put 22 -wheel vehicles across that little road. So
we have to make it local.
Chairperson Wilcox — Tracy.
Board Member Mitrano — I would like to make a recommendation that this issue be
included in the Study and also to any degree that the Town Planner could maybe be
working with law enforcement to research what the weight limitations are on any of the
local roads and ask that the appropriate authorities be alerted to this issue such that
they can begin to monitor and enforce any of the violations of those ordinances.
Mr. Kanter - Can I address that. I do know that the City of Ithaca is involved in this
very heavily and they are going to ... do have an enforcement police force, the Town of
Ithaca does not. We have the Sheriff's office and they are involved in that to some
degree but the City of Ithaca has actually been quite involved in that. This isn't
something new, this....
Board Member Mitrano - ...96 and 89 and 79 and all of the in and out State Roads and
watch the 22- wheelers go by.
Board Member Hoffmann — I would like to thank you and the previous speaker for
bringing this up. I had heard of this truck traffic before but I hadn't thought of
including it in this Transportation Plan and I think that is a very good idea and I agree
with you, that it is a local problem as well as a regional problem.
Mr. Mennen — What are we going to do, go through Albany ... What are we going to
do ... try and get this thing solved through Albany? I am being facetious.:. nothing
happens in Albany. We have to keep this in local. One of the ways in which, in my
im
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
research on this thing, one of the ways in which local areas solved the problem, is
through police enforcement and it makes perfect, total sense. First of all they are well
funding their efforts through fines, so this doesn't cost them money. Again, they are
bringing in money ... again I have articles if you'd like. But, what they are doing is they
are literally stopping them as they exit ... you get these small communities, we can do it
here in Ithaca with a road stop, we just start inspecting. Boy that will stop it quickly.
Chairperson Wilcox Two points. One, I remember, 12- months ago, 18- months ago,
there was some articles in the paper about the City's enforcement, pulling trucks over
down near Cass Park, I believe is where they were doing it ... Second of all, just so we
are absolutely clear ... that that was the City that was doing that because the trucks were
in the City at that point and the City of Ithaca police had the jurisdiction at that point.
As Jon Kanter pointed out, the Town of Ithaca has to rely upon the Sheriff for
enforcement and it's different than having your own City staff or Village so I would
encourage you to also go to the City.
Mr. Mennen — Again, we are here to help you. We see it as a local problem and we are
here to help out where we possibly can in relation to our resources and our
connections.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you.
Cande Carol, 925 Mitchell Street
I will be very quick and I am not nearly as articulate as the two gentlemen that already
spoke. One of the things that I notice... regarding trucks ... I have two little issues...
Trucks ... big issue, heavy, heavy issue ... Often driving through Cass Park, I notice that it
has become a virtual rest stop for these trucks. There are bathrooms, some vending
machines in the summer, shower rooms over at the Marina and many, many trucks are
gathered there, many times when I am going through. And yet the City is paying for
that.and the Town of course, right next door, as soon as you go up the hill it becomes
the Town. I have never seen a truck stopped for speeding. You see many cars
stopped for speeding all the time in the Town of Ithaca on Route 89, never once have I
ever seen a truck. That's not to say that trucks are not stopped but one of the areas of
influence that the Town definitely does have in this regard is to enforce the 45mph
speed limit that already exists. It doesn't have to be necessarily less; it simply needs to
be enforced. I often drive through the Town of Dryden and when you come in to
Dryden, I and everyone else who I know, understands that there is a 30mph speed limit
there that is enforced. We could have signs in the Town of Ithaca on Route 89 that say
45mph speed limit, which it already is, strictly enforced and our deputies could be
asked to enforce that. That is all it takes, are .fines for people who are speeding,
whether it is in a car or it is in a truck, it doesn't matter. When those speed limits are
enforced, people do slow down and drive at the speed limit and that will enhance the
safety that is not there right now.
19
The other thing has
here but there are issues
walking trails. What hap
extremely against a Town
trails and biking trails and
about that. That's it.
to do with eminent
where the City is.
pens in the City is
taking over residen
so in advance of it
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
domain, which I'm not sure it is relative
concerned in terms of bike paths and
likely to happen in the Town. I am
:'s property for the purposes of walking
happening I just want to go on record
Chairperson Wilcox — I am not going to let you leave. "What happens in the City is
likely to happen in the Town" does anybody want to comment on that statement other
than me? I appreciate your concern and certainly it comes on the heels of an insert in
the Ithaca Journal yesterday, which I am sure most of us read. I am not going to
comment on what the City of Ithaca is doing; it's not my place. It's not my place sitting
here on this Board, but just because the City does it doesn't mean the Town is going to
do it or vice - versa.
Ms. Carol -- I'll retract that and re- state. I fear that...I stand corrected.
Mr. Kanter — It really does ...
Chairperson Wilcox — It really does. Look at the Villages... they all have their own village
police staffs and we all know, you don't speed in those villages.
Board Member Mitrano — What is well worth articulating is that if the reason that they
are coming through our area is that it is cheaper, once it becomes more expensive,
they will stop.
Board Member Talty - It is also a direct path.
Board Member Mitrano — But if it is a virtual toll to go through here, either because they
have to go so slowly or they can't go because they are violating either speed or weight
limits, they won't go through this area anymore.
Joel Harlan, Newfield
I lived in Dryden for quite awhile. These people are talking about... it's about time you
stopped talking about major thoroughfares and infrastructure on roadways, but it is
going to remain a big problem because everything is growing. We got a lot of big
buildings going on in this area, including Cornell and Ithaca College so it's not just up
Taughannock Boulevard; it's all over the area. Your going to have to discuss about that
about anywhere I the Town of Ithaca because there's major thoroughfares coming
everywhere in this Town. It's like a wok bowl, the lake is the handle and everything
else is like the bowl. These guys are talking about these major garbage trucks going up
that road ... I've watched and studied these trucks, they don't just carry garbage, they
carry Cargill Salt Mine and the powerhouse, Milliken Station and they are also carrying
salt. So this side is also pretty busy with them too. Lansing and they sometimes have
20
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
to come down through here to go to Pennsylvania. Or they go done the Freeville
way ... so we got them scattered all over the place, not just one area. You gotta look at
the whole picture and not just Taughannock Boulevard. Thirteen is the busiest, hectic
highway... traffic jams all over the City when it comes to 5:00 when they're all the
Cornell and Ithaca College and Borg Warner let out. Plus the train comes through at
5:00 so we got a massive traffic jam at 5:00. So, hats off to you for trying to solve the
problem. But, it's not just the Town of Ithaca ... it's the City and Lansing where it's
generating most of these big vehicles and even Forest Home, I been around here and
you know they are trying to get the traffic off their roads and they can't do it. Where
that one lane bridge is, is not cutting it, there is still a lot of traffic up there and that's a
small town and Cornell surrounds that town.
So I am going to sit back and let you decide what you want to do with the
sidewalks and all that. I see they are starting to put sidewalks down on the Elmira
Road. Down through the Southwest corridor with all the business coming in. It sure
beats walking through the mud and getting sloshed up with all the slush from the
vehicles... especially when it's snowing. I got one other question for you ... When's the
next meeting for the Sapsucker Woods issue? I (inaudible) onto that. I need to now
when the next meeting is. It's the new cause...
Chairperson Wilcox — We don't know when they are going to come back.
Mr. Harlan — You don't put it in the paper until it's too late.
Chairperson Wilcox — All I can tell you is that they have a significant amount of work
left to do before they can come back to this Board in an attempt to get final approval
for the subdivision.
Mr. Harlan — I want to get involved in that. I just wanted to let you know that those
trucks are all over the place. So what are you going to do about it? This town's too
small to handle the traffic and it's just going to get worse.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you.
Board Member Talty — I have to agree with Joel. What I do for a living is travel and I
travel 90 and I have to agree with Cargill salt trucks, I've seen the garbage trucks but
no where near like the Cargill trucks ... I don't know what the ratio is but...
Mr. Kanter — It's a little harder to keep the locals out. We need that type of traffic. It's
just a matter of enforcement I think.
Chairperson Wilcox — it is interesting when we have a particularly difficult winter in
terms of snowfall and the towns and the municipalities around us start running out of
salt, they start sending their trucks out to Cargill to actually pick up salt and I've seen
21
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
them coming off' Route 13 North, getting off near Stewart Park and heading out
34B...just a procession of them ... I haven't seen much coal but...That could be an
owner's problem for 34 and 34B ... absolutely.
Board Member Talty — The new legislation that's out with regards to freight
requirements is that there are a lot of freight types folk that now have to travel with
two people because of the time restrictions so, not only do they have to go from A to B
in the shortest amount of time, but that's why they are speeding, to get to where they
need to go, because they only have X amount of time to get there, unload and come
back and unload, and if they don't make it in that time requirement, they actually have
to have another driver. So I know that that was transpiring with regards to freight.
Michael Ben, 127 Warren Road, Forest Home Improvement Association
I have a brief statement to read.
"The Forest Home Improvement Association strongly endorses the Town of
Ithaca's Transportation emphasis on preserving and enhancing the livability of
neighborhoods and encouraging biking, walking and public transportation. We also
very much appreciate that the Plan addresses our community's need for traffic calming
and pedestrian improvements. The Forest Home Traffic Calming Plan will be done by
this spring, and look forward to being included in future discussion with the Town
regarding these matters."
Chairperson Wilcox — can we quote you on the Traffic Calming Plan will be done by this
spring? Congratulations on $850,000 for the upstream bridge.
Bruce Brittain, 135 Warren Road
I'd like to second what Michael said about our appreciation that the Plan acknowledges
and seeks to address the problems in Forest Home but then I also wanted to speak just
for myself, I have only read the main text, I have not looked at the Appendices, the
Design Guidelines or the Executive Summary, but overall this is a much better draft that
the draft I had seen previously this summer. There's still some typos and
inconsistencies and in the best of all possible worlds I would have had a marked up
copy this evening and I don't but I will as soon as I can. I will try and be more concise
and coherent than my quote in the Journal this morning.
My main complaint is that the Plan doesn't go far enough. It seems...it seems
that there was sort of a predetermined solution which was increase transit, increase
pedestrian and increased bicycle ways which is nice BUT, there are conclusions that
don't always follow from the data. For example, the Town Survey found that only 16%
of people would use transit if it was available and yet still transit still seems to be the
main solution. The ... there's the regional development and transportations system
section which also, it doesn't seem its conclusion is based on the data. It compares
trend based versus a planned base development scenario on projected traffic levels in
22
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
30 years.. If you look at what those projected levels are, there's only a 2% difference
between plan -based and trend -based so if you are looking at a 30 -year time line, that's
only a 7 month difference, we'll get there in 30 years in 7 months instead of in 30
years, that's not a significant difference and yet the conclusion is that we need to do
the trend ... we need to do a planned based development rather than just allowing trend
based to continue. I was also disappointed with the natural Environment and
Transportation section. I think that's probably the weakest part of the Plan. It makes
some really good arguments. It identifies existing problems, for instance, with water, it
mentions that current zoning allows 70% of any parcel to be impervious... it mentions
that roads and parking contribute 50% of the runoff in a typical residential area, 80% in
a typical commercial ...talks about noise, transportation noise obstructs sleep which
impedes learning. Light pollution is a problem. Heat pollution from dark pavement ... All
these good arguments and then you get to the Conclusions section of that and it says
'therefore, we need increased transit, increased pedestrian and increased bicycle"
which is the same conclusion and I think a better conclusion would be directly address
those problems and say we need to change zoning to reduce the amount of impervious
area allowed in the Town. We need to reduce pavement widths for the same reason.
We need to explore the use of porous material and light colored pavement for roads,
for parking lots for walkways for bike lanes. Need to strengthen the Town light
ordinance, the Towns noise ordinance, require trees in parking lots, require street trees
along roads. So, and to be fair, some of that does get into the Recommendation
section, but I think that section, the Natural Environment section, ends up looking too
lenient. So some of it does get into the Recommendations..:
Ms. Tedesco — It is interesting just the way the Plan was structured and unfortunately
the issues didn't always fit in to the structure but to make it usable, you kind of got to
go with it. You're right, what I tried to do was to keep the Identification of Needs
section which is the section you are referring to, as this is what we need and then how
will we fulfill that need and putting that into Recommendations. So I wonder if there is
a middle way.
Mr. Brittain — Right. Just in reading it, it looks like it is copping out rather than saying,
okay here are the problems and here is what we need to do.
Ms. Tedesco — One of the problems if we were to start including that level of detail,
then some of those recommendations would almost be foregone conclusions because
there is more than one way that you can address water quality issues, for example, and
so to list all of them in that section and then choose one right, you wouldn't be able to
really examine the benefits ... Am I going ahead of myself here?
Mr. Brittain — Well, I'll take another look at it, but I do think that there could be more
put into that section without cheating the Recommendations section. I know that you
want the Recommendation section to be its own powerful use section. and not just
restating but I think you could do more with the Environment section.
23
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Ms. Tedesco — Okay. I will look at that section....
Mr. Brittain — I will try and get comments to you also. My biggest concern is, with
Attachment D, which is dealing with the Comprehensive Plan, I was on the Town of
Ithaca Comprehensive Planning Committee, 15 years ago I was on the Transportation
Sub - Committee that actually drafted the need for a Town Transportation Plan and
outlined what it should include and this current draft, while it's a straight... great stride
forward... still falls short of what we had envisioned 15 years ago for what a
Transportation Plan would be. So I feel a responsibility to see that that vision is not
lost. For example, the Comprehensive Plan recommendation 2B called for developing
our own Town of Ithaca, roadway classification system. The Attachment D in the
current Transportation plan says that this has been addressed in the Motor Vehicle and
Roadway section. I couldn't find a motor Vehicle and Roadways section.
Ms. Tedesco — Do you have that section with you?
Mr. Brittain — No. I have it at home.
Ms. Tedesco — Okay. Actually when I read that recommendation of the Comp Plan, I
read it as that the Town should adopt a functional classification system and I think
in ... at some point during our discussions it came up that when the Comp Plan was
being written was when the ITCTC was preparing to do the first functional classification
assessment for the area so I had actually interpreted that recommendation as being a
recommendation to adopt a functional classification system as in the Federal Functional
Classification System.
Mr. Brittain — My recollection is there already was one and we thought it was
inappropriate for the Town and the .Town's that we. had looked at the various
classifications and decided that we didn't like them and wanted ones that were based
on adjoining land use rather than traffic levels which is the way they were being signed
at the time.
Mr. Kanter -- If you want to ...
Chairperson Wilcox — You two are having a personal discussion and we are just
listening ... I let it go because Bruce has made many contributions to Town of Ithaca
Plans and clearly there is a history between the two of you in terms to his input and I
am more than happy to let this continue...
Mr. Kanter — In terms of the classification system, the Transportation Council, the NPO,
was really just organized right around the time the Plan was adopted and the
classification ... the criteria for that classification system, the federal classification system,
I think has evolved over the years and they do look more at things like adjacent land
24
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
use besides volumes and other issues so I think the committee discussed this and came
to the conclusion that it really didn't make sense to have an entirely new classification .
system when probably the better thing to do is to use the federal classification system
and have roads reclassified if they are not in the right class. So that's basically why.
Mr. Brittain — Then I would like to see that in writing ... I think it is fine to go back ... here
it is 15 years later, the landscape has changed, and if that is no longer a Town priority,
to come out and say that we no longer feel a need to develop our own system rather
than saying that we did it. That we have done it.
I want to hit some other points here. Comprehensive Plan Recommendation 2E
called for buffers along arterial and collector roads to separate land uses from roads.
Attachment D says that this was addressed in Recommendation 7, I couldn't find
anything in Recommendation 7. So I think that still needs to be addressed.
Comprehensive Plan Recommendation 4D said to avoid environmentally sensitive
areas... Attachment D says that's addressed in the Design Guidelines, again, I couldn't
find it in there.
Comprehensive Plan Recommendation 5A said limit the scale and concentration
of development to what can be supported by the transportation system. Attachment D
says that's in Recommendation 7, again I couldn't find that. Recommendation 7 dealing
with mixed use zoning and cluster development and adding commercial... neighborhood
commercial to residential zoning. Maybe it's beyond the scope of this Plan. That's a
zoning issue and it may be that the Town ... That is a pretty bold statement limit the
scale and concentration of development to what can be supported by the transportation
system. It may be that the Town doesn't want to do that and that's fine, but I think
that should be said up front, that we have changed our direction or that this is no
longer necessary or appropriate. I was concerned to see that the statement that it was
in there.
One other... Comprehensive Plan Recommendation 6A said consider designating
scenic roads, Attachment D says that that's in Attachment E but Attachment E deals
with pedestrian and bicycle safety education. The only thing I found on scenic
designation was Recommendation 2C46 which said it should be done. So that's fine. I
think if you haven't done it but you still think it is an important thing to do, I think go
ahead and say that. No we haven't done it but it's still important and we still have it on
our agenda. I think that's fine, but I don't want to have something that says; Oh we
did that and we fulfilled the goals and objectives of the Transportation Plan.
So, I guess I think this is a good document. It's a lot better than earlier drafts
that I have seen but I still think that there is significant work that needs to be done to
clean it up and especially in the in section of what were we setting out to do, what have
25
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
we done, what still needs to be done and is important and what have we decided is not
worth doing. And I will try and get specific comments to you.
Chairperson Wilcox — Should we recommend what's already be drafted to the Town
Board?
Mr. Brittain — I don't understand the process sufficiently to be able to answer that
question. I think you have a good document.which needs work. I don't know that if
you recommend it ... does that mean that you stop? I would think that you could still
correct typos but.where does it become enough of a policy change that you would not...
Chairperson Wilcox —,We have a draft Resolution in front of us and under the Resolved
it says that "the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends the Town of
Ithaca Town Board adopts the Draft Transportation subject to the following:
Comments from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, Town of Ithaca Town Board, Town
of Ithaca Conservation Board, other stakeholders such as adjoining municipalities and
the general public submitted during the Public Hearing process are considered: and
incorporated into the Plan as appropriate.
It is pretty open ended...it says take what we've got, incorporate... staff
incorporates those comments... those impacts they think are relevant .and that's what
goes to the Town Board for eventual review. If you're comfortable with that.
Board Member Talty — I think that has to be a discussion for us.
Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely. I . wanted Bruce's opinion. We will have our
discussion, I wanted Bruce's opinion. Thank you. Anybody else? Oh, I'm sorry. Kris,
hold on. Eva, go ahead.
Board Member Hoffmann — I actually spoke to Nicole earlier today about this specific
paragraph because I was hoping that she would be able to give us a little bit of a
feeling for how much time we all have to supply those comments before a decision has
to be made. So did you find out anything like that, Nicole?
Ms. Tedesco — I found out that I don't know anything. No, in all honesty, I think a lot
of it will depend on what the Board does tonight. Procedurally speaking, the public
comment period will not close with whatever your decision is tonight. So if you are
reading through the document and other issues come up, you think of other things, you
are still welcome to submit comments to staff. That door doesn't close when you guys
make a recommendation to the Town Board.
Chairperson Wilcox — And for the public as well.
26
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Ms. Tedesco — Yes, for everyone and anyone. The Town Board will hold at least one
more public hearing. So there will also be that opportunity to make comments in
person.
Chairperson Wilcox — Do we have a tentative month when the Town Board may hold
their public hearing?
Mr. Kanter — Probably in January. Of course that is up to the Town Board and depends
on what this Board's recommendation is.
Chairperson Wilcox — Answer your question?
Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. Thank you.
Chairperson Wilcox — Kris?
Kris Hodges, 16 Saunders Road
Kris Hodges, 16 Saunders Road. I appreciate your efforts on this plan. It is one of the
many things that I appreciate about the Town employees and volunteers and citizens. I
think when you look at it; it makes a lot of sense. Someone had alluded to a little
earlier that it is probably something a little broader than transportation, since we are
talking about pedestrian usage and bicycle usage as well. But I wanted to say, too,
that I think part of this is what makes the Town of Ithaca attractive place to people
because when people come in or moving within the area you look at the things that
affect quality of life and a lot of this does affect quality of life. You can hear people
talking about what it's like living on 89 so if we can address those things it makes the
Town more attractive to people, which brings up property values, which brings in more
revenue for.the Town. So everybody is happy.
Chairperson Wilcox — And more taxes, too.
Ms. Hodges — Yes, of course. But I wanted to bring up the area where I happen to live,
which is South Hill and a.couple of things regarding that. You have been dealing with
the soon to be or College Crossings Shopping Center at the corner of 96B and King
Road and South Hill has been an area that has been growing. Just within a mile of that
area there, there are nearly 6,000 people who live there now and that has been up
almost 20% in the last 6 years, in terms of population growth. I think one of the things
is, is looking at that area with that becoming a destination for people is thinking about
pedestrian traffic on a busy road, which is East King Road. In fact looking at the maps
that you had online, looks like the traffic count on East King is around 2,500 cars. I
mean that is over 100 an hour on average. You can kind of see that during the peak
times it does get very, very busy there. With that being such a busy road, it is used a
lot right now by Ithaca College students and athletes who will run, they'll kind of run a
loop out of the college and head south and loop around. Residents use it to some
27
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
extent for walking and biking, but right now the shoulders are not very good, especially
for biking. If you do that, there is a lot of traffic and there is nowhere to go safely on a
bicycle if you happen to get squeezed a bit. And with the shopping center coming in
there it starts to become the destination for residents and children wanting to ride bikes
there or walk there. And right now it is a situation I would not let a child, you know,
under teenage years do that by themselves. It is just much too dangerous, this
situation right now.
So I know that up in the Hanshaw area they have been working, there are
sidewalks that are due up there and they have been working in conjunction with the
County and it sounds like you have a good relationship there and that there have been
some federal funds that have come in to fund that. It starts the thinking about funding
for some of these things and I know that there are things such as lighting districts.
Maybe you establish sidewalk districts. But maybe something like that could be even
broader in the sense that typically sidewalks in many communities the value of them or
cost of them is assessed directly on whose property has a sidewalk on, but there is a lot
of people who might use it who would benefit from it, especially along something like
King Road, you don't have a lot of residences on King Road. There is a lot of frontage
there and to think of doing an assessment of just those people would not really be fair,
but maybe it is kind of a progressive type of thing. You could branch out and people a
little further away might be assessed a little less than those who are directly on it, but it
is just a funding idea to think about when it ... when you need to take a look at those
issues. And also something I think would be beneficial, might be. a little out of your
purview is getting bus service up there. Right now the bus stops at Longview up on
96B. It would certainly be easy to come up, hit King and go down Troy and loop back
into Ithaca College that way and give a lot of access to public transportation to people
up there who right now just, you know, have to go a little bit further. It makes it a little
less easy for them. So those are my thoughts.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thanks, Kris. Questions?
Board Member Mitrano Was it the shopping mall in which we talked about... (not
audible) ... about having a sidewalk going up King Road? I'm trying to recollect which
project that was.
Board Member Hoffmann — Yes. We talked about sidewalks for both the new hotel, for
this business where Ziebart's used to be, also for that property on the opposite corner
of the hotel. Diagonally opposite.
Board Member Mitrano — The Monkemeyer.
Board Member Hoffmann — Right. We talked about a sidewalk along there, especially
since it is so close to the Montessori School.
weeJ
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Mitrano — But I think it was in that last one where we talked about a
sidewalk going up all the way King Road.
Ms. Hodge — Right, yeah, I think it's...
Board Member Mitrano — I think the last one in which we talked about a sidewalk going
all the way up King Road, I think would be very appropriate.
Ms. Hodge — Yeah, something like that.
Chairperson Wilcox — Is that a County road?
Ms. Hodge — Yes, it is.
Mr. Kanter — I was just asking if that was shown on our priority plan for walkways.
Ms. Hodge — I have spoken with the County person about it and they are more than
happy to work with you folks.
Chairperson Wilcox — Will, did you hear that?
Mr. Walker —.The definition of more than happy means that, they'll allow the Town to
build a sidewalk on their road.
Ms. Hodge - Although if you are going to do bicycle usage, to, you have to think about
whether you have bikes on the road or bikes on the sidewalk usage type of thing, too.
But clearly those shoulders are... (not audible) ... for pedestrians and bikers.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you, Kris. Before I ask if anybody else wishes to speak,
Mark, I see you are sitting out there. I suspect that you might have some other people
from Ithacare /Longview with you. I apologize to those people. We will get to you as
soon as we can. I know the hour is starting to get late and we'll do our best. Anybody
else this evening with regard to ... sir? Yes.
Joe Crookston, 185 Westhaven Road
Hi. My name is Joe Crookston. I live at 185 Westhaven and I am relative new to
Ithaca and I am relatively new to this kind of process, but I just really wanted to come
and ... I read some of the plan and my understanding a little ... I think Bruce was his name
about there were these issues, but then the recommendation was more towards
pedestrian and bike paths and I also have the same kind of reaction in a general way to
the plan that it was focused... Living at Westhaven, on Westhaven, right on 79 where
you go up the hill, up the hill out of Ithaca, there is actually a stretch of about .2 miles,
you know 2/10 of a mile that is still within Ithaca City, but the speed limit is 55 miles an
hour and it's a dotted yellow line suggesting passing. So I live right there where the
29
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
speed limit is 55 in the City and it is a passing zone up this hill. So it ends up being
about 65 miles an hour. Cars are passing pretty much all day long. So I'm just simply,
I wanted to come here and just say that that to. me is such a priority. If there was
going to be a bike trail or a pedestrian walking along that road, to me, before that could
ever happen that speed limit would need to be reduced.
Board Member Mitrano — Could you be a little more precise about that 2/10 of a mile
stretch where that is?
Mr. Crookston — Yeah, so going up 79 it curves...
Board Member Mitrano = Is it before or after you hit Pine Tree?
Chairperson Wilcox — No. West.
Board Member Mitrano — Oh, west.
Mr. Crookston — Like Linderman Creek area:
Board Member Mitrano — I know where you mean now.
Chairperson Wilcox — Now she's all set.
Mr. Crookston — So I would say it is about a tenth of a mile or so before Linderman
Creek.
Board Member Mitrano — I know exactly where you mean now.
Mr. Crookston — Up to, you know, just below Westhaven.
Mr. Walker — Actually, just a correction. The City line is actually at the bottom of the
hill where the curve is. You know that little parking area right at the bottom of the hill?
That is where the City line is.
Mr. Crookston — Not where the sign is?
Board Member Thayer — Right.
Mr. Crookston — Okay.
Mr. Walker - There may be a sign saying the City of Ithaca, but that is not within the
City limits.
Mr. Crookston — A welcome sign.
30
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — Lets make sure. So that is where the City limit is. So as you are
going up that straight stretch of hill, you are in the Town of Ithaca.
Mr. Walker — It is all in the Town.
Chairperson Wilcox — Absolutely.
Mr. Walker — All of Linderman Creek is in the Town.
Mr. Kanter — I believe the speed limit, though, was reduced there to 459
Board Member Mitrano — Its 45 there. I think I do know... (not audible)
(not audible... several people talking at once)
Chairperson Wilcox — They did reduce it for a short distance, but" your point is well
made though.
Mr. Crookston — My point is, just a real ... and I looked at the map on the website of the
plan just to see where in Ithaca City where there is still 55 mph speed limits.
Mr. Walker — They don't have 55 mph in the City. It is all 30 in the City.
Chairperson Wilcox — The only exception is part of Route 13. Part of Route 13 in the
City is the only exception.
Mr. Walker — By the high school.
Chairperson Wilcox — High school, Aldi's, back in that area where it is 45 and 55. That
is the only exception by the way.
Mr. Crookston — I don't think I have a lot other than ... is. really a question. I understand
then that is in the Town, the speed limit, and to change that that is more of a State
issue?
Mr. Walker — We have to get permission from the State.
Mr. Crookston — Right. Okay. So then my question is, and I don't want to take any
more time here for that, but where... who... where would I go or who ... could . the
Transportation Plan make a recommendation to the State. Could that be part of the
Transportation Plan?
31
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — It could. I think that if you wanted to pursue that we might just
want to do it independently. I believe it has to be the Town Board of the Town of.
Ithaca that goes to the State and requests a change in the speed limit. I don't think
.
this board 1) should do that because I think it is policy related so we have a..I'll get to
you, Fred, in a second.
Mr. Noteboom — It's just to answer the question.
Chairperson Wilcox — Okay. Good. Go ahead.
Mr. Noteboom = The Town Board passes a resolution, which actually has to go to the
County Highway Superintendent and they give their recommendation or don't and then
it goes to the State. The State does a strict engineering study and they either approve
or disapprove based on the engineering study.
Mr. Walker — And based on the land use on that section of Route 79, they will not
change the speed limit any lower than it is because there's only about a half a dozen
driveways and it probably will not meet their warrant for a reduced speed limit there.
Enforcement is the other issue because actually, driving on that road since I live out
there, that is the fastest uphill drag strip I have ever seen. People just have a need for
some reason to go from 30 mph to 65 before they hit Westhaven and the only thing we
can do is recommend better enforcement from the Sheriff and maybe the State Police.
Board Member Mitrano — I am impressed, though, by the number of people who have
come out under the basis of this transportation study to talk about various aspects of
speed and so I think Fred's idea of independent action depending upon how ambitious
and civic minded you are, you may want, to start something where people from around
the County begin to talk about the various areas of concern and then follow whatever
processes like Fred Noteboom mentioned.
Mr. Crookston — Dan, could I ask you one other question about the ... so you just
suggested that the speed limit changing it because of the driveways that makes sense,
the number of driveways, but what about a passing zone. Is that a different... my sense
is if it were two double yellow lines up there it would cut the speed limit by 20 mph
typically.
Mr. Noteboom - A passing zone is actually based on sight distance.
Mr. Walker — They have passing zones marked based on that sight distance. I doubt if
they might change that either, but again the speed limit is lower. It is 45 for the first
section there, but people do not observe it and the only way to do that is enforcement
and we can bring that up to the Sheriff and ask them or the State Police maybe to do
more enforcement.
32
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — I need to do two things. Before you go, I need a spelling of your
last name.
Mr. Crookston — C- r- o- o- k- s-t-o -n.
Chairperson Wilcox — And Fred Noteboom, would you let the audience know, your
position with the Town, please?
Mr. Noteboom — I am the Highway Superintendent for the Town of Ithaca.
Chairperson Wilcox — Thank you. Anybody else? Okay. I am going to leave the public
hearing open just for a little bit in case someone thinks of something that they hadn't
said before and would like the opportunity to step up. What is this board's pleasure at
this point?
Board Member Mitrano — Move it.
Chairperson Wilcox — Discussion?
Board Member Mitrano — Well, no, I mean its open in such a way that I don't see why
we wouldn't move it. There is still opportunity for continued input. I think this has
been very helpful...
Mr. Kanter — I think we are looking at this quite differently than you would normally
look at a local law that comes to this board for a recommendation, which is basically
that is the law that you are recommending. This is the plan. We're hoping the Town
Board will adopt it at some point, but on the other hand, it is also going to be an
evolving document. I mean even once it is adopted it will probably change periodically,
probably, you know, every couple of years. So it is not like it is going to end up as a
certain document and then that's it, so, but yeah, I think, I think certainly sending a
recommendation similar to the way it is worded in the draft resolution, you know,
basically signaling to the Town Board this looks pretty good. You know.
Board Member Mitrano — And I want to comment on how open and favorable you are,
Nicole, to recommendations and suggestions. Its, you know, really lovely. So, thank
you.
Ms. Tedesco — And I mean the more input, the greater number of suggestions we get,
the more comments we get, the better the plan is. I think that is what the
Transportation Committee is really focused on and hence, I mean as new traffic data
comes in, the plan is going to be updated. So it's really not ... the more information we
get the better.
Board Member Mitrano — Yeah. It's a nice approach.
33
F
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Howe — Jonathan's comment helped clarify for me, so I'm also
comfortable moving it forward. I didn't want to put any extra burden on anyone else,
but you have clarified it very well. .
Chairperson Wilcox — Is there anything in particular that struck you as we listened to
the public? Safety was a concern of many people, either directly or indirectly. No one
mentioned Coddington Road specifically, but I'll mention Coddington Road in addition to
some of the other roads that were mentioned where there are safety concerns either
because there is not room for pedestrians to walk safety. King Road was mentioned.
89 where bicycles have a problem given the parking situation, the speed limits.
Coddington Road, which I am familiar with when I used to live up there, given the lack
of shoulders. Common thing.
Board Member Conneman — Bill Lesser raised the question about funding of TCAT. I
don't whether Will wants to comment on that or not.
Chairperson Wilcox — [laughing] He's in the hallway all of a sudden.
Board Member Conneman — It seems to me that that is an issue because it could
have ... and also another thing, a park and ride. When you see a park and ride work as
you come into Ithaca as you come from Elmira. There are some places that really
work. They really make a difference.
Board Member Thayer — I agree. TCAT could play a big part in that.
Board Member Conneman — You'll also remember when we had some ... when we are
doing a lot of construction downtown there are a lot of people who illegally use the
hospital parking lots as a way ... that's another place where somehow if there were some
way to have a park and ride there it would probably work. I think anyway.
Mr. Walker — Well, the hospital is limited right now and it may be because of their
construction. They are actually patrolling and putting ... their employees have to have
stickers and park in certain locations and they are posting parking limitation pretty
strictly.
Board Member Conneman — I understand that. It's just that that is one of the places
where you could prevent or encourage people not to go downtown and not to go to the
City of Ithaca.
Ms. Tedesco — It would be one of the ... I know that the ITCTC has been working with
TCAT and they did a park and ride study. So that issue is being looked at, at a regional
level. It is important that it is looked at, at a regional level. I think the best park and
ride lot sitings are farther out because if people are going to drive 10 miles to Ithaca, if
34
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
they are going to drive the first 9 and then hop on a bus for the last mile, they're just
not going to do it. Whereas if they only have a half mile drive to the lot, they are more
likely to take the bus and that also keeps the traffic out of the Town, period.
Board Member Thayer — A good example of that is the park and ride out on Route 34B,
by the fire station. It's the park and ride for Tioga County and its way out.
Chairperson Wilcox — There is a park and ride lot in Tully, right? Have you seen the
signs on 81? There is a park and ride lot in Tully. Right?
Board Member Thayer — Yeah.
Chairperson Wilcox — Is that for north traffic to Syracuse? Yeah.
Ms. Tedesco — Yeah.
Chairperson Wilcox — There's a good distance away from Syracuse.
Mr. Kanter — That is like 15 or 20 miles.
Ms. Tedesco — At least.
Board Member Talty — I have a question. For the park and rides that work, are they
State owned,. County owned, Town owned? Who actually owns the property and
maintains it?
Mr. Kanter — Or sometimes they are privately owned. Typically the funding or
maintenance issues are kind of a combination. Usually TCAT gets involved directly in
them in some way because they are going to be serving the people who park there.
They are often times in say a church or a shopping center that has extra spaces and
done by license or other agreement with the private entity. In other parts of the State,
there are a lot that are basically. .'have been done by the State DOT, but I don't know
that there are too many of those around here.
Mr. Walker — No, usually the State puts them in where there is a lot of feeding off of an
interstate coming into ... it takes the load off of State roads so they can justify the park
and ride lots. But that is usually in the bigger urban areas. I know in Rochester right
off of 490...390...490 I guess it is, on the east side of Bush Hill Basin there is a large
park and ride lot there. People commute in from Canandaigua and all that. They come
in the thru -way and then they stop right off the thru -way there and there is probably a
400 car lot there.
Board Member Talty — Right. So that lot, the one you are talking about, is that ... do you
believe a County owned lot?
35
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Walker — I'm not sure if it is State or County, but it's not just the Town, I know
that. It's not apparent who owns it.
Board Member Talty — What I am trying to determine here is ... like...it's a wonderful
idea, but where do you take it from there. So do you look at private parcels? Do you
work with the State? Do you work with the County? Because I think that is what really
needs to be determined is that logistically where does it matter. I agree with Nicole. If
you are going to drive all that way, you are not going to stop your car one mile out or
two miles out. I think Tully is an exception at 15 or 20 minutes out, but I think that
that needs to be determined on logistically where are the lots ... almost kind of like a cell
tower. Like they look to see where the lines of sights are. Are there silos there or is it
a private lot where they can build a tower, that type of mentality.
Ms. Tedesco — No, it's interesting. You would probably be interested in the park and
ride study that is still happening. Correct?
Mr. Kanter —Yeah,
Ms. Tedesco — Yeah. I mean those are the exact things they are looking at for siting.
Mr. Kanter — And again, they'll probably be coming up with some specific actual park
and ride recommendations, specific locations and then . helping to act as the
coordinating agency to get, as we have been saying, whoever is going to be involved in
setting it up, TCAT, possibly the County, whatever the Town is. There is actually one
that was recommended just outside of the Town of Ithaca on 79 at the church.
Chairperson Wilcox — East or west? 79 east or west?
Mr. Kanter — Well, going east out of the City. It's about a mile and a half or 2 miles.
Its probably about as close in as you would want to get to make it effective, but there
is an awful lot of traffic that comes in commuting on 79 that if it could be cutoff there
and maybe even, say, 30 parking spaces were made available there at off -peak times
when the church isn't using them.
Board Member Mitrano — Even further up would be ... in Brooktondale. Up that way.
Chairperson Wilcox — At the Crispbell facility, as an area, where you could catch the
Dryden, Brooktondale...
Board Member Conneman — Nicole..: (not audible) ... page 11 of the executive summary,
it seems to me maybe something more could be said about park and ride. That's my
point.
36
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Ms. Tedesco — In the executive summary? Oh, in the transit section?
Board Member Conneman — Yeah, because it says unfortunately none are located in the
Town. It doesn't sort of drop it there but...
Ms. Tedesco — Okay.
Mr. Walker — The other sponsors of park and rides very often ... well, the bus system
would sponsor it because they would be generating the revenue to pay for the costs,
but the large employers like, Cornell, should be sponsoring something like this, too.
Chairperson Wilcox — Ithaca College. School District. Borg Warner. There are a lot of
large employers. Any other comments, questions?
Board Member Thayer — We haven't talked too much about the one person in the car
bit, you know. And that could tie in with the park and ride, too, without using a bus
type thing.
Ms. Tedesco — Well, actually, I just went to a very exciting talk yesterday about
vanpooling. I will give you the really quick story. Vanpooling is not just like carpooling
where you all hop into somebody's car: There are actually companies, like a turnkey
operation where the company will provide the vehicle, the insurance, they'll take care of
the gas, etc. and they help private companies or public entities to set up vanpools. And
there will be one coordinator. The coordinator will take care of the drivers and
collecting the money and stuff. So its one step below the idea of a park and ride, which
is completely organized by the transit agency and one step up from a carpool, which is
sort of an ad hoc type thing. So there is TCAT and Cornell are looking to get something
started, which could very easily be expanded to include other employers, Ithaca
College. It could even become like a public rideshare type of thing. So those are some
of the exciting things in the works in the Ithaca area.
Board Member Talty — So its kind of one step up from a taxi, but one step below a limo.
[laughing]
Board Member Talty — That's what it sounds like to me. Am I missing something?
Ms. Tedesco — Instead of using your own vehicle, you just share the use of a vehicle
that is owned and maintained and taken care of by and I mean the vans that they use
are like 9 to 15 passenger vans.
Chairperson Wilcox — Airport limousine. Eva?
37
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Hoffmann — Nicole, I can't remember now,. is there any mention of the
kind of lot which I think are called kiss and rides sometimes.
Chairperson Wilcox — Tell me more.
Board Member Hoffmann — One car and one spouse drives the other to where there is a
bus stop and there are a few places where you can stop until the bus comes and then
the other spouse goes off in the bus.
Ms. Tedesco — That is not mentioned in the Town's plan, but when Cornell did their
origin and destination study, I think one of the questions they asked is what type of
facilities would you like to see at a park and ride location. Would like to see dry
cleaners or a bank or whatever. Again, that is one of the things that's being looked at
but hasn't been mentioned in this plan. Do you think it is something that is important,
sort of an idea to throw out there?
Board Member Hoffmann — Well, it would allow people to ... they wouldn't need to have
two cars, maybe, in a household where they would normally drive two cars to two:
different jobs. If one of them could go by bus and the other one could drive the person
to the bus stop and have a place to pull off the road and wait...
Board Member Mitrano - ...and kiss.
Board Member Hoffmann - ...until the bus comes. Exactly. That's right. Haven't you
seen those signs?
Chairperson Wilcox — No. This is the first I've heard of it. I'm sorry.
Board Member Hoffmann — You haven't been around enough. The other thing I was
wondering, I couldn't remember if there was any mention about educating drivers
about the rights of bicyclists on the road. Is there a section on that?
Ms. Tedesco — Yeah. There is. If you look towards the end, the recommendations.
Board Member Hoffmann — Because that is very important. I think I ... I hear drivers
once in a while who get so upset when there is a bicyclist on the road and say they
ought to get off of the road and this is for a car.
Board Member Conneman — I have a lot of respect for people who drive bicycles, but
also they cut in front of you and don't obey the traffic rules. They go through stop
signs. They turn left in front of you. So there are two sides to the truth.
Board Member Hoffmann — I know there is.
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Talty — Are bicyclists legally allowed to go down the center of the road,
not the dead center? I'm talking your driving lane. I see more bicyclists in Ithaca go .
down the middle of the driving lane.
Board Member Mitrano — Are they turning?
Board Member Talty — I just want to know. They are not turning. They are just
moseying along.
Board Member Hoffmann — Are they getting ready to turn to the left maybe?
Board Member Talty — No.
Board Member Thayer - No bicycle lane.
Board Member Talty — There is no bicycle lane, but they are literally dead center of the
center of my car as I'm driving. So, for example, I know ... see I think there is a lot of
driver frustration out there and that is what leads to speeding. So, for example, by not
having signals timed correctly people are, ah, I gotta jump ... I gotta get to the next light
before it changes. Or if there is a bicyclist in the middle ... you know, going 10 mph,
there is an urgency, there is a need in the driver's mind to get around that person and
speed up at the stop sign. I think that if there was unison where everyone was moving
appropriately there wouldn't be as much urgency to speed.
Board Member Thayer — Perfect world.
Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah.
Board Member Talty — Well, Route 13, they can start there because going through the
City of Ithaca, I bet every single person in this audience has done it...
Board Member Mitrano — Oh dear.
Board Member Talty - '...where they will try to get to the next light because you know
Green Street is going to change or one of those streets. So I know it has been brought
up many times in the Ithaca Journal; but there is City of Rochester, City of Buffalo, they
time the lights. If the speed limit is 30 mph, its 27 to time the lights perfectly and you
get right through. So...
Chairperson Wilcox — Ladies and gentlemen, before I close the public hearing, anybody
want to make any additional short, brief comments based upon our discussion? Up to
the microphone. You gotta come to the microphone. Name only will do.
39
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Segelken — Roger Segelken again. Back to the park and rides. I just wanted to
question the assumption that shortening the distance that people drive is the only
reason that people use park and rides. Particularly if you look at some of the very large
park and ride facilities in the suburbs around New York City, clearly people are using
that and taking a bus or a train to avoid the cost of parking in the City. The park and
rides are generally free. There is some restriction on how long you can leave your car
there, not overnight probably and some of them whether you are actually a resident of
the Town that sponsors the park and ride facility. .I think when we are thinking about
siting park and rides in the Town, we should keep in mind that distance driven is not
the only motivation for using these things.
Chairperson Wilcox Thank you, sir. Anybody else? Very good. Thank you. I will
close the public hearing at 9:02 p.m. Tracy, you moved the motion?
Board Member Howe — Second.
Chairperson Wilcox — Seconded by Rod Howe. Discussion? Changes? Anything we
think that should be focused on?
Ms. Brock — Do you have any interest in listing some of the items that were discussed
tonight in the resolution itself as items that you want the Town Board to be
considering?
Board Member Mitrano — Do you have some suggestions?
Ms. Brock — I have some suggested language. This is sample only, so you may want to
change the items I picked, but as I heard the public's comments and your discussion,
these are the things that seemed to be recurring. In the resolution, the Planning Board
is recommending that the Town Board adopt the draft transportation plan subject to
comments from the Planning Board members, the public, etc. add at the end of that
paragraph 1 the following language. So you are saying that you want the Town Board
to adopt the transportation plan subject to comments from these various entities,
"including additional discussions in the plan about truck traffic, Town of Ithaca
evaluation of TCAT funding requests, potential speed limit reductions and, bicycle and
other safety issues raised during the Planning Board's November 21st public hearing."
Mr. Kanter — Could you repeat that?
Board Member Howe — As long as that doesn't preclude other things that...I think Nicole
probably took notes on and what not.
Ms. Brock — We can say...
Chairperson Wilcox — It doesn't preclude, it adds extra emphasis to those items.
.I
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Kanter — Could you just repeat those?
Ms. Brock — The items are...the language is added at the end of the phrase, "as
appropriate, including additional discussions in the plan about truck traffic, Town of
Ithaca TCAT funding requests, potential speed limit reductions, and bicycle and .other
safety issues."
Chairperson Wilcox — Bicycle and pedestrian safety issues?
Mr. Kanter — That one I'm not quite sure what that would mean exactly. Because I
think ... there is a lot in the plan that addresses that.
Chairperson Wilcox — I think it is an indication of our concern and focus and...
Board Member Mitrano — Yeah. I'm all for it.
Chairperson Wilcox — I think we are just simply highlighting those areas.
Ms. Brock — But add the word ""pedestrian" after bicycle?
Chairperson Wilcox — Yeah.
Ms. Brock — "bicycle, pedestrian, and other safety issues."
Board Member Hoffmann Yes or could it say perhaps "including, but limited to" and
then you list those things? '
Ms. Brock - Sure. That would be fine. "Including, but not limited to" at the beginning.
Does that hit the major issues?
Chairperson Wilcox — Tracy, you happy?
Board Member Mitrano — Yeah.
Chairperson Wilcox — Rod, acceptable?
Board Member Howe indicates changes are acceptable.
Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else? All set? All set over here? All those in favor
please signal by aye?
Board — Aye.
Efil
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody opposed? Are there any abstentions? There are none.
The motion is passed. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you. I.
appreciate your patience and we thank you for staying here and providing your input.
Before you we all leave, I wanted to note for the record that Will Burbank is here. I
think that was already noted. He is a member of the Town Board. Ed Marx, the
Commissioner of Planning, was here. He just recently stepped out in the last couple of
minutes. He also was in attendance this evening and heard the discussion this evening.
All set? Very good. Thank you all very much.
PB RESOLUTION NO, 2006-113: Recommendation to Town Board Regardin4
Adoption of Proposed Transportation Plan
MOTION made by Board Member Mitrano, Board Member Howe.
WHEREAS:
1. For the past three years, the Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee has
worked on a draft Transportation Plan, the goals of which include protecting the
quality of life in the Town and the livability in residential neighborhoods, the
expansion of bicycling, walking, and transit opportunities, and adoption of
roadway design guidelines that promote aesthetically pleasing, safe, and efficient
streetscapes that promote alternatives to the low- occupancy motor vehicle; and
2. That, if adopted, the Transportation Plan would provide a guide for the
maintenance and development of the transportation system in the Town, and
could potentially become an element of the Town s Comprehensive Plan; and
3. The Town of Ithaca Transportation Committee has already held three
informational meetings for the public to present the .progress of the Plan and to
solicit input from residents; and
4. The Town of Ithaca Town Board, on October 5, 2006, has referred the draft
Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan to the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for
their review, comments, and recommendation (TB Resolution 2006 -195); and
5. On October 17, 2006, Planning Department staff gave an introductory
presentation about the Transportation Plan to the Town of Ithaca Planning
Board; and
42
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
6. On November 21, 2006, the Town of Ithaca Planning Board held a public hearing
on the draft Transportation Plan to solicit input from the public; and.
7, That, pursuant to New York State Environmental Quality Review Act, the Town of
Ithaca Town Board is acting as Lead Agency with respect to the environmental
review of the draft Transportation Plan and will hold a second public hearing as
part of the environmental review and adoption process;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED;
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town. of Ithaca
Town Board adopts the draft Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan, subject to the
following:
1. Comments from the Town of Ithaca Planning Board, Town of Ithaca Town Board,
Town of Ithaca Conservation Board, other stakeholders (such as adjoining
municipalities), and the general public submitted during the public hearing
process are considered and incorporated into the Plan as appropriate including,
but not limited to, additional discussions in the Plan about truck traffic, Town of
Ithaca evaluation of TCAT funding requests, potential speed limit reductions, and
bicycle, pedestrian and other safety issues raised during the Planning Boards
November 21, 2006 public hearing; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED.
That the Town of Ithaca Planning Board hereby recommends that the Town of Ithaca
Town Board amend the Town of Ithaca Comprehensive Plan (1993) to incorporate the
Transportation Plan as an element of it.
A vote on the motion resulted as follows:
AYES. Wilcox, Hoffmann, Conneman, Thayer, Mitrano, Howe, Talty.
NA YS.• None.
The Motion was declared to be carried unanimously.
AGENDA ITEM
Update regarding the proposed Skilled / Adult Care Addition at Longview, an
Ithacare Community, located at 1 Bella Vista Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 394-131, Planned Development Zone No. 7. The proposal
involves the construction of a +/- 24,000 square foot addition on the north
43
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
side of the existing building to serve up to 32 additional, residents. The
proposal will also include approximately 11 new parking spaces, a new
driveway, and new stormwater facilities. The Town Board also referred the
proposed amendment of Planned Development Zone No. 7 to the Planning
Board for a recommendation. Ithacare Center Service Company, Inc.,
Owner /Applicant; Mark A. Macera, Executive Director, Agent.
Chairperson Wilcox — Before you begin, our Town Attorney has something to say.
Ms. Brock — I just want to disclose for the record that I had represented Ithacare in the
past. I have not done any work for them since at least 1996 or 97. So probably about
10 years. One of the things I did do for them was represent them when they were
before you probably in the mid- 1990s, 95 or so, seeking approval for the facility that is
now on 96B, the Longview facility. This Planning Board gave a negative determination
of environmental significance for that facility. Some neighbors sued ... my memory is
they sued the Town and Ithacare intervened in the suit as well, basically on the same
side of the suit as the Town trying to convince the court that the negative
determination was appropriate and I represented Ithacare in that effort. The judge
determined that an environmental statement actually should have been required. So
one was then prepared and I worked with Ithacare on that as well. Then. the matter
came back to the Board and you gave, ultimately, final approval for the project. The
issue in the suit was one of viewshed impact and so that was the real issue that was
being litigated, whether or not the impact on the view would have the potential to
cause a potentially significant impact. Although the EIS was not limited just to
viewshed, it went ahead and looked at a number of other issues, too, environmental
issues. That matter has been long resolved. The facility is now built. What Ithacare is
coming before you now about is a different matter in that they are going to. be
proposing an addition to the facility.
I do not believe that there is any type of conflict of interest or appearance of
impropriety, however, if as things develop, impact on viewshed becomes a large issue
again, then perhaps I'll look at whether I should continue to represent the Town in this.
It's not the same matter, but maybe because some of the issues are very similar to the
types of issues that were in the past, you know, it may or may not be appropriate for
me just in terms of how things might appear to the public. So I just wanted to give you
that disclosure. I have talked with. Mr. Macera about all of this and Ithacare has no
problems with my representing the Town now on this matter. But I wanted to get this
just out on the record and have it be a very open process. And if any of you have any
discomfort with my role as Attorney for the Town in this project, please say so because
it's better that we have this discussion up front rather than on the back end of things.
Board Member Mitrano — What court did that go to, Susan?
Ms. Brock — It was here in Tompkins County Supreme Court. Judge Relihan.
CIAI
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — You don't have a problem, Mark?
Mr. Macera — No. I would only add that discussions that Susan and I had also took into
consideration that the interested parties, which essentially include Ithacare and the
Town can basically disclose it and eliminate any conflict of interest that would take it to
the next step and freeing the parties from any potential negative outcome as a result of
any actions that Susan may take on behalf of the Town and Ithacare may take in filing
an application
Ms. Brock — I think what he is referring to, is that Ithacare has waived any potential
conflict of interest. I mean I don't think there is one anyway, but Mark has actually
stated to me in writing that they waived that. So that provides the Town more
protections.
Board Member Mitrano — Okay.
Board Member Thayer — Okay.
Ms. Brock — At least vis -a -vis Ithacare.
Chairperson Wilcox — You can begin. The floor is yours.
Mark Macera, Executive Director of Ithacare
My name is Mark Macera. I am the Executive Director of Ithacare Longview, located at
1 Bella Vista Drive here in the Town, of Ithaca. My colleague and associate in this
project next to me is...
Dave Schossler, Schopfer Architects:
Dave Schossler, Schopfer Architects, Partner, 1111 James Street, Syracuse NY.
Chairperson Wilcox - Can I interrupt one more time? I'm sorry, Mark. Ladies and
gentlemen, there is at least one visual and possibly some others. If you wish to come
up and come around and be able to view it better you are certainly welcome to come
up behind us if that works better for you. My apologies.
Mr. Macera — Our objective here this evening is pretty much to revisit the issue of the
sketch plan review that was submitted for the Town of Ithaca's initial review, I think
approximately one year ago. I believe it was November of last year. We recently
submitted an application for preliminary site plan review and then leading up to the
process to begin that actual review; we wish to revisit the sketch plan review. We have
submitted information that includes additional documentation to begin that process.
We hope to present you with additional information, answer questions, and perhaps
identify additional documentation that may prove necessary and useful to the Town in
45
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
considering our expansion project. With that, let me point out, for those who are
interested, there are several other representatives of Ithacare. I know there is no
scheduled public hearing here, but assuming that the members of the Town Planning
Board are interested in hearing from any other members. Behind me and to my left,
your right, I think from your right to left we have Betty Allinger, who is the President of
the Adult Home Resident Council. Inside we have Kathryn Bisner, the current President
of the Ithacare Board of Directors. To her right is David Corson, the immediate past
President of the organization. I'm also pleased to note that we have two other
residents . here. We also have John Wood, who is the President of the Independent
Resident Council and we have two other residents here. We have Artie Bennett, who is
a resident and Lemoyne Farrell, behind me. So they are prepared, I think, to respond
to questions or comments. regarding this project.
Board Member Mitrano - Eva has some questions.
Board Member Hoffmann Well, I'm waiting. Do you have some more presentation to
give?
Mr. Macera — We are prepared to begin a discussion of the documents that are here
and just some general questions that will probably determine the direction of the way
we proceed this evening.
Mr. Schossler — I guess I would add between the last year, from sketch plan to what
has been presented here, there really has been no significant changes in what we have
presented other than we have had obviously more detailed information, grading plan,
stormwater management plan, etc, which take the sketch plan review one step further.
As a simple reminder, the Longview is sitting on approximately 28 acres. It is currently
129,000 square feet of building on four levels. The. site grading from the north...from
the southeast, which is up in this corner to the opposite corner at the northwest is a
drop of about 75 feet. The existing building as it was approved in the SLUD had a
maximum height of approximately 600 elevations, elevation of 630, which is ... what is
being proposed is a 22,000 square foot addition tucked in down and behind, if you will,
out of sight of Route 96 and a majority of the residents that currently...the residential
units that occupy the facility. It will add 30 units to the capacity of the facility. It is
being ... its finished floor level is 5 feet below the lowest existing floor level, for the
purpose of reducing sight line issues within the complex, not outside it, but within it.
And as we presented previously, the addition is one story, 22,000 square feet,
and there is a link at this location, which ties in through via elevator access to the upper
floors and that is approximately 3 stories. Once completed, that 3 -story element will be
approximately 17.5 feet below the existing highest roof plane of the existing building.
So in sight line studies that we have given you and photographs we have given you,
even from the highest point on 96B from the overlook and rest stop, there will be
absolutely no view of any portion of the addition. The closest view one can actually get
mo
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
to, seeing this as one moves from north to south on Route 96 coming up the road,
there are fleeting glances of a portion of the building.
What we have added to what wasn't there in sketch plan, but which we have
added, is we have current surveys and site grading plans. We have had modifications
and discussions with New York State DOT. As of today, we just received approval.
Originally, we had proposed a curb cut at this location. They were concerned with two
things, one the angle and two the distance from the existing curb cut. With the plans
we have submitted, have it revised at this location and has a complete elevation and
grading to it. Today we received an acceptance from New York State as to that
modification.
We've also got a stormwater management report as planned, which basically
locates two detention areas. One which basically is a filtration and we are basically
retaining approximately 3.5 acres of property, which far exceeds the acreage of the
development itself, which is less than 2 acres. Then a pond, which is down in this area,
you will see actually on the grading plan the area proposed for the pond does not
actually have any shrubbery in it. It is actually a low area, hence a natural detention
area. So we are actually taking advantage of that and actually all we have to do is
build up the west end of that and it is a natural detention area shielded visually by this
row of trees and shrubbery at this location.
Additionally, we have given you a landscape plan, photometrics and updated
floor plans and grading and elevations sheets. I guess with that we can open it to
questions. I'm sorry ... we have also received a list of suggested additional submittals
from Jon Kanter. I think we are about half way through that. We have made some of
those and the intention of those was to have them submitted for our preliminary review
in December and will have most of those within the next week.
Mr. Macera — You will find those items as part of the memo that Jon sent to you that
includes on the front page, first paragraph, bottom, amending or drafting a new public
law to amend the old law creating Longview and basically that large middle paragraph
on page 2 of that memo, which identifies the items that Dave is alluding to, which
includes such things as, again, driveway configuration, which David just suggested
documentation regarding the archeological resources on the site, perhaps a revised
long environmental assessment form, issues dealing. with an updated narrative,
additional grading details, if necessary, draft easement that we need to work out
language with Ithaca College given the grading scheme that that proposes. Basic
additional information sources that would enhance information that is already in the
Town's possession or was included in the submissions that we have made so far.
Mr. Schossler — The State Historic Preservation had an early response to our
submissions last year. We have just recently submitted our response to them and
documentation showing that we believe this to be ... that they should be issuing a
=4
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
negative declaration with respect to archeological on this site on the basis that it is a
totally disturbed site, particularly the area in which we are developing. We showed
grading plans. We gave them grading plans prior to the original construction and after
the original construction showing that there is over 10 feet of fill in that area, of which
we will be excavating only into the fill. And the other basis is that bedrock and shale
throughout the entire site was anywhere from 1.5 to 5 feet below existing grade, which
is not your typical archeological dig site. So on that basis we would fully expect and
would hope that they would give us a response in the next couple of weeks.
Chairperson Wilcox — Is the natural depression part of mining activities from way back
when or at least...?
Mr. Schossler — You mean the detention area?
Chairperson Wilcox— Yeah.
Mr. Schossler — Actually, the detention area is just ... as far as I can see, is just natural
grading and if you look at the ... actually if you the ... there are additional (not
audible) ... beyond this point, obviously that is just the hill that continues right on down.
So the drop of 75 feet from here to that location continues right on down and there is a
natural drainage swale that is in there currently taking most of this at the moment. So
what we are going to do is basically capture what we are doing, but again capture a
larger area that drains right through there and detain that. We have given
documentation to the Town to support all those calculations done by TG Miller.
Board Member Conneman —.I have a question for Mark. I received your newsletter
today, which you explain that the Governor of the State of New York had turned down
your original plan and I assume to do this you also have to have some sort of an
approval.
Mr. Macera — The Governor didn't turn down any plans. What we had done is we had
petitioned the Health Department originally to license this facility as a residential health
care facility. I think most commonly known as a nursing home.. Because of
commissions and because of moratoriums and because of current state of planning
within the State Health Department supported by the Executive Branch, they were not
issuing licenses for new nursing homes, expansions or fresh capital projects. We can
license this as a number of different types of levels of care and we propose to move
forward as an assisted living residence, an ALR. Certainly our intention is always to be
able to provide skilled services. We would like to be licensed as a provider so we can
accept Medicare and Medicaid and provide those services. That clearly is not going to
happen today under the current Governor. Conditions could change the beginning of
January, but eventually we would be looking forward as part of our strategic plan to be
able to provide skilled rehabilitation services as a licensed. provider that can bill third
party.
EN
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Conneman — So actually, it is ultimately up to the Health Department?
Mr. Macera — As it is for any health facility under licensing mechanisms and regulations
that are in place. That is correct.
Board Member Conneman — I guess I am not sure. Is their point that there is not
sufficient need for more nursing homes as you describe it?
Mr. Macera — It depends on what source you want to accept and their rationale. I think
the State ... (not audible) ... if you will, and the issue of the Certificate of Need process
would suggest that there is none, but we can tell you as we sit here today and speak
that Ithacare has residents who have aged in place and there are requirements for
skilled and. rehabilitation services that the State refuses to allow us to provide under a
license are forced to leave against their will. So our own definition of need certainly is
not in keeping with the State's definition and they are basically controlling and dictating
the terms and conditions of the health care, perhaps in this case the long term care
system.
Board Member Conneman — Ultimately if you were to get approval for this you would
sort of be comparable to Kendall? Is that right? .
Mr. Macera — Yeah, I think to describe us and to bring Kendall into discussion, Kendall
is an Article 46, a life care community. We wish to become a life care community so
that we would be able to provide similar levels of care, not withstanding the financing
of such an approach, what we don't have that Kendall has today, is we have everything
else, is a skilled nursing facility.
Board Member Conneman — Got it. Thank you.
Mr. Macera — So ours would continue to operate on a fee for service basis, theirs in an
endowment under New York State Article 46.
Chairperson Wilcox — Anybody?
Board Member Thayer — They have done well to take care of the view problem. I
actually have no problem as the fact that there is nobody here objecting, anyway. At
least it doesn't appear.
Chairperson Wilcox — You're right. It's early. Overall cut and fill?
Mr. Schossler — We are about ... that information has been requested and we will be
getting it to you. We are expecting to have an excess of about 20% at the moment.
..
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — Can you put that into cubic yards?
Mr. Schossler — Not yet.
Chairperson Wilcox — Okay because obviously if it gets significant then we get into truck
traffic and where is it going and...
Board Member Mitrano — Don't take it up 89.
Chairperson Wilcox — Can you...
Mr. Schossler — As it is graded right now and submitted to you, what we did is we ran
some numbers and I didn't .bring the documents with me because Jon had asked for
them, but we hadn't submitted them yet, the numbers as they first came up are
showing a 20% excess. The arrangement that is actually being made with Ithaca
College is that we can actually take that product and move it right there and we may
just have to submit a slightly modified plan to show a balance and that is what you are
looking out on that supports the road. What it is, is actually grading plans that we have
submitted, which are actually right in here and we are getting, currently, a relationship
between Longview and Ithaca College. We are getting ... (not audible)...that basically
show approximately, I think it is about a 50 foot right -of -way up in this area to show
that we can basically overfill onto their property. One, because the grade naturally is
extremely high right there and we need, in order to support the roadway properly, we
need to go over that area. So that is actually what is shown on your grading plans and
has been requested by supporting documents that is being worked on currently. I think
when we get done, we will, be showing .you a balance cut and fill.
Mr. Macera — With the point being you will see no trucks coming or going with regards
to the fill materials other than foundation related materials. .
Board Member Hoffmann — I did have a question about the fill that is going to spill over
onto the Ithaca College property and I don't know if it is naturally steep there. I think it
is steep there because of fill that happened when you did the original construction.
Mr. Schossler — That is correct.
Board Member Hoffmann — So the steepness is built in, it is not natural. But what I was
wondering, if you are going to get permission from Ithaca College to put fill on their
land anyway, why not avoid that very steep grade that you have indicated on your
plans and let it fill out over a larger area and be less steep, as long as you don't
damage some vegetation that it is important to keep.
50
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Schossler — As I said, basically, we at the moment, if we have the excess fill, we will
revise the drawings to do just that, but if we don't have the fill, I don't want to be
trucking in fill to make a grade, a less steep grade.
Board Member Hoffmann — No. I didn't mean that you should do that. I just thought
that whatever fill you had to put there, instead of making it so steep, you could make it
less steep by spreading it out.
Mr. Schossler — That is correct. That is what I was suggesting. When we get our cut
and fill calculations just a couple of days ago, we will probably be submitting revised
drawings to you on that grading plan to show a balanced cut and fill.
Mr. Macera — If you go to the site plan that is submitted in the paperwork that you
have, you'll notice those swales that was proposing moving the existing slope further to
the north to support basically our highway, our means of egress, if you walk the site,
you have seen it. It is such a high pitch now that the ability to do what I think you are
suggesting, and I think is an excellent idea, we would have to bring in because there is
no net difference based on what we are going to be excavating to be able to take a
slope that is like this and basically do that. I mean it would just be...I mean just
enormous quantities of soil. We are not going to produce anywhere near anything like
that. I think the other issue is, is certainly with the College's permission and approval
the issue will be their own plans for that land and any action on our part to invade or
be invasive in doing more with their land could impose on their plans. I have no
knowledge of what those might be, but those are the impacts on our part, I think it
would be better than impacting college property at this point.
Mr. Schossler — I will also suggest, one thing you have to realize is that scale is 1 inches
equals 50 and basically that is a one on two slope that we are actually showing on
there, which is a fairly manageable slope. I mean, you can actually on a 1 on 3; you
can mow on a 1 on 3. If you basically took the slope that is occurring here that is
untouched, we have actually taken that existing slope and this slope in here and
matched it. This up in here is a little tighter than what currently exists just in these two
areas.
Mr. Macera — And all that soil is coming from where, David? Do you want to show the
Planning Board?
Mr. Schossler — Basically, as I said, we are taking 5 feet of fill out of this area and
lowering the entire building for sight line issues, which again we showed you previously
the rendering from, if you were standing over in here ... and looking at the ... (not
audible). This is the existing building that is up in here. This is what we are proposing
and it puts the peak of these roofs at the railing height of the second level. And right
up in here is the top of the 3 -story addition.
51
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Hoffmann — You said that was a 2 -story or 3-story. addition?
Mr. Schossler — It is actually 3 levels because it has to go. up to the dining level, which
is right near the, essentially the third level up.
Board Member Hoffmann — And that is supposed to have a flat roof?
Mr. Schossler — It has .a flat roof for sight line purposes, yes.
Board Member Hoffmann — And it is, what did you say? 17.5 feet below the highest
point of the existing building?
Mr. Schossler — Correct.
Board Member Hoffmann — Okay.
Mr. Schossler — And again, one of the items that Jon has asked is more detailed
viewshed and I am assuming other than the photographs we have given you and
the ... (not audible)...give you through it, the only thing more I can really provide you
with is more detailed cut right through here to clearly represent the roof change, but
we have given you complete exterior elevations of all buildings and all buildings in that
link that clearly shows the height difference between proposed and the existing roof.
Board Member Hoffmann — Yeah, based on the drawings and the. photos you provided,
I don't see that there is going to be any change in what you see, what views you see
after you build a new addition according to these plans. The view has already changed
where the original building...so I don't see that there is going to be any more change to
how much of the view you see, or how little, with this one. So I am not concerned
about that it's happened already. Let's see. What else did I have? I wanted to ask
you. There was something in the paper that Jonathan provided that mentioned that
you are going to have ... you are going to exceed the number of dwelling units that are
permitted in the current zoning and could you tell us by how many because it wasn't
clear from this, to me anyway.
Mr. Schossler — There will be 30.
Board Member Hoffmann — It will be.:.
Mr. Schossler — The addition will hold up to 30 residents, 30 units and the SLUD
currently is 160, which they are at capacity.
Board Member Hoffmann — And that was the limit?
Chairperson Wilcox — It was written specifically to the size of the original building.
52
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Hoffmann — But I thought I remembered that there were going to be
some additional units and cottages above and beyond what was in this building when
you presented the original plan?
Mr. Macera — There could be at some point in time with regards to our studies that
indicate there is a small niche of service: Again, using Kendall as the illustration and
comparison, Kendall developed and had the cottages. It is a known fact that there are
some older adults moving into campuses in to our type still enjoy single -story cottages,
physically removed from the facility. There is nothing being planned on this parcel of
land, although we have acquired some additional land to the south. At some point in
time the Board may wish to consider, the residents may wish to consider this as an
additional housing /service option that that is just discussion in terms of us doing some
free -will thinking about what could happen at some point, but that is not part of our
current plan.
Board Member Hoffmann — No, I understand it is not part of this proposal, but I
thought it was part of the original proposal and that is why I thought 160 dwelling units
was not the total allowed.
Mr. Macera — It was never part of our original proposal. Only the congregate residence,
a single building.
Board Member Hoffmann — I distinctly remember it, but we'll pass...
Chairperson Wilcox — I remember the discussion, but I also remember the Town Board
and the Attorney for the Town crafted what used to be called the SLUD, now its called a
Planned Development Zone, crafted it specifically to what was built. And I think one of
the issues that Mark ran into is every time they wanted to make a small change, they
certainly had to come back to us. I remember the small little outdoor facility for lawn
equipment and things like that for example, but also potentially back to the Town Board
to revise the zoning under which they operate. I am not surprised that the current
zoning for the facility exactly matches their current capacity because it was very
restrictive. It says that's all you can do.
Mr. Schossler - The language actually refers specifically to the architect's drawing as
submitted to you.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not surprised.
Mr. Macera — And I will just add, Fred, as some may recall, as part of that review
process there were repeated questions from members of the public and some members
of the Planning Board about, again, what are our broader plans over time. That was
the context in which, you know, there was some open and free - wheeling thinking about
53
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
what else could take place on this site and it was during that that discussion and
exchange that the issue that perhaps some separate and distinct, nonattached units
was discussed. Not part of the plan then and still currently not part of the plan.
Board Member Hoffmann It could be it was discussed at sketch plan level of review
and then was abandoned, but I certainly have a memory of it. But I want to move on
from that. There was some question about what will happen with the gardens that are
in the location where you are proposing the buildings. Will they be abandoned or will
they be moved somewhere else?
Mr. Macera — No. I think... certainly we are subject to criticism if in fact, you know, if
the Planning Board wishes to see more of what is there or modification of what we are
proposing, but we will be replacing anything that we are displacing there. Currently
and one of the references. of modification of site plan had to do with our
intergenerational program, which we have childcare. Preschool childcare there. We
built that ... (not audible) ... which we had to come to the Town for approval of that site
plan modification. That would be moved to a different location and we are currently in
discussions with Tompkins Community Action with regards to precisely where they
believe it would be best suited and certainly in consideration of site plan where it would
be facilitated. The issue of the covered walkway that runs to the inside now, which was
another request for a modification of site plan that will be modified and moved to
another location, still attempting to provide the opportunity to navigate the complex for
people who enjoy taking walks and getting outdoors. The other gardens, the way that
they are graded or raised and landscaping, there is a proposed plan for landscaping,
certainly can be amended to include as much landscaping as people's hearts desire and
certainly the budget will permit. There really are no limits to that. So we see no
restrictions, no limitations associated with that all.
Board Member Hoffmann — So you just told me a whole lot of things that I didn't ask
about. So what you said, I think, if I can restate it is that the gardens will be moved
some place else on the site, but you don't know where yet because they are not
indicated on the plans. Is that right?
Mr. Macera — Probably not a comprehensive, good illustration of exactly what gardens,
what constitute gardens and where they will be moved.
Chairperson Wilcox — Mark, the correct answer there is yes or correct.
Mr. Macera — Yes.
Board Member Hoffmann — Now since you did mention the walking trails, there is a
section of the walking trails that are not on these plans, but that I remember from that
original...the original construction. They are the trails that continue into the woods and
there was a stipulation that they were going to be open to the public and they are. And
54
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
I am wondering if that could be indicated in some way on the plans that those are trails
accessible to the public and that it would. be okay for the public to have access to them
via this new driveway and parking lot because otherwise the walkways that are more in
the southerly part of the parcel don't really.connect up to those trails.
Mr. Macera — If you .look at the plans, the proposed project does not impact those
nature trails, which were part of the original plans. It really displaces the promenade
that we built and added that connects to those trails. The reserve spots are located on
the southwest corner of the land and they would remain being reserved because that
establishes what we believe to be the most appropriate traffic pattern for visitors to
basically enjoy those nature trails at the trailhead. The issue of diverting traffic into
two areas and to access the trails further removed from the actual trailhead, I don't
think, probably just wouldn't make a whole lot of sense.
Board Member Hoffmann — Are we talking about the same thing?
Mr. Macera — I'm not sure.
Board Member Thayer — There is no connection between the parking lot you are talking
about and the trails that are open to the public.
Mr. Macera — That is correct.
Mr. Schossler — That's not exactly true. What is shown on here and what was actually
surveyed out, these are all the trails that Eva is referring to and this is the new walkway
that is going in that feeds to this walkway. So it is reconnected.
Board Member Thayer — But yet you want the public who uses the trails to be over in
the other parking lot as you just mentioned.
Mr. Macera — Well, we have to add, because we are talking about two different
proposals, two different plans over two different periods of time. These trails, which
are located here in the woods, which begin and these are the reserved spots that allow
public access to trails, this additional promenade was added later on. It did connect
back to the trails. This project here does not touch any of the original plan that
included the nature trails, which is served by these parking areas. The plan that we
currently have, doesn't attach the promenade to these trails ... (not audible)...they exist
as part of two different projects. If people are moving about the building here, they
will still be able to access these trails, if they wish, but the point I wish to stress here is
the parking areas Eva is alluding to, which are located here that provide access to trails
is going to be maintained. There is nothing being supplanted by what we are
proposing. These can be amended and modified and extended and changed any way
you wish. We don't prevent the people, for example, who are visitors who use this trail
from walking around the building now if they choose, but we propose, lets keep the
55
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
traffic and the visitors to these marked signs here as opposed to either remove some
spots or even add a net increase of spots that might be located over in this parking cuk
de -sac.
Board Member Hoffmann — To the north.
Mr. Macera — Exactly.
Board Member Hoffmann — Right. The spaces for the visitors to the trails are to the
south, which I had actually forgotten, so I was really talking about spaces in the north.
So we understand each other there, but my point is I don't see that there is any trail or
walkway that connects from the southernmost parking lots that you pointed out to
these trails through the woods. Is there a trail around there? It's not indicated...
Mr. Schossler — Yeah. If you look at 1 of 1, the second sheet in. It shows you ... a
survey map by TG Miller, which basically doesn't have the grading on it, but it shows
you all the pathways.
Board Member Hoffmann — Okay. I see a dashed line.
Mr. Schossler — Now what it is, basically on theirs it shows that what existed previously
in this area, these walkways were not connected to this southerly. They are part of this
project. We are connecting those now.
Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, but I am talking about connecting the southernmost
parking lot for people who don't live there to have access to...people in the public to
have access to the trails in the southern part of the parcel.
Mr. Schossler — That is what all of this is.
Board Member Hoffmann — No. Not in the northern part. The southern part. There.
Mr. Schossler — These walkways through here?
Chairperson Wilcox — Right. Eva's question is can you get from the parking lot to the
trail on a pathway.
Mr. Kanter — Yeah. Its right there.
Chairperson Wilcox — If that's what she is asking.
Board Member Hoffmann — Yes.
Board Member Thayer — Yeah, that's right.
56
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Hoffmann — It wasn't clear to me that the dashed lines there were
actually an existing trail.
Mr. Kanter - What Eva I think is saying, though, it would be helpful to show that actual
trail on the site plan.
Board Member Thayer — C1.1. It. should be on there.
Mr. Kanter — You can see the clearing there, but you don't see that it is actually a trail.
So I don't know if that is something you could just revise on there.
Chairperson Wilcox — Anything else, Eva?
Board Member Hoffmann — Let me look through here a little bit more. I think I had
something else. I had a question about the light fixtures that are shown on plan C1.6,
the photometrics plan. I see light fixtures L1, L2, and L3, but I don't see where Q. is
used on the plan.
Board Member Thayer — I hope not because that is a. bulb showing...
Board Member Hoffmann — Yes, right. That is why I was looking for it.
Mr. Schossler — We'll clarify that. I believe it is in the courtyard. It is the captured
courtyard that is within the building.
Ms. Brock — It is on the plan.
Board Member Hoffmann — You do see it on the plan? In the courtyard?
Ms. Brock — Its right here.
Board Member - Hoffmann — Oh, all right. It does say L3 there. That looks like it is
drawn on the building, but there must be an arrow pointing somewhere, which I guess
I don't see anyway, but I do have a problem with that fixture as Larry pointed out
because it looks like its clear glass and you see a bulb. That is the kind of fixture we
especially don't like to see where elderly people live because elderly people are much
more prone to being blinded by that sort of light and having trouble seeing what they
need to see. It says wall -mount exit area light.
Mr. Schossler — It is at the exit doors. Sorry.
Board Member Thayer — So that is exterior.
57
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Mr. Walker But it's just in that courtyard area, right?
Mr. Schossler — No. I stand corrected.. It is at the exit doors. We'll take a look at the
fixture. Most of the those fixtures come with defused glass as well and I'll check.
Board Member Hoffmann — I would suggest that you look into that because we try to
avoid lights that create glare where you can see the bulb. I don't know if I have
anything else. Let me look a little bit more.
Chairperson Wilcox — Gentlemen? I'm all set.
Board Member Howe and Board Member Thayer — I'm all set.
Chairperson Wilcox — George, do you feel comfortable right now?
Board Member Conneman — Yes.
Chairperson Wilcox — While Eva looks, Mark, let me take the opportunity to thank you
for coming tonight and being patient and giving us the update.
Board Member Hoffmann — More and more we hear about new kinds of asphalt and
paving materials that actually let water through when it drains rather.than sheeting on
top and running off the edges and running into drainageways and creeks and eventually
downtown as it would from this site. I would encourage you to look into whether it
would be possible to build this new driveway and parking lots using that kind of
material.
Mr. Schossler — I will, discuss it with Mark, but I will tell you that we will probably be
back here with the asphalt the way it is proposed because actually what we are doing is
taking that runoff and actually controlling it now and we are controlling substantially
more that is running off the site. One of the problems on this particular site is the
grade that is on the road is, although it is very drivable, it is such that we are going to
have to maintain that road for obvious purposes. We have used it, we have used if you
will, more permeable pavers and things of that nature quite a bit and we have had a
fair amount of problems in snow areas and snow removal areas with maintenance of
those pieces. We will look into it?
Board Member Hoffmann — What kind of material have you used?
Mr. Schossler — Basically the pavers that we have used are ... they basically have holes at
intersections, a variety of things like that. Also the ones that get the grass to grow up
between them, which just have not functioned at all from a maintenance standpoint
and again, the particular usage of this with where we are driving to and that nature we
need to be able to maintain that properly.
VTOP
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Board Member Hoffmann — Well, the newer materials I know ... I am familiar with the.
kind of the pavers you are talking about, too and they do seem to work in some places,
but they have now newer materials which are just pretty much like regular asphalt or
concrete, but they let water through so that they should be much more easy to
maintain even for plowing and such. .
Chairperson Wilcox — And they stand up to emergency vehicles?
Board Member Hoffmann — Well, Ithaca College had proposed some.
Chairperson Wilcox — They made a change though. Didn't they change something and
they eliminated part of it or moved part of it because they were concerned about...
Board Member Thayer — It's laid down at Cass Park and we never really did hear the
results.
Chairperson Wilcox — Ithaca College had it for its new building, but they had to change
some of it because of the concern about, I thought it. was the weight of the emergency
vehicles.
Board Member Hoffmann — Right. The fire trucks.
Chairperson Wilcox — And the porous materials. They eliminated some or moved it to
another location.
Board Member Hoffmann — That could be, but for regular parking lots and such it was
still okay at Ithaca College as I remember or other paved areas.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not sure.
Board Member Hoffmann — They moved that kind of pavement from the road where
they needed the fire truck access to some other parts.
Chairperson Wilcox — I'm not sure. We need to finish up here, just because we have
some other things we have to do this evening.
Board Member Hoffmann — Let's see...
Chairperson Wilcox — Mark, you're all set for now?
Mr. Macera — We just look forward to working closely with the staff, submitting
additional documentation, clarifiication... (not audible)...we would elaborate on and have
those documents include our discussions.
59
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
Chairperson Wilcox — If I may, ladies and gentlemen, normally I would give any of you
a chance to speak even though this isn't a public hearing, but we are running a little
late. We have a few more things to do. So when Mark and all of you return for
preliminary approval and or final you will have an opportunity to speak for sure. Thank
you very much.
OTHER BUSINESS
Chairperson Wilcox — We have to do a couple of things here that ... real quickly here.
Chairperson Wilcox announced that Ms. Tedesco has accepted a position with TCAT,
but will continue to work with the Town on a part-time basis to help finish the
Transportation Plan. The Board thanked Ms. Tedesco for her work with the Town.
Stacey Whitney, Overlook, appeared before the Board with a model light being
proposed at Overlook. He announced that new fixtures have been installed on the
Community Building. In a straw poll (with no commitment), the Board concurred that
they would be willing to approve the model light fixture if it were part of a proposed
application before the Planning Board.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
PB RESOLUTION NO. 2006 -114: Approval of Minutes: November 7, 2006
MOTION by Chairperson Wilcox, seconded by Board Member Talty.
RESOLVED, that the Planning Board does hereby approve and adopts the November 7,
2006 minutes as the official minutes of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board for the said
meeting as presented.
The vote on the motion resulted as follows:
A YES: Wilcox, Conneman, Thayer, Howe and Talty.
NA YS: None.
ABSTAIN: Hoffmann.
ABSENT.• Mitrano.
The vote on the motion was carried.
Other Business Continued
Chairperson Wilcox gave an overview of the December 5, 2006 Planning Board agenda.
The Board discussed the new training requirements mandated by the State.
.c
PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
FINAL - NOVEMBER 21, 2006
ADJOURNMENT
Chairperson Wilcox adjourns the November 21, 2006 Planning Board meeting at 10:05
p.m.
R,spectfully submitted,
(arrie Coate W ore
Deputy Town Clerk
61
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
215 North Tioga Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
AGENDA
7:00 P.M. Persons to be heard (no more than five minutes).
7:05 P.M. SEQR Determination: Haines 2 -Lot Subdivision, 1519 Slaterville Road.
7:05 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision approval for
the proposed 2 -lot subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax
Parcel No. 56 -1 -1, Medium Density Residential Zone and Conservation Zone. The
proposal is to subdivide off a 4.463 +/- acre parcel from the southwestern end of the
8.112 +/- acre parcel, which will then be consolidated with City of Ithaca watershed
lands. Patricia F. Haines; Owner /Applicant.
7 :15 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town
Board regarding the draft Town. of Ithaca Transportation Plan.
8:15 P.M. Update regarding the proposed Skilled / Adult Care Addition at Longview, an Ithacare
Community, located at 1 Bella Vista Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel. No. 39 -1 -1.31,
Planned Development Zone No. 7. The proposal involves the construction of a +/-
24,000 square foot addition on the north side of the existing building to serve up to 32
additional residents. The proposal will also include approximately 11 new parking
spaces, a new driveway, and new stormwater facilities. The Town Board also referred
the proposed amendment of Planned Development Zone No. 7 to the Planning Board for
a recommendation. Ithacare Center Service Company, Inc., Owner /Applicant; Mark A.
Macera, Executive Director, Agent.
6. Persons to be heard (continued from beginning of meeting if necessary).
7. Approval of Minutes: November 7, 2006.
8. Other Business:
9.. Adjournment,
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
NOTE: IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING BOARD IS UNABLE TO ATTEND, PLEASE NOTIFY
SANDY POLCE AT 273 -1747.
(A quorum of four (4) members is necessary to conduct Planning Board business.)
TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING BOARD
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
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, November 21, 2006, at 215 North
Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y., at the following times and on the following matters:
7:05 P.M. Consideration of Preliminary and Final Subdivision approval for the proposed 2 -lot
subdivision located at 1519 Slaterville Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 56 -1 -1,
Medium Density Residential Zone and Conservation Zone. The proposal is to subdivide
off a 4.463 +/- acre parcel from the southwestern end of the 8.112 +/- acre parcel, which
will then be consolidated with City of Ithaca watershed lands. Patricia F. Haines;
Owner /Applicant.
7:15 P.M. Consideration of a recommendation to the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding the
draft Town of Ithaca Transportation Plan.
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.
Jonathan Kanter, AICP
Director of Planning
273 -1747
Dated: Monday, November 13, 2006
Publish: Wednesday, November 15, 2006
2 S` f
' .Wednesday,�November 15, 2006 � THE ITHACA 10URNAL�' °
��;
-T t ro -� C
a3�`� x�� 4 ^�a # as vet.. ,""� ��`e n, ..
TOWN OF ITHACA
PLANNING BOARD
SIGN -IN SHEET
DATE: November 21, 2006
(PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES)
PLEASE PRINT NAME
PLEASE PRINT ADDRESS /AFFILIATION
cc
t A
0::� nx
, �, ,
! c� i� 4pr c- c cz
cc
TOWN OF ITHACA
AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING AND PUBLICATION
I, Sandra Polce, being duly sworn, depose and say that I am a Senior Typist for the Town of
Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York; that the following 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 newspaper,
The Ithaca Journal.
Notice of Public Hearings to be held by the Town of Ithaca Planning Board in the Town of Ithaca
Town Hall 215 North Tioga Street Ithaca New York on Tuesday November 21, 2006
commencing at 7:00 P.M., as per attached.
Location of Sign Board used for Posting: Town Clerk Sign Board — 215 North Tio ag Street.
Date of Posting:
Date of Publication:
November 13, 2006
November 15, 2006
Sandra Polce, Senior Typist
Town of Ithaca
STATE OF.NEW YORK) SS:
COUNTY OF TOMPKINS)
Sworn to and subscribed before me this 15`h day of November 2006.
Notary Public
CONNIE F. CLARK
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 01CL6052878
Qualified in Tompkins County
Commission Expires December 26, 20 06