HomeMy WebLinkAboutMN-PDB-1973-09-25 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES
City of Ithaca
Regular Meeting September 25, 1973 7:30 P.M.
PRESENT: Chairman Doney, Vice Chm. Shaw, Mrs. Benson, Messrs. Austin, Clynesy
Schickel and Stein.
ALSO: Aldermen Jones, Meyer, Slattery and Spano;, Bldg. Comm'r Jones; Anna
Holmberg, Curtis Ufford, J. Cantrell, and members of the press and radio,
Chm. Doney called the meeting to order at 7:30 P.M.
111r. Shaw MOVED and Mr. Stein seconded, approval of the minutes of the meeting of
August 28, 1973.
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS-.
a. The Board, by consensus, agreed that zoning cases should be moved to the be-
ginning of the agenda. As a result, they decided to hear the zoning; appeal of
Evaporated Metal Films, BZA Appeal 1027. This was a request .for a variance and an
exception in a RW3 zone. The appellant operates a light industry at 701 Spencer Ed.
for the manufacture of first-surface mirrors and other high-vacuum products. A
variance was granted in 1963 for the construction of the present building, and again
in 1967 for a storage addition. The appellant needs the exception and the variance
because without them the usefulness of the property will be seriously curtailed. The
exception is needed because the rear of the proposed addition is too close at one
point to the rear property line. The variance is needed because its uses are not
permitted in 'R' zones. Mr. Curtis Ufford described his business to the Board mem-
bers and explained why he requested the exception and the variance. The Board
briefly discussed the possibility of changing the zoning. It ,Tas noted ths,t a
zoning change would be a more appropriate way of handling these uses, but in the
interim the Board voted to recommend approval of the request. Mr. Shaw MOVED, and
Hr. Schickel seconded the motion. It CARRIED unanimously.
b. Alderwoman Meyer asked to be heard on the subject of removal of soil from
property between the flood control channel and the LVRR tracks .south of West Clinton
Street. It was reported to board members that soil was being removed from this
property, and it was noted that the zoning ordinance prohibits sale of soil without
a, permit. ;!!loving soil from one part of an owner's property to another is legal;
however, there was some disagreement as to whether all of the property in question was
in one ownership. Mr. Austin said that he thought a legal opinion would be necessary
as to whether the city could prevent sale of the soil. Another board member pointed
out that enforcement of the zoning ordinance and the building code ,'Tere not the
responsibility of the Planning Board, and, if illegal removal of soil was taking place,
it would be the responsibility of the Building Commissioner to brie¢ action against
those who were moving the soil. Comm'r Jones said that he would need someone to sign
a complaint in order to take action. Mr. Stein questioned whether a complaint was
necessary. It was his opinion that the Building Commissioner could act on his own..
The discussion concluded with the Board members noting that it was not the Board's
responsibility to enforce the ordinance.
Mr. Schickel .asked whether the zoning cases to be heard by the Board could be
listed on the agenda. Mr. Van -Cort explained that the Building Pepartmeat did not
give the cases to the Planning Board until the Thursday or Friday before the Planning
Board meeting and that he tried to mt.il out agendas before that time. Comm'r Jones
said that regulations called for submission of the appeal no later than 10 days be-
fore the meeting; of the BZA which makes it impossible for him to get the cases to the
planning staff any earlier than is now done. He said,; however, that wherever possible
he would get the cases to the Board as soon as he receives them. Mr. Van Cort in turn
said that when possible he would list the cases in the agenda, and, when he thought a'
ease was particularly controversial, he would try to notify the Board before the
meeting by telephone.
=,R4ITTEE REPORTS:
a. Executive & Liaison Committee-.
1) Health Care Center Study m It was decided to move this item further down
on the agenda in the hope that Bonnie Howard might be able to answer some of the
Board's questions about the Health Care Center. Kr. Van Cort noted that he had
invited Miss Howard to speak but that she had a prior commitment; however, she
would try to make it anyway.
2) Preliminary 1974 Operating Budget b Chm. Doney explained the Preliminary
Budget as submitted to the Controller by Mr. Van Cort on Sept. 14. He noted
that the Executive Committee had discussed the budget and he explained that they
were requesting a change of title for Rosalind Williams from Junior Planner to
Assistant Planner and were asking for a new junior planner line. This and
several other built-in increases such as the fact that the Planning Director had
been paid in fiscal '73 for only 9 _months instead of 12 were responsible for the
bulk of the budget increase. The preliminary estimate .for '74 was an increase
from $50,930 to $6+,747. Mr. Van Cort noted that there were certain negotiable
salary increases which would still have to be added to the estimate. Increases
in non salary lines amounted to only a small fraction of the budget. Mr. Clynes
asked that board members be given a chance to examine the budget., and Mr. Ilan
Cort said that he would prepare an itemized budget and a preliminary work program
for 197 + and distribute it to the board members before the next meeting.
b. Community Facilities and Services Committee:
1) Southside recommendations - Mrs. Benson reported on the Planning Board's
application to the Revenue Sharing Committee. She explained again the process
by which the staff had arrived at community priorities and outlined the Revenue
Sharing application which requested money for recreation space near the Southside
Center as well as one or more tot lots in the Southside. She noted that the Reve-
nue Sharing Committee had asked her and Rosalind Williams a number of questions on
the other priority needs of Southside, including transportation and health care.
Mr. Van Cort noted that he had met with residents of Southside on Monday of this
week, and he had offered to give further help to the Southside in amending; their
Revenue Sharing application.
ZONING CASES- See above.
2
OLD BUSINESS
a. CRP Progress Report - Mr. Van Cort 'reported__that_..Raymond, Parish <: Piney the
CRP-consultants, had billed the city on 2/23/73 and 7/17/73'for work performed on the
CRP. The 2/23 billing has been paid, but the city couldn't pay the 7/17 bill because
an action by the Planning* Board extending the contract deadline for completion of work-
on
orkon the CRP had not been taken. In early 1973 the deadline had been extended to April
4 but a subsequent extension had not been granted. Without extension of the deadline
a 2 percent penalty clause would have to be imposed. Board members asked why the work
had not been completed to date. Mr. Van Cort said that he didn't know why the con-
sultants had not yet sent the brochure. He also pointed out, however, the city had
not been billed for work done on the brochure, and he expected the consultant to bill
them as soon as work was completed on that part of the program. Board members dis-
cussed the possibility of not paying the previous bill until the brochure was
delivered, but it was derided. that in the future payment could be withheld for the
brochure if it was determined that was necessary. Therefore, Mr. Clynes MOVED, and
T1r. Stein seconded, ''the Planning Board approves the extension of the contract with
the CRP consultant, retroactive to April 4, 1973, and to extend to November 1, 1973
without penalty to the consultant for such period in accordance with the terms and
conditions of the contract dated July 1971 between the city and the consultant.''
CARRIED unanimously.
Further, 112r. Van Cort told the Board that staff had gotten estimates on printing;
the CRP Technical Report. High estimates ranged from $532 to �19"O for 100 copies
of the 280-page report, plus binding and collating. Mr. Van Cort said that since two
estimates were in the $550 range he expected that this was a realistic estimate and
he said that he hoped to have the Technical Report to the printer by October 5. He
also said that he would call the consultants and inform them of the Board's motion
for extension, but at the same time prod them to deliver the brochure by the deadline
date. It was also noted that the cost of printing would not come out of the Planning
Dept. budget but had been reserved on another line.
b. Capital Improvements Program - Progress Report - Pair. Van Cart told Board
members that the Capital Improvements Review Committee was to meet within the next
few weeks and he said 'tlat the staff had been doing some work on the CIP and capital
budget format as well as analysis of the budget process including the role cf!
planning staff and the role of the. Controller. He added, however; that the work was
not completed to a degree sufficient for presentation to the Board and he added -that
he hoped to have some report to give to the Board members by their next meeting. He
asked that the Board empower the General Plan and Capital Improvements Committee,
with the addition of 1.1r. Austin, to make recommendations for the Planning Board on
the Capital Improvements Program. and the capital budget to the CIRC. The Board so
designated the committee.
c. ReaDpointment of Donald Lannoch - Mr. Van Cort told Board members that he
had tried to have Donald Lannoch, one of the temporary junior planners, re-appointed
in September on a part-time basis to complete work on the East Hill study. This
reappointment had been delayed by the Civil Service secretary because of Civil
Service Commission rules against temporary and parttime appointments. As a result
Mr. Van Cort had appeared before the Civil Service Commission at their regular
meeting on the evening of Tuesday, Sept. 115 at which time the planning director had
explained the need for reappointment of Mr. Lannoch because of his knowledge of the
East Hill study since he had done most of the preliminary work on it during the
summer. The Commission granted the request. As a result 'Mr. Schickel T4OVED, and
3
Mr. Clynes seconded, "that Donald Lannoch be re-appointed as a temporary parte-time
junior planner for completion of the fast still study with an upper limit of 100 hours
of work." CARRIED unanimously.
Beyond that, n,r. Van Cort had discussed with the Commission members the Planning;
Department's need for a certain amount of flexibility in hiring, on a temporary and
part-time basis, planners who have special skills or training for particular problems
which -from time to time face the .Board. He explained that this was not an attempt to
evade any Civil Service regulations but instead was necessary because of the great
variety of problems which arise. The Commission had told 'Ir. Van Cort that they
agreed in principle to allow the Board occasionally to hire such people. The question
of hiring city residents was also discussed, and Mr. Van Cort again stated that an
Ithaca, resident applying for a job would have many advantages over someone not from
this area because of his greater knowledge of local problems. The Planning Director
stated that he would try whenever possible to hire 'ocal people. In order to
accomplish this he said that future job openings would be advertised in the local
paper.
d. hall Progress Report - Recommendations for _Construction Documents Phase of
Work m Chm. Doneygave a report of progress to date on the mall. He informed the
Board that the Mall Steering Committee was meeting on a regular basis every other
weer in public sessions to discuss the design of the mall and finance and work
arrangements for its construction. Design is proceeding on schedule and an open
meeting for final approval of the design development phase drawings is tentatively
scheduled for Wednesday evening, October 24 in Common Council chambers. Doney rem
ported that at the last regular meeting on Sept. 13 a number of downtown merchants
and owners I. :..d attended and had asked. many questions about the mall. The answer,
although not necessarily complete, seemed to satisfy most of the people at the
meeting and in general feedback on the meeting had been quite favorable. Doney also
stated that the architect. at a previous meeting, had presented a preliminary cost
estimate for the mall which ranged from :x1030,000 to $1.11 million. The Committee had
met to discuss this estimate and had decided to ask the architect to try to design
the mall to be built within the limits of the original cost estimate, i.e. , in the
neighborhood of �t850 000. Anton Egner, the architect, had said he would work toward
this estimate and would do another complete -c:•osting out before the end of design
development phase. Van Cort showed board members a drawing of the mall. and the side
street improvements which had been prepared by Egner. The design was discussed in
some detail. Van Cort also informed board members that the .Playor, Controller, City
Attorney and Planning Director had a conference call with Sykes. Galloway and Dikeman
the city's bond counsels During that conversation, bond counsel had informed the
city that it was their opinion that a tax benefit district for the mall could be
established so long as the city could demonstrate benefit to those taxed. Further,
bond counsel said that any basis for taxation, be it assessed valuation, front footage,
floor area, or a combination of these, could be used in the district so long as these
could be proven to be equitable. Thirdly, bond counsel affirmed that the city could
not bond for longer than 15 yrs. without passage of state legislation for a longer
bonding; period. It was unclear from the conversation whether this state legislation
would be a c*hole ne;. set of facts covering pedestrian malls or a home rule act or
anlendments to appropriate sections of the General Finance Law. These questions were
to be pursued further with bond counsel. Bond counsel also agreed to write the
appropriate legislation for the City of Ithaca. The exact arrangements for financing,
i.e. , the share of the cost to be carried by the city as a whole and the share to be
carried by the benefit assessment district has not as ,ret been determined.
4
The Board discussed whether to take action. in giving -reliminary approval to work
performed to date by the consultant and giving in principle approval to hiring the
consultant for the construction documents phase. It vas decided there was not
sufficient information to take this action at this time and that the Board would take
this action if appropriate at its Oct. 23 meeting. Board members were urged, if
possible, to attend the two intervening regular meetings of the Mall Steering Com-,
mittee with the consultant.
NEt1 BUSINESS:
a) Prososed sale of city-oi.me_d land on Floral Avenue - Mr. Van Cort informed the
Board that Common Council had asked the Board to mare a recommendation on the sale of
surplus city land on Floral Avenue south of land which was sold to Bernard Carpenter.
He said that he had only been able to get the details of the case on Monday from
Clo Calistri and that as a result he had not had a chance to make on-site inspection
of the parcel; however, Planning Director said he didn't know of any reasons tTrhy the
proposed sale would be in confl4.ct vTith this city's " aster Plan although further in-
vestigation -night be needed. After some discussion of the advisability of selling
the land, rlr. Ste;.n MOVED; and Mr. Shaw seconded, pito refer the question to the
General Plan & Capital Improvements Committee of the Board." CARRI?D.
Mr. Austin asked Mr. Van Cort whether he had had a chance to find out about tax
maps and Van Cort replied that the Planning Board didn't have copies of them but that
they did have an old Sanborn map, as well as the city map which had been prepared by
a former city engineer. He also pointed out that tax maps were available in the
Engineering office, and they were annually updated. Planning Director said he
would try to have these avilable on the night of Planning; Board's meeting so that
they could be referred to by board members when necessary.
b) Proposal for application for 701 Comprehensive Plan funds - Planning Director
informed the Board that staff had begun investigating the possibility of applying for
701 Comprehensive Plan funds. He said that contact had been made with Bob Hansen of
the Syracuse office of Office of Planning Services, with Frank Liguori, County
Planner, and with a representative of Raymond, Parish & Pine. Mr. Van Cort noted that
Hansen had told him that it was more difficultto get these funds now than it had
been in the past but new applications were still being accepted. The deadline date
for applications for fiscal '74-'75 is November 1, 1973. Hansen guessed that the
city, if successful, could expect to get somewhere between $5 and X10 thousand,
perhaps around $7' or .$8 thousand would be a good estimate. Funding on 701 money is:
3/4 federal 1/8 state, and 1/8 local. Ithaca only has to pay 1/8 instead of 1/4
because it is in the Appalachian Program. The city's share can be paid in in-kind
services which means that there is no direct cost to the city. Planning Director
further stated that 701 funds would really only be of value to the city if the
application could be made out in such a way as to cover needs and programs which the
Board intended to undertake anyway. Van Cort asked whether the Board would recommend
spending some consultant money, roughly $1 thousand., to help staff prepare the
application. In his opinion a consultant who had had experience with 701 applica-
tion might be able to provide aid in judgment about the proper kind of materials to
be included in the application and help in preparing a reasonable work program. In
addition outside help might make it more feasible for staff to complete the appli-
cation by the November 1 deadline. Van Cort also informed the Board that the appli-
cation for management programs which was made in fall of '72 had been rejected, and
he asked the Board's guidance on whether to pursue that'application or to begin a
5
whole new stud-y. After some discus sion-o-f-tie type of programs to be studied with
701 money and on the value of hiring a consultant to make out the applications, the
Board decided that the staff should continue to prepare 701 application, but thnt..na __
consultant money should be spent on the application.
Mr. Clynes asked whether these funds would save the city money and Van Cort said
they would; if his understanding; was correct, the 701 monies would go into the
general fund but they T.rould hlep to pay the Planning Board's staff.
c) Proposal for Land Use and Transportation Study of Inlet Island - Planning
Director gave brief history of the corridor designation for 13 & 96 and said that at
the time of designation it had become clear that further study was needed of the
land uses and highway alignment through the west end of the city. Opportunity
presented itself this fall to get help from a group of students at Cornell University
in doing the study. After some discussion of the development possibilities in the
west end of the proposed highway, Mr. Shaw MOVED, and Mr. Clynes seconded, "that a
study of the West End and Inlet Island be undertaken by the Board. Van Cort said
that he was trying to arrange a boat trip around the island for interested board
members. This trip was tentatively scheduled for Friday, the 5th of October.
d) (from above) Health Center Study - Since all other items on the agenda had
been completed and Miss Howard had not arrived, Chm. Doney reported on the Executive
Committee that this was a pilot study which had the greatest opportunity for success
in the City of Ithaca because of the great number of potential health care consumers
in the city and because of its location., for the eastern side of the city. It was
noted that there was no danger of this center competing with the private health care
facilities and that the center would not cost the city money since it had to be self--
supporting under the provisions of the Appalachian grant under which it was estab-
lished. Doney further stated that the center proposed for Ithaca was one oftwo to be
located in the community; one of which would be lccatcd cr. t:hF present hospital
campus. The advisability of a Southside location in the city was also discussed.
After further discussion of the situation relative to the location of the health
center, Mr. Stein MOVED, and Mrs. Benson seconded, "the Health Center Location
Report prepared by Planning Board staff be adopted by the Board and referred to
Cominon Council for their information and possible follow-up." CARRIED unanimously.
The meeting ADJOURNED at 10:30 P.M.
Respectfully submitted,
H. M. Van Cort
10.11.73 Planning Director
6
RESOLUTION OF THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF I THACA APPROVING GENERAL CORRIDOR
LOCATIONS FOR RELOCATION OF ROUTES 13 AND 96 IN THE CITY OF ITHACA
t
WHEREAS the City of Ithaca has rec.>;,:.ed a er:,ect location report and Draft
E.nvircnr)ental lrnpacl_;/i++ fl '.:=t.a9:,n pert generaIIy deserIb.ing the proposed
1ccation for the . reloc=ted Route I c; rridor in and south Of the City
of I thaca, and for the relocated' Route ?6 corridor in and general ly
n orthwest of tthaca; aid
WHEREAS the Cor-rolion Council of the City of Ithaca has reviewed these reports -,
now therefore , be it
RESOLVED drat this Common Council concur with and approve the General Project
Location as indicated on Map 3 , P. 6E of the report titled "Project
. .Location Report-Conclusions and Recommendations for. the Improvement
of Routes 13 and y6 from Newfield Hill to Ithaca to Trumansburg,"
said location for Route 13 beim the expanded Alternative C
(Alternatives A and C and the area between) beilinning just South
of the intersection of Route 13 and 34 and 96 , and proceeding in a
northwesterly direction West of Cayuga Inlet and the Lehigh Valley
Railroad to the vicinity of the proposed Southwest City park, from
which point t,.he recommended corridor location continues in. a
northerly direction , flaring out to cover the land bounded gener-
ally by Fulton Street and the Flood Channel , terwinating at
connection with existing Route 13 in the vicinity of Dey, Street,
said location for Route 96 being the Alternative Za (modified)
and beginning near the intersection of Fulton and Court Streets
in the City of Ithace and running northerly crossing Cayuga Inlet
a.nd the Flood Control Channel , then clirbintj the hili between
Cliff Street and the abandoned L.V. R. R. bed to a point just north
of Tompkins County Hospital . From this point, this alternativr
would turn, westerly , climb the hill and join existing Route 96
approximately one-half mile northwest of the Dubois Roa c - Route
96 intersection. The City of Ithaca finds this plan to be, in
agreement with City transportation objectives , and rec.on?mends th,4A
the New York State Department of Transportation proceed with the
design phase of the project .
DRAFT
I
CITY RESPONSE TO DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR RELOCATION OF
RTS. 13 & 9€ IN AND ADJACENT TO THE CITY OF ITHACA
Dear Mr. Powers:
We appreciate the chance to review and comment on the Draft Environ-
mental Impact Statement (LEIS) for Routes 13 and 96. Since it appears that
the document contains the Corridor Location Recommendation by the
Department of Transportation, in addition to the subject impact statement,
we will take the opportunity to comment on both.
Environmental Impact
The statement seems to adequately address the questions of air, water
and noise pollution, and indicates that proper care will be taken to avoid
adverse effects. However, the information on which area descriptions and
impact analyses must have been based -seems somewhat dated (pp. 7-9, Map 3) .
For example, West dill is developing vigorously, adding to the need for
improved access, and development and land use along Elmira Road (Rt. 13)
and at Cass Park are misrepresented by the map. Though parties involved in
the project are aware of these matters, the interested citizen or official
reviewer may not be. Data similar to that shown, on the enclosed map from
the City's General Plan should be available from the Town for updating the
final statement (graphic presentation should be legible) . Similarly, Some
important points in the Location Alternatives section are misrepresented:
Alternate B doesn't go Northwest at any point, nor is it adjacent to the
railroad in the city (p. 13) . Though the modified Alternate C is discussed
(p. 14) ; its differences from the original may not have been adequately
publicized to inform interested parties. The possible interchange at
Treman Park (p. 15) should be indicated on Map 4.
2
A mayor environmental impact which does not appear to have been
adequately considered in the Statement (Chs. IV, V, X) is that of esthetics
in terms of urban design. This is more than simply the appearance of the
highway itself, but involves how it complements the urban environment.
Alternate C, as proposed by DoT, would tend to present a visual and
psychological barrier at. an important gateway to the city, no matter how
its design .could reduce the appearance of a physical barrier. Alternate C
would introduce a discordant element into the pattern of present and future
development. Alternate A, by contrast, would be less intensive and would
tend to blend with and reinforce existing and future development. Alternate
C would .also affect the amenity of the new Flood-Control Channel as a green
space and as visual relief in an urban area,, by restricting access to the
East bank and by introducing a ribbon of concrete..and traffic immediately
adjacent to it, visible from many, points in the city on.West Hill and
South Dill.. In this and other ;more or-.;less specific respects-, the disruptive
effeets ,on the natural and built environments may be unavoidable in toto,
but sufficient attention by.DoT,ls .: design staff, coordinated with local
agencies and possibly with input from design oriented consultants, should
minimize. adverse impacts on :existing. natural and developed areas. One
further area out of.our jurisdiction but of concern to us is the extension
of 96 North along West Hill: it is to be hoped that areas of cut and fill
can be kept to a 'minimum, disturbing as little as. possible the streams
crossed and avoiding the monumental effect of fill similar to that presented.
by lit. 13 on the East side of the lake.
The discussion of the impacts of alternatives (Ch. V) raises two main
issues which the Statement does not cover in sufficient detail to give many
interested parties basis for relevant response. The issue of esthetics
is covered in ,the, preceding paragraph. As for the issue ofimpact on
3
development, DoT is aware off the city's concern regarding support and
enhancement of existing and potential development on the 'island' formed
by the Flood Channel and old Inlet,, in the commercial area East of the
Inlet, -and i.n .the mayor city. park West of the channel. More detail of
what "Special consideration would be given for access to the Ithaca
Recreation Center .(p. 57) and what other existing facilities might
be affected (pp. 59-60) would have been helpful for public information,
though we realize these matters will be discussed in greater detail during
the design stage. We wish to emphasize that from the city's viewpoint,
as contrasted with DoT's overview, what happens in this area is seen as of ,
tremendous- .importance, and the specifics of potential impacts of each
Alternative are .of immediate concern. Response to DoT's proposals cannot
help but be affected by considerations at this level., so the more closely
potential effects can be identified, the more useful it will be and the
more responsive can be the eventual solution,
Location
The consensus of city opinion favors. Alternate 2a (modified) for Rt. 96,
and some variant of Alternate A or C for Rt. 13,
All alternatives for Rt. 96 (save Alt. 1, on existinglocation) are
the same within the city, and offer the overwhelming benefit .of increased
access between West Hill and the hospital, and the CBD and ,East and South
Hills. The major concern here is that 96 take as little as possible from
the BOR-funded parcels and other lands:, around its terminus in the city:
the i.nterchange .with Rt. 89should occur North or South of the western
bulge of.the former railroad loop, as has always been provided for in plans
for the park.
4
We agree that interchange between 13 and 96 should not be completely
grade-separated and high-speed, and that it should occur somewhere between
Cascadilla and Green Streets. There is some question as. to whether a direct
connection from 13 southbound to 96 northbound might hot be desirable.
Review of the investigation done in conjunction with the Ithaca Area
Transportation Study currently being conducted by DoT Albany may reinforce
the findings of the 1962 0&D Survey, but if significant differences are
discovered, it may be advisable to revise the 0&D data and the conclusions
drawn therefrom, and to rethink the interchange requirements.
We agree that Alternatives B and D do not appear desirable for the city,
due to the way they traverse developkble .land. With all alternatives,
however, the arguments for elimination are not convincing due to a certain
telescoping and lack of data to compare with the decision criteria stated
or apparent in Ch. IX.
From the data presented in the-Statement, it is not apparent that
Alternative A (as modified by the city) is infeasible to the extent indicated.
From the point at which this alternative would enter the city, a bridge of
possibly four hundred feet would be called for to get over flood channel
and railroad together. The reverse curve referred to does not appear to be
unacceptable or overly long, nor are the engineering requirements of a skew
crossing extraordinary. The necessary taking from the Southwest Park would
be approximately five acres out of seventy. The right-of-way could swing
slightly more to the East around the railroad yard, if it exists at that
time; possibly the railroad bed would be available for the highway.
With regard to the impact of either Rt. l3 or 96 on the BOR land on the
'island,' the city does not have plans for that land, so we would hope that
'quiet' pavement and landscaping would be utilized to reduce noise and
visual impact on adjacent- commercial and recreational uses. Such landscaping
5
should not completely scrTen the park from the road, but provide attractive
glimpses to the motorist. . Here, where locationalalternativesare limited,
considerable attention must be paid to environmental considerations.
Alternative C (modified) is not the city's preferred location for Rt. 13,.
due to. the estimated impact on potential development in the West End of the
city, and to other environmental impacts previously discussed. Since there
are reservations on the part of DoT with respect to, Alternative A, a compro-
mise solution similar to that which we understand is presented in the
recently-published Project Location Report and recommendation would be
acceptable .to the city. One modification to."that corridor recommendation is
desirable: that the widened joint corridor within the city include land
East of the railroad tracks, to encompass the city's modified Alternate A.
One further comment is called for regarding the provision of replace-
ment- land
eplace-mentland for that taken from the BOR-funded land. The city feels that the
proposal already made concerning what is known as the C.Y.O. land presents
an adequate exchange for the approximately ten acres to be taken. Should
this not be fully acceptable, we feel that this land should be approved as
part reimbursement prior to October 1, 1973, in order that the city may
exercise its option on said property before expiration of the option. We
feel that, the C.Y.O. property is eminently suitable for such exchange and
use, and we may lose the opportunity to make "such purchase if we have to
wait several years for an exact determination of the amount to be taken for
the highways, in order to make what the regulations state is necessary for
such conversion. We will, in the interim, be studying other parcels as
possible additions to ,the C.Y.O. land to round out the equivalency nece-
ssary.
.We look forward to continuing to work with you on the implementation
of this much-needed project.
Very sincerely yours,