city of ithaca, new york: a general plan

r I ,

: \

I I

: \ \

I· I j )

~ _ )

: l

:L

I

: [

: ( '

ITHACA, N.Y.: A GENERAL PLAN

ITHACA, NEW YORK: A GENERAL PLAN

CITY PLANNING BOARD, 108 E. GREEN STREET

1971

Sketches by H. Peter Kahn

Copyright© 1971 City Planning Board, Ithaca, New York

Cover: Illustration from an etching of Ithaca done in 1882 by L. R. Burleigh, reproduced by Wilcox Press.

l

[_

\_,

PLANNING BOARD

1 ) RICHARD M. PuTNEY, Chairman ROBERT M. BURNS EDWARD J. CONLEY HENRY E . DONEY RICHARD P. KORF JoHN W . REPS 'i\' ILLIAi\·I F . ScHMIDT

PAST PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS

MARGARET M. HAMILTON ANNE T. JONES JAi\IES D. PARKES

PLANNING STAFF

GREGORY KAsPRZAK, Planning Director JoNATHAN C. MEIGS, Assistant Planner MARGARET ,V, MoNROE, Junior Plan11er GEORGE E. LAWRENCE, Planning Tech11ician HILDA P. HuTSON, Secretary

( '

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION Development Objectives . .. .. . . .. . .

I. ITHACA'S HUMAN, FISCAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES .. . .

Ithaca's Beginning ..... . . .... .. . Physical Environment . . ... . .. . .. . Population . ... . .. .. .. . .. ... . . . Economy . ..... .. . .. .. . ... . . . .

II. LAND USE . . ........... . ....... . Cornell Heights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . University ... . . ... ... . ... . .. . . Belle Sherman . . .. . .. .. .... . . . . East Hill .. .. . . . . .. .. . ..... .. . Fall Creek . . ... ..... .. ... . . .. . North Central . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Central ..... . . . .... . . . . . . ... . South Hill ... . .... . .... ... . . . . South Central .. . .. . ... .. . . ... . Inlet Valley-Elmira Road . .. . ... . West Hill . ... . .. . . . .. . .. .... . Cayuga Inlet ..... . ....... . . . . . The Future .. .. . . . .. ..... . . . . .

III. COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES ... .. . .. . City Government . .. .......... . . Police Protection . . .... . . . . . ... . Fire Protection ..... . .. .. .. . .. . Civil Defense Protection ........ . .

Page

1 1

3 5 7 9

13

19 25 26 26 27 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 38

41 43 46 47 48

Page

Library Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Educational Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Social Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

IV. Co.t'viMUNITY F AGILITIES . . . . . . . . . 59 Water Supply . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Sewage Collection, Treatment,

and Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 Solid vVaste Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Natural Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Electricity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Street Lighting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Parks and Open Space . . . . . . . . . . . 70

V. SPECIAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . 77

National Arts and Recreation Center 79 Urban Renewal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 Housing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84

VI. CIRCULATION AND TRANSPORTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . 87 Internal Circulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 External Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Parking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 Other Transportation Facilities . . . . 95

Community Transit System . . . . . . 95 Long Distance Bus Service . . . . . 98 Railroads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Air Transportation . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

CONCLUSION AND EPILOGUE . ..... 101

v

ITHACA'S HUMAN, FISCAL, AND

ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCES

TABLES AND MAPS

LAND USE

Page

Map 1.1: Developed Land and Village Boundaries of Ithaca in 1806 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

~vlap 1.2: Developed Land and Village Boundaries of Ithaca in 1835 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Table 1.1: Annual Census Enumerations and Percentage Change Over Time for Tompkins County and the City of Ithaca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Map 1.3: Developed Land and City Boundaries of Ithaca in 1889 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Table 1.2: Age and Sex Characteristics of the Populations of the United States, New York, Tomp-kins County, and Ithaca for 1960 . . . . . . . . 11

Table 1.3: Age and Sex Composition by ·wards for the City of Ithaca, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Map 1.4: Area Inundated by the Flood of Record, July 1935, and Ithaca Flood Control System, 1970 12

Table 1.4: Population Projections for the City of Ithaca, 1970-1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

~vlap 1.5: Seven City Wards, Used for Population Distribution Analysis, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Table 1.5: Comparative Distribution by Age Group of the Total Labor Force of New York State, Upstate New York, Tompkins County, and Ithaca, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Table 1.6: Labor Force Distribution by Selected Occupation, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Table 1.7: Comparison of the Average vVork Force and Average Rate of Unemployment in Tompkins County from 1962 through 1966 . . . . . . . . . 16

Table 1.8: Distribution of Income by Individual Employees and Employers and by Family in the City of Ithaca, 1960 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Table 1.9: Weeks Worked by Employed Persons, 1960 17

vi

Table II.l: Page

Tabulation of Kind, Condition, and Construc-tion Material of all Structures in the City of Ithaca by Neighborhood, 1969 . . . . . . . . . . 21

Nlap II.l: Neighborhood Boundaries, 1970 . . . . . . . . . 22

Table II.2 : Existing Land Use by Acreage and Percent for the City of Ithaca by Neighborhoods 23

1Vlap II.2 Existing Land Use, 1969 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Table II .3: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Table II .4: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Table II.5: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 27


Table II.7: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 5 . . . . . . . . . .. . . 29



Table II.lO: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 8 . . . . . . . . . . . . 32




Table II.14 Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 12 . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

f ' (

f

'-

Page Map Ilo3

Projected Land Use, 1Q90

Table Ilo15: Projected Land Use by Acreage and Percent for the City of Ithaca by Neighborhoods,

37

1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38

Table Ilo16: Changes in Land Uses by Acreage and Per-cent from Existing to Projected Land Uses 39

COMMUNITY ACTIVITIES

Table III.l: Organization Chart for Ithaca City Govern-ment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43

Page Map III.2:

Institutions of Higher and Continuing Edu-cation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 54

Table III.l2: Social Services with Headquarters in the City, by Interest 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 55

Map IIIo3: Social Service Organization Headquarters located in the City, 1969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56

Table III.l3 : Breakdown of County, City, and United Fund Expenditures on Social Services 0 0 0 0 57

Table IIIo2: COi\IHviUNITY FACILITIES Cumulative Graph of Percent Change in Employment by Tompkins County and City of Ithaca 1962 to 1969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44

Table III.3: Actual Revenues for the City of Ithaca, 1966 through 1968 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 o 46

Table III.4: General Fund Budget Allocations by Dollar and Percent for the City of Ithaca, 1964 to 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47

Table III.5: Quantity and Description of Machinery Owned by the Ithaca Fire Department in 1969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48

Table III.6: Number of Registered Borrowers from Tomp-kins County Library 1965-1969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49

Table III.7: Public School Standards as Determined by the Ithaca Board of Education 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

Table IIIo8 : Description of Public Schools within the City of Ithaca by Age, Number of Rooms, Site Size, and Student Enrollment, 1970 0 0 0 0 0 0 51

Table IIIo9 : Enrollments and School Population Projections by Percent Increase from 1960 to 19800 51

Table III.lO: Absolute Enrollment Projected for 1970 through 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51

Map IIIo1: Ithaca Public School District 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52

Table IIIoll: Distribution of Staff by Responsibility, Sex, and Level of Education in 1966 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53

Table IVo1: Drawing Capacity of the Ithaca City Water Reservoir in 1970 and Projected for Daily Increases of 008, 016, and 025 Million Gallons 61

Table IVo2: 'i\' ater Treatment Plant Use and Capacity 0 0 61

:Map IVo1: 'i\Tater Treatment Plant Service Areas, 1970 62

Table IVo3: Description of the Cost of Treating Water and 'i\' ater Quantities by Absolute Numbers and Percent Change, 1964 to 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 63

Map IVo2: Sewer Treatment Plant Service Areas, 1970 64

Table IV.4: Cost of Sewage Treatment Plant Operations for the City of Ithaca, 1964 to 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 65

Map IVo3: Proposed County-Wide Refuse Disposal Sites 67

Table IVo5: Recommended Lighting for Major, Collector, and Local Streets within Downtown, Inter-mediate, and Outlying Areas 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68

Map IV.4: Street Lighting Classifications 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 69

Table IVo6: Recreation Area Standards as Set by the 1968 Recreation Plan, City of Ithaca 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71

Map IVo5: Park and Open Space in the City as D esignated by the Recreation Plan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 72

Table lVo7: Recommended and Existing City Parks and Open Spaces by Function 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 73

vii

Page Table IVo8:

Description of Actual and Proposed Park Land and Open Space by Neighborhood, Function of Park, and Population in Ithaca, 1969 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 74

Table IVo9 : Description of the Regional State Parks Adjacent to Ithaca by Distance, Size, Facilities, and Population Served in 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 75

SPECIAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

Map Vo1: Proposed Inlet Park Development

Table Vo1: Employment Concentration Ratios (County I New York State) for the Entertainment and Services Sector in the \iVestern Upstate Counties with Major Urban Centers 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0

Map Vo2: Urban Renewal Area, 1970 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Table Vo2: Proportion of Students to Total Population

80

81

83

of Ithaca, 1950 through 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 84

Table Vo3: Comparison of Housing Units per ShLJ.cture in Tompkins County, 1950, 1960, 1968 0 0 0 0 85

Table V.4: Housing Vacancy Rates for Selected Upstate Communities, 1967 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85

viii

Page Table Vo5:

Vacancy Rates for Areas of Tompkins County, 1967 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 85

CIRCULATION

Table VI.l: Traffic Generators in the City of Ithaca, 1969 89

Map VI.l: Existing Major Streets and Traffic Genera-tors, 1970 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 90

Map Vl.2: Projected Major Streets and Traffic Genera-tors, 1990 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92

Table Vl.2: Frequency of Use of the Transit System by Percentage, 1961 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96

Table VI.3 : Number and Type of Bus Users, Annual Revenue and Annual Loss of the Transit System from 1964-1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 96

j\,llap Vl.3: Area Transportation Systems, 1970 o 0 0 0 0 0 97

Table VI.4: Freight Shipments In and Out of the Ithaca Station by Carload in 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 98

Table VI.5: Tompkins County Airport Air and Passenger Traffic, 1965 to 1968 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99

,'

r

INTRODUCTION

Urban land use planning refers to the continuous advisory process of guiding land development according to established policy and toward predetermined goals. The ultimate objective of such conscious shaping of the physical environment is the welfare of those who live and will live in the community. The Ithaca General Plan also provides a basis on which public and private agencies can relate and coordinate their development to design principles and objectives as expressed in the plan. In short then, the city's General Plan becomes an official public document which is used by local governmental boards and officials as a guide to decisions about the physical development of the community. The plan, as adopted by the Common Council, becomes an official document of the city. Alone, however, the document has no force-in-law. The "teeth" of the plan develop if, and when, parallel zoning and other city ordinances are adopted.

There are three essential elements of a general plan. The plan must be comprehensive, general, and long range. To be comprehensive the plan must include all geographic parts of the city and all functional elements of the city which have a bearing on the physical development of the community. To be general the plan must summarize policies and proposals and not offer the detailed solutions to problems. To be long range implies that the plan look beyond the pressing current issues to the future perspective of 20 years hence. Long range planning must not only correct present faults but create the benefits of the future. Each of these aspects of the General Plan is a part of the whole, a basis for a better community. While the ideal of this plan is complete fulfillment and while some of the proposals made here are interdependent with others, any part of the General Plan carried to completion will mean an advance for Ithaca. The General Plan is a working proposal, not a fantasy. To be effective the implementation of its goals must be flexible. Periodic review of the plan's proposals is fundamental to achieving a General Plan which is flexible and responsive to the growing and changing nature of the city.

Ithaca serves a unique function as a major center of higher education. In accordance with this function Ithaca is a small city with a well developed service sector; a small, but diversified, industrial base; and a great, but undeveloped, potential as a regional recreational-cultural center. All of the objectives of the General Plan work toward maintaining and improving these functions of the city. No data is available which indicates that Ithaca is going to change its size or function radically in the next three or four decades.

Ithaca's General Plan, as presented here, has been prepared with the function of the city in mind. A balance has been struck between such things as residential, commercial, and indush·ial development, between time required for long range projects and capital funds available. In fact, the unique contribution of this General Plan to the city's development policy is that each component of the city's structure is analyzed and planned in the context of all the components.

The major parts of the Ithaca General Plan-Land Use, Community Facilities, Community Activities, Special Community Projects, and Circulation-are based on careful study and statistical analysis. Some parts of the plan, however, are the product of judgments. The field of human values cannot be measured statistically, but many of these judgments are signifi· cant components of the essential decisions to be made. These value judgments are stated as explicitly as possible in the plan; however, explicitness is not always possible.

A clear understanding of the community's potential calls for a careful analysis of the conditions under which the plan must operate. This history of a community provides much insight into its present condition. In order, therefore, to provide a better understanding of the base on which we will build for the future, the chapters that follow deal first with the historical developments which brought the city to its present condition, the nature of the city's present human, physical, and economic resources, and projections as to the future changes in the city which can be anticipated.

DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVES

The development objectives of the Ithaca General Plan provide the guidelines for building a community which will be a place of, and for, men. A community in which each resident has an opportunity to exercise his full potential in seeking worthwhile economic, educational, cultural, and physical goals.

Development Objectives

1. A city which builds for the different interests of its citizens.

Achieving a better understanding of our citizenry and their various urban area needs is probably our most difficult challenge. Some of these needs are common to all citizens, others vary according to the citizens' differences in education, sex, age, etc. A good city is one \vhich considers and builds for these differences.

1

2. A city which understands and does not abuse its nonreplaceable physical resources.

Another challenge is our land-3,900 acres. This is the basic physical resource we have to work with. It comes in a £xed amount. If we waste or pollute our land and environment, it cannot be replaced. ·we must, therefore, try to understand and make wise use of the soil, gorges, water, air, and plants which are a part of the community's nonreplaceable physical resources.

3. A city which has a workable pattern for relating the industrial, commercial, and residential activities of men.

Buildings serve the purpose of housing nearly all of man's productive activities. We must search for ways of securing buildings which are esthetically pleasing, efficient, and functional. We must £nd workable patterns for relating buildings to one another, whether they house similar or dissimilar activities of man. In some situations a sensitive physical and social design plan can group dissimilar activities; more often, however, the result is offensive and unsightly and the stronger commercial and industrial activities move bit by bit, destroying the residential and other economically weaker activities . A good city must be able to properly accommodate all the building activities of men.

4. A city which moves its goods and people efficiently and safely.

Circulation into and through the city is essential to its life. Movement between buildings and areas is necessary because man cannot perform all of these necessary activities in a single building. Therefore, we must improve the quality of and safety of our circulation system.

5. A city which encourages the diversity of its industrial base and makes every effort to employ its labor force according to its skill and capacity.

2

Our economy is based on the combination of our land use, buildings, circulation system, and our personal abilities and talents. \Ve must work toward using these talents and resources in the most efficient manner, giving our citizens the maximum opportunity to become productive members of our society.

We should work toward maintaining all sectors of our economy and strive to increase diversity in our economic base by encouraging new light service and recreational industries to supplement our existing service and educational industries. vVe must provide for those members of our labor force who will need special job training or reh·aining to develop the skills needed by our expanding economy.

6. A city which is responsive to its growing regional role as a cultural-recreational center and its local role as a commercial-service center.

Although our community's population is not anticipated to increase by more than 9 percent by 1980, the surrounding county is anticipated to have a 36 percent population increase. Despite the lower growth rate in the city, the rapid expansion in the county and increasing emphasis on the city's role as a culhual-recreational center for upstate New York will increase the city's role in the future as a commercial-service center.

Such growth will inevitably mean physical changes in the city. It should be an objective of the city and of each neighborhood to begin working together now to understand the common problems which will result from an increasing commercial-service specialization in the city's function.

7. A city which employs the renewal of resources, buildings, land, and circulation as a means to correct and bring new vigor to the community.

It should be a community objective to recognize the value of the aspects of the city-buildings, circulation, activities, facilities, and land useswhich are in good condition and do whatever is possible to enhance, continue, and maintain their use. Renewal of human resources, buildings, land, and circulation, however, must also become a development objective if we are to correct and bring new vigor to our community.

8. A city which recognizes that its future development will be based on the city's recreation potential, the city's role as a retail-service center, and the city's ath·active powers for service type indush·ies; and a city which plans for these future developments .

Recognizing the city's regional role and its natural assets as an educational, cultural, and recreational center, we should encourage and provide leadership in the development of facilities which will appeal to visitors and residents alike.

For the new people who will settle in Ithaca, for the new land which will be developed in the city, for the new buildings which will be built, and for the new circulation patterns required, it should be a development objective to provide well-studied plans and programs to properly guide their growth.

The active pursuit of the development objectives listed in this section will improve Ithaca's chances of continuing to build a pleasing rather than an ugly community. Following these objectives will assist the community in achieving a good place of, and for, man.

f_.

t I

I l

3

( '

ITHACA'S BEGINNING

In 1781, 1,800,000 acres in upstate New York were set aside by law to be used as payment to Revolutionary \Var soldiers. Ithaca was a part of this acreage. Simeon DevVitt, then Surveyor General of New York State, purchased several of these soldier's lands at the head of Cayuga Lake in 1797. With the additional purchase of a portion of the Bloodgood Tract, DeWitt owned most of the delta area at the lake head.

In 1806, Simeon DeWitt prepared to develop his holdings by laying a series of streets in a north-south gridiron pattern on the dry, flat land between Cascadilla and Six-Mile Creeks. Surrounded by marsh and swamps, this area was the most easily developable of DeWitt's holdings. Moreover, the land laid out had good access to the potential water power of the- adjacent creeks so essential for industrial development. The Bath-Jericho Turnpike, completed through Ithaca in 1804, provided a major overland access to the developed plat.

At the time of Ithaca's founding the turnpikes were the most influential factor in determining the orientation of the community. Not until the opening of the Erie Canal in 1837 did Cayuga Lake begin to play a really important role in the commercial life of the community, Therefore, despite the presence of the lake to the north, the early growth of the community moved west along the turnpikes. By 1824 seven major turnpikes served Ithaca. All of these turnpikes came down East Hill and left Ithaca up the Inlet Valley.

In 1817, Ithaca was declared the county seat of Tompkins County. By 1818 the village had acquired a court house, 17 stores, seven groceries, eight offices, 28 mechanic's shops and a population of 611.

In April 1821, the New York State Legislature recognized Ithaca as an incorporated village. Thus began a new era in Ithaca's development. The first 15 years after village incorporation were particularly important because it was during this period that the street plan was laid out for the next 50 years. In this decade and a half the village population more than quadrupled from 859 to 3,923, sidewalks were built and the village boundaries were extended ( 1826) . ~'Inch of the growth of the village was simply peripheral expansion around the established core of the settlement. For example, the village trustees erected a Public Post for all official notices on the corner of Owego (State) and Tioga Streets in 1821. The placement of this post indicated that the focal point of the village in 1821 was in essentially the same location that it was in 1806. However, as Owego (State) Street became a main thoroughfare to the rapidly developing area at the inlet, linear development began along State Street. This vvestward expansion is clearly visible on the 1829 map of the village.

Simeon DeWitt's 1831 map for the village extended the north-south gridiron pattern to the area bounded by Brindley, Cascadilla, Factory, and Clinton Streets. This area is the basis of the present city street system. In addition, some of the land uses set aside in De·witt's 1831 plan have become intrinsic parts of Ithaca-Washington Square, the Public Ground (De·witt Park), several churches, and the Clinton House. Generally this 1831 map, !he last of DeWitt's maps, maintained and extended the basic pattern of the 1806 map.

After De\Vitt's death, a final street map was drawn to settle his estate. On this map the gridiron was extended up East Hill and the area west of Auburn Street was laid out at a diagonal to the village's original plat. This 1835 map became, by vote of the village trustees, the basis of the 1836 Village Map.

The Panic of 1837 slowed the rapid growth of Ithaca. There was little change in the street plan from 1837 to 1888. This period was more one of filling in the earlier street plans for the village.

The era from 1837 to 1888, however, included several events which were to have significant impact on Ithaca's future growth. First, the construction of four railroads linking Ithaca to other rail terminals were completed by 1874. However, the cost of construction on the steep terrain and the poor quality of the early equipment made extensive rail access to Ithaca prohibitively expensive. Therefore, the main lines of the developing rail carriers by-passed the village.

In the 1860's, the New York State Legislature established the new State University in Ithaca. Even as a fledgling operation the University made a significant contribution to the village; and today the University is a mainstay of the Ithaca economy.

In 1888 Ithaca became an incorporated city. As indicated on the 1889 map, by the time Ithaca became a city most of the "Flats" was developed and the plans of 1806, 1831, and 1835 were fixed permanently in mortar and brick.

Ithaca's second century has been far from colorless. In the 1890's development began apace on the hills surrounding the Flats, first on East Hill adjacent to Cornell University, then on South Hill, and later on West Hill. In 1914 Renwick Park (Stewart Park) was leased to a movie director. For six years Ithaca was the movie capital of the world. In the 1920's the automobile increased Ithaca's accessibility and established the city as the central place for employment and retail services in the county. By 1923 the citizens of Ithaca had realized the need for planning and appointed a citizen's committee "to consider and formulate plans for a comprehensive program of permanent

5

CITY OF ~ ITHACA ~~ , ___ _ NEW YORK I CITY PlANNING BOARD · JUNE, 1970 1~,·

CAYUGA L AKE

I

{

I

L

! -

tl II

' \

( '

improvements"! for the city. A consultant was hired to formulate a city zoning ordinance which was adopted in 1925; and in February 1926 an official City Planning Commission was appointed under state law.

The Future

As we look at Ithaca's development from its founding to the most recent extension of its city limits, we see that there were several important influences on the city's physical development. First, there was the Glacial Age which not only created the beautiful, steep terrain enclosing the city, but also was responsible for the poorly drained soil and swampy areas on the "Flats." Second, there was Simeon DeWitt whose plans of 1806 and 1831, amended in 1835, detem1ined the street pattern and even some of the existing-land uses in the city. There was the city's early accessibility by overland turnpikes which encouraged linear development from east to west, away from the lake front, an influence still visible in the city today. The fourth factor which influenced the city's physical development was the location of Cornell University on East Hill. The University drew development up East Hill.

It is important to note that the present land use pattern in the city still has many features of much earlier uses; for example, the Public Ground (DeWitt Park) flanked by the Presbyterian Church and Court House. By and large, the commercial center of Ithaca today is at the same intersection of State and Tioga Streets that it was on the 1806 map. Ithaca has remained ostensibly the same because the changes in the city have been primarily peripheral additions to the old development rather than replacements of land uses. The uses which have disappeared, generally, are those which were related to an old way of life such as the Public Post, public markets, or small waterpowered industries. These older uses have been replaced by new technology or other services.

The future growth and development of the City of Ithaca will be strongly influenced by the framework defined by the Glacial Age, the plat designed by Simeon De\iVitt, the turnpikes, and the attraction powers of the University. These immoveable parameters, fixed in soils, mortar, and brick, are factors which will influence planning. The land area of the city is presently almost fully developed. Further development, then, will result in shifting land uses and increases in the density of existing land uses. Now more than at any time in the past 100 years, Ithaca needs to plan for the future.

'Kermit C. Parsons, A Study of the Ithaca U·rban Area, Cornell University Thesis, Ithaca, New York, 1953, p. 6.

PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT

The City of Ithaca is located at the north end of the north-south valley which marks the drainage area of Cayuga Lake. This drainage basin is bounded by hills rising to an elevation of 1,910 feet above mean sea level. The valley was eroded by ice during the glacial period to a depth of approximately 45 feet below mean sea level. Glacial drift mantled the bedrock at the north end of the valley forming a dam south of which Cayuga Lake was formed. The drainage basin encompasses 780 square miles.

As the glacier melted, retreating northward, the high level lakes in the Cayuga Inlet and Six-Mile Creek valleys dropped lower and lower until they drained into the present lake basin. As these high level lakes drained, they left great quantities of sand and gravel in the form of hanging deltas. These hanging deltas, later supplemented by alluvial stream deposits, created the plain at the head of Cayuga Lake on which Ithaca was built. The result of this glacial fill is that much of the city has poor soil drainage. Only Neighborhood 5, Fall Creek; Neighborhood 7, Central; Neighborhood 1, Cornell Heights; and part of Neighborhood 6, North Central; have good drainage."

Soil drainage is one of the major determinants affecting land use and the character of the outermost portions of the City of Ithaca. Most of the hillsides and surrounding uplands have soils with generally poor internal drainage and this has caused improper functioning of many septic tank installations. Where septic tanks are used, residential lots must be much larger than would be necessary if public sewers were available. Even with large lots, sewage problems are likely to occur on South Hill, East Hill and, to a lesser extent, on West Hill.

Lake Cayuga is the second largest of the Finger Lakes. The lake is drained by the Seneca River which flows northeastward to the Oneida River and Lake Ontario. Cayuga Lake has a surface area of 66.9 square miles and is 431 feet deep at its deepest point northwest of Reddens Point. The lake is 37 miles long and varies in width from one to three miles. The New York State Department of Public Works, Division of Canals and Waterways, regulates the lake from a low elevation of 378.5 to a high elevation 382.5 feet when climatological conditions permit. Flood stage of Cayuga Lake is at 388.5 feet. At flood stage not only are lakes and cottages endangered, but cellars in the city flood and the city sewage treatment plant is threatened. In the time of flood , the main problem areas on the shore line are Levanna, Willets, Myers,

• Good drainage means deep soils underlain by slowly permeable subsoil and substratum with a deep water table.

7

CITY OF ' ITHACA · ~ ... ~ . N E W Y 0 R K I CIT Y Pl ANN ING BOARD · JUNE, 1970 l~-·-•~

CA YU G A L AK E

~ and BOUND~-RIES, 1835

II

r Ithaca, and Sheldrake. The new Army Corps of Engineers' Flood Conh·ol Channel in Cayuga Inlet completed late in 1969 has helped to alleviate the flooding problems within the City of Ithaca. The flood control channel is designed to alleviate flood conditions equal to the flood of record, July 8, 1935. Map I.4 shows the portion of the city inundated by the 1935 flood.

Despite the steep slopes and access problems in the area, South and East Hills have become densely developed. Only West Hill, with slopes of 10 to 15 percent, has appreciable vacant land remaining to be developed. About 20 percent of the City of Ithaca (and its environs) slopes by at least 15 percent.

The variations in topography, compounded by the lake, affect the climatic conditions in and around the city. Since the dominant topographic direction in the area is north-south it appears that the sheltered slopes of West Hill and the slopes on the east side of South Hill have the advantage of somewhat milder weather.

Ithaca has a humid continental type climate: the summers are warm and the winters long and cold. There are frequent storms in the winter and the maximum precipitation occurs in the late spring and summer. Not far from the path of major weather systems moving across the nation, the area's weather is subject to variety. Temperatures of 90°F. or higher occur from two days in cool summers to 20 days in exceptionally warm summers. The humidity averages between 45 and 55 percent in the summer. In the past 30 years, only four days have registered temperatures of 100°F. or more. In the winter temperatures of 0°F. or colder are recorded on only six to 10 days from early December through March. In a very cold winter there may be as many as 15 sub-zero days. The coldest temperatures during most winters is near -l0°F.

Annual precipitation in the Ithaca area in the past 30 years has ranged from 26 to 46 inches. The highest annual rainfall in the past 30 years was 46.6 inches in 1958; the lowest annual rainfall was 26.7 inches in 1941. The average rainfall over the past 30 years has been 35.4 inches a year. Normally the growing season precipitation is adequate for crops, lawns and shrubs. However, one or more periods of deficient rainfall are common in most summers.

In the past 30 years the snowfalls have ranged from a low of 35.7 inches to a high of 115.1 inches. The average annual snowfall over the same time period has been 61.9 inches. The snowfalls in the Ithaca area, however, are drawn out from mid-November to mid-April. A monthly total in excess of 20 inches occurs only five years out of ten.

OUR POPULATION

An important aspect of Ithaca's growth is its

human resources. The recorded population of Ithaca was 858 in 1820. It was fifty years before an official United States Census enumeration was taken of the village. In 1870 Ithaca's population had increased to 8,462. By 1960, less than a hundred years after the first United States Census, the city's population had increased to 28,799 or by 240 percent.

Until the 1940's the census figures for the City of Ithaca show a steady increase in population. During this period the rate of increase in the city's population was never less than seven percent, and in hvo decades ( 1880 and 1920) the rate of increase in the city was greater than 20 percent.

From 1870 to 1930 the population in Tompkins County increased by no more than 18 percent and actually decreased in two decades, 1880 and 1900. Since 1930, however, the county's population has increased steadily and the city's population has decreased except for 1950 when students were enumerated for the first time at their place of school. The corrected figure for 1950, 0 however, indicates that the city population achwlly declined by one and a half percent in 1950.

This shift in population gain from the city to the county began with a four and seven-tenths percent loss to the city and a four and four-tenths percent gain in the county in 1940. The symmetry of the percentage loss and the percentage gain indicated that the city was losing population to the county. This trend of city loss and county gain has continued.

TABLE 1.1: Annual Census Enumerations and Per-centage Change Over Time for Tompkins County and the City of Ithaca

Tompkins % Change City of %Change Year County Over Time Ithaca Over Time

1960** 66,164 12 28,799 -2 1950** 59,122 36 29,257 48 1940 43,340 4 19.730 -5 1930 41.490 18 20,708 24 1920 35,285 5 17,004 15 1910 33,647 -1 14,802 13 1900 33,830 3 13.136 19 1890 32,923 -4 11,079 22 1880 34.445 4 9,105 7 1870 33,178 6 8.462 1860 31.409 -2 1850 38.746 2 1840 37,948 4 1830 36,545 77 1820 20,681 -

SO URCE: U.S. Population Census 0 The corrected figure is the total population minus the student

population in the same year.

0 ° Figures include student population.

9

CITY OF ~ ITHACA ~ .... '" NEW YORK I CITY PLANN I NG BOARD · JUNE, 1970 l~:>l·

CA Y UGA L AKE

-~: / .... ::-.~•, :>•U~

(

and I;

II

.'

< I

Age and Sex Composition of the Population

The age and sex composition of the City of Ithaca is strongly influenced by the annual influx of college age students. A comparison of the population pyramids for the United States, New York State, Tompkins County, and the City of Ithaca indicate the extent of the effect the college age population has on the composition of the community's population. Both the United States and New York State pyramids show, by their deviation from the triangular shape, the effects of the decline in birth rate during the depression and World Vl ar II (age cohorts from 15 to 30 years) . The Ithaca and Tompkins County pyramids, on the other hand, show an exaggerated increase in population in these same age cohorts. Since (other than the bulge at the 15-30 age cohorts) both Ithaca's and Tompkins County's population dish·ibution are fairly normal, one can assume the disproportionate increase shown is the result of the influx of college age students.

The extent of this student influx is considerable. In 1960, in the age ranges of 15-19 and 20-24 years, both the county ( 18 percent) and the city ( 9 percent) exceeded the growth of the entire upstate region ( 6 percent). The transience of these in-migrants is confirmed, however, by the fact that both the city ( -27 percent) and the county ( -14 percent) lost more individuals from 1950 to 1960 in the completed college age categories, 25-29 and 30-34, than did the upstate New Y ark area ( -8 percent). The loss of this young, well-educated population has a significant negative impact on the city's labor force .

Distribution of Population 11

The population pyramids indicate that most of the student residents are concentrated in areas 5 and 7 of

0 The city has been divided into seven wards for this population distribution analysis.

TABLE 1.2: Age and Sex Characteristics of the Popu lations of the United States, New York, Tompkins Cou nty, and Ithaca for 1960

United States

Tompkins County

--80-84 - -70-74 --60-64 --50-54 _40-44 -30-34 - 20-24

- 10-14 0-5

85+ - -75-79 --65-69 -55-59 45-49 -35-39-25-29 -15-19 5-9 -

New York State

-'--:-:-+-=--'-

Ciiy of Ithaca

SOURCE: U. S. Census of Population, 1960.

the city with additional, smaller concentrations in areas 6 and 2. Cornell University is largely contained in area 5. This area also covers the East Hill area encompassing Collegetown and many of the Ithaca College living facilities. During the 1960's, Ithaca College moved to South Hill beyond the city limits. This move will have a significant impact on the student composition of areas 5, 6, and 7 in the future. Area 5, which contains many aparhnents, is particularly attractive to the older undergraduate and graduate students and will continue, no doubt, as a locus for non-permanent residents in spite of Ithaca College's move. Area 6 on South Hill had already become a residential location for a number of students, most of them attending Ithaca College. With the move of Ithaca College to South Hill there may be an increase in the number of non-permanent residents in this area. Area 2 contains the west end of the downtown section. There are a number of student living quarters there, particularly apartments and a few Ithaca College facilities. A number of graduate students from Cornell can be found in this area.

Areas 2, 3, 4, and 6 indicated the highest proportion of elderly residents. Area 5, the area encompassing the University, has the fewest elderly residents .

TABLE 1.3: Age and Sex Composition by Wards for Ithaca, 1960

Ward I

Ward 3

Ward 5

___ 80-84 70-74

__ 60-64 __ 50-54 __ 40-44

30-34 _ _ 20-24

_10-14 0-5

85+ - --75-79---65-69 --55-59 --45-49--35-39--25-29 15-19--5-9 --

SOURCE: U. S. Census of Popu lation, 1960 .

Ward 2

Ward 4

Ward 6

11

::.,

H l! :: •'

CITY OF ' ITHACA . ~ · ·- ·~ NEW YORK I C I TY PLANN I NG SOARD · JUNE, 1970 •~-~ 0 ~'~·

CA'fUGA L AKE

r .

(

\

SYSTEM, 1970 '

Generally speaking, the student population in Ithaca is rather tightly bunched around the educational facilities with a certain amount of infiltration into other areas. Meanwhile, the elderly population seems to be concentrated in those areas least used for student dwelling. In thus demonstrating resident areas by age, the pyramids disclose a degree of segregation of the non-permanent and permanent populations in Ithaca.

Future Population

Population projections for the city anticipated a moderate upward h·end in population in the next 30 years. The population estimates for the city have been presented as a range. The low figure of the range represents a projection from the natural increase and migration rates of the decade from 1950 to 1960. The high figure uses the base rates, established from 1950 to 1960, and makes adjustments for changes anticipated in the city in the next 30 years. The data on Table 1.4 indicates that the city can anticipate a constant rate of population increase for the first time in three decades. However, a closer examination of the data reveals that in addition to an overall increase in the city's population, there will · be a shift in composition of the population. 'While 60 percent of the residents of the city were permanent in 1950, by 1990 only 41 percent of the city's population will be permanent.

Since the majority of the non-permanent residents are university and college students, the increase of this segment of the population will have a significant impact on the composition of the city's population. The

increased pressure for housing created by the anticipated increase of non-permanent residents may also mean that the age segregation now existing in various parts of the city may break down.

OUR ECONOMY

In 1960, 39 percent of Ithaca's total population was employed in the labor force. Of these employed, 60 percent were men and 40 percent were women. Forty-three percent of the women employed in Ithaca were married with their husbands present. While this is a large proportion of the women in the labor force, it is less than the percentage of married women with husbands present in the labor forces of New York State, the upstate area, or Tompkins County.

The most striking characteristic of Ithaca's labor force is its youth. A comparison of the median ages of New York State, the upstate area, and Tompkins County's labor force to the median age of Ithaca's labor force exemplifies this youth. The median age figures for Ithaca's labor force is four years younger than that of Tompkins County and nine years younger than the median age of the upstate area and the state as a whole.

In Ithaca's case median years of school completed figures show that the population of Ithaca is better educated than the population of New York State, the upstate area, or Tompkins County. Thus, if education and youth are functions of trainability, then certainly Ithaca's labor force is more adept and well suited to highly specialized industries.

TABLE 1.4: Population Projections for the City of Ithaca, 1970-1990

CITY OF ITHACA

1950 1960 1970

Cornell U. Students and Their Dependents in the City 10,120 11,200 12,700 Ithaca C. Students and Their Dependents in the City 1,407 1,425 500 Cascadilla School Students in the City 75 125 100 Total Non-permanent Population 11,602 12,750 13,300 Total Permanent Population 17,655 16,049 15,600 Total Population 29,257 28,799 28,900

March 1970, Ithaca City Planning Office, City of Ithaca. NOTE: Population forecasts are rounded off to the nearest 100.

ITHACA ITHACA Low Estimate High Estimate

1980 1990 1970 1980 1990

15,600 20,200 13,200 16,700 23,000

600 700 500 650 1,000

100 100 100 150 200

16,300 21,000 13,800 17,500 24,200

14,000 12,500 16,300 16,500 16,800

30,300 33,500 30,100 34,000 41,000

13

J '

I I

I '

TABLE 1.5: Comparative York State,

Distribution by Age Group of the Total Labor Force of New Upstate New York, Tompkins County, and Ithaca, 1960

50

45

40

__ __ New York State

__ • __ Upstate New York

____ Tompkins County

____ Ithaca <l) u .... 0 35 I.J.... .... 0 .0

30 ro .....1

ro +-' 25 0 f-'+-0

+-' c 20 <l) u .... <l) 15 0....

10

5

14-17 18-24 25-34 35-44 45-64 65 OVER

Age Groups

A close look at the percentage distribution of age groups within the labor force, however, indicates that Ithaca's labor force is not normally distributed. Rather, Ithaca's labor force has a bi-modal distribution: the percentage of the labor force employed in the age range from 14 to 24 is virtually the same as the percentage employed in the 45 to 64 age range. The nature of this distribution is clearly seen in Table 1.5. The contrast betvveen Ithaca and the New York State and upstate area is clearly seen by the fact that the solid line representing Ithaca moves far above the others in the 18-24 category and is just slightly below the others in the 45-64 category.

The high rate of loss of population in the 25-34 age categories indicates that comparatively few of the university and college students trained in Ithaca stay on. Moreover, student wives who are working tend to move out of the labor force and start families as soon as the student completes his education. As a result, many of the large number of workers in the 18-24 age category tend to be transient workers who move to Ithaca and are employed for a shm't period, several years at most, and move on or out of the labor force. This transient nature of the young people in the labor force should be balanced against their generally

high level of education and trainability. The fact is that, while transient, the number of such persons will increase with time as the number of students at the University and College increase. Not only is there constant replacement of students in the labor force, but as the University and College grow, there will be an increasing number of students and their wives seeking jobs in the city.

Occupation

Of the people employed in Ithaca, the largest number ( 33 percent) are employed in the field of education. The next largest group is employed in other professional and related services (eight percent).

A comparison of the distribution of Ithaca's labor force by occupation to that of New York State and the upstate area reveals that a disproportionate number of Ithaca's labor force is employed in education. This concentration shows clearly the dependence of the city on the education industry. In all other areas of occupational distribution except entertainment and recreation, and communications and utilities, Ithaca is below the New York State and upstate percentages.

15

TABLE 1.6: Labor Force Distribution by Selected Occupation, 1960

AREA STATE UPSTATE TOMPKINS ITHACA NUMBER EMPLOYED 6,599.462 2,226,822 25,458 11,368

ch.....J8~ Total 13 13 34 41 u.Jcs::t-~ Hospitals 3 3 2 1 LJ...zcc>

en Oa.....Jo:: z: O::::::_u.JLLJ

Educational 5 6 27 33 0 a... (')0::: (;")

en 0:: '-'-' ENTERTAINMENT & RECREATION 1 1 1 1 "-0 '-'-' >- FINANCE, INSURANCE, 0

6 3 2 3 _, REAL ESTATE "-::;:

'-'-' 8 6 4 4 ...... z:z: Total 0 00

~ ~~ 1 2 0 0 I 1-U R.R., R.R. Express en ~ZU? "- O...::::J~ Other ::> en:;:>-

Transportation 4 2 1 1 0 Z:;:~ 0:: ~0~ (,!)

>-<->=> Communication, >-3 3 3 3 0:: Utility I-en

::>

3 3 0 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 5 5 z: -

INDUSTRY NOT REPORTED 5 4 6 7

SOURCE: N.Y. State Dept. of Commerce, Fact Book, Elmira, 1965.

Since Ithaca serves as an entertainment center for a large number of college students during the school year, and as a tourist resort during the summer season, it is not surprising that a slightly higher percentage of its population should be employed in entertainment and recreation occupations. The high percentage of the labor force employed in the communicationsutility sector is explained, in part, by the fact that the New York State Electric and Gas Corporation has its district headquarters in the Ithaca area.

A look at the change in Ithaca's labor force from 1950 to 1960 indicates that there were some significant shifts in the occupations of Ithaca's labor force over the decade. There were considerable losses in three categories: craftsmen, foremen, and kindred workers; operatives and kindred workers; and laborers, except farm and mine. The major gains in employment in the 1950 to 1960 decade were in the professionaltechnical, clerical, and service workers categories. This shift underscores the extent of the loss of semi-skilled and skilled members of the Ithaca labor force and emphasizes the fact that Ithaca's economy is tending to become more specialized in the service-education sectors to the detriment of the manufacturing labor sector. If Ithaca is to retain a mixed industrial-service economy, steps must be taken to attract and hold the industrial labor force.

Employment and Unemployment

From 1960 to 1969 the county 0 experienced a yearly increase of 500 jobs to a job total of 29,500.

0 Employment and unemployment rates for the city alone are not available. However, the city and the immediately adjacent industries represent the major employers for the county.

16

There were approximately 1,150 new jobs in the manufacturing sector and 3,200 in the non-manufacturing sector, primarily in education and related services. This growth in available jobs is expected to continue at the present rate of about 500 annually to a 1971 total of 30,500 persons employed in the county.

Unemployment figures for the City of Ithaca are not available. However, these figures are available for Tompkins County of which Ithaca is a major employment component. An examination of Tompkins County unemployment figures indicate that the rate of unemployment has decreased significantly in the past five years while the size of the labor force .has increased slightly.

TABLE I. 7: Comparison of the Average Work Force and Average Rate of Unemployment in Tompkins County from 1962 through 1966

Average Work Average Rate of Year Force (1,000) Unemployment ( %)

1962 28.9 4.1

1963 28.7 3.6

1964 29.3 3.4

1965 29.4 3.1

1966 29.3 2.7

SOURCE: New York State Department of Employment, Tompkins County State Employment Office.

An important factor about the unemployment data for Tompkins County is the steady decline in the average rate of unemployment. The figures indicate that the increase in the average size of the work force has not been as stable as the decrease in the unemployment rate. It is important to note here that the increase in the total labor force in the county was not sufficient to account for the decrease in the average rate of unemployment. 0 Therefore, the decrease in unemployment can only be accounted for by an increase in job opportunities for those seasonally unemployed or by a reduction in the number of seasonally employed individuals.

Income Distribution

Income figures for the City of Ithaca in 1960 show that more than half of the individuals working made less than $3,000. However, only 16 percent of the families in the city made less than $3,000.

0 The average number unemployed in Tompkins County in 1962 was 1,100. By 1966 this figure had decreased to 800. In the same 1962 to 1966 time period the labor force increased by 400. The reduction of unemployed by 600 despite the increase in the labor force of 400 indicates that more jobs (some 900) were made available in the area during the period.

\ '

r \

I

\

{

.1 \ '

\ '

{ J

TABLE 1.8: Distribution of Income by Individual Employees and Employers and by Fam ily in the City of Ithaca, 1960

Income

Under $3,000 $3,000-$4,999 $5,000-$6,999 $7,000-$9,999 Over $10,000

Individual Employee, Employer by Percent

66.0 17.0 9.3 4 .3 3.4

Family by Percent

15.5 20.7 24.3 21.3 18.2

SOURCE: 1960 U.S. Population Census, New York State.

The median income figure for unrelated individuals in Tompkins County in 1960 vvas $903 while the median income for families was $6,233. The median income for families and unrelated individuals was $3,380. The fact that the two groups (family and unrelated individuals) combined have considerably lower median income than families alone indicates the effect of the single individuals earning small amounts of money on income figures. A key component of income, however, is the number of weeks worked. Tompkins County has considerably more

TABLE 1.9: Weeks Worked by Employed Persons, 1959

Weeks Worked

50-52 48-49 40-47 27-39 14-26 13 or less

Tompkins County Percent

34.7 4.5 8.7 9.4

13.7 29.0

New York Urban Area Percent

62.1 5.8 9.3 7.8 7.1 7.8

SOURCE: U.S. Population Census, 1960.

people who work 13 weeks or less, partly because of the number of students who take part-time jobs. All of these part-time workers are counted in the individuals receiving income, increasing the number of employed people receiving $3,000 a year or less, and causing a distortion in the median income figures for unrelated individuals and families.

Commutation

Commutation is important in terms of the labor force. The in- and out-movement of workers defines the drawing area or market area for labor available to industries in the city and county.

Data on commutation for Tompkins County reveals that the county attracts three and a half times as

many commuters as leave. Cornell University in the City of Ithaca is the dominant employer in the county. The University and Ithaca's service sector provide 47 percent of the employment of the county. Other major employers are iVIorse Chain, Therm, Inc., and National Cash Register at Ithaca, and Smith-Corona at Groton. Therefore, of the five major employers in Tompkins County, four of them are in, or immediately adjacent to, the City of Ithaca. The only large group of outcommuters ( 400) go to Cortland County. The outcommuters to Cortland, however, are 57 percent of the commuters from Cortland County into Tompkins County.

Another way to evaluate this data is to compare the out-commuters to the in-commuters. Such a comparison reveals that in each case Tompkins County drew more commuters than it sent. Thus, Tompkins County (with Ithaca, its major employment area) is an independent center for commuters. This independence is particularly significant considering Tompkins County's proximity to Elmira and the Triple Cities, Binghamton, Johnson City, and Endicott. Had Tompkins County been a secondary employment center, it would have drawn workers from the north but sent as many or more to the south.

Economic Base

Cornell University is the key economic influence in Tompkins County. Not only is the University the major employer, employing 7,485 full-time employees, but it also has the largest annual payroll, $59.5 mil· lion. "' Because of the number employed by the University, many of the smaller businesses must compete with the wages paid by the University. The largest income group at the University is in the $4,000 range. The median income at the University is $5,510 while the average income is $7,948 a year. These income and employment figures for the University do not include part-time employees of the school.

In an effort to determine the suitability of the Ithaca economic area for industry, the City Planning Staff interviewed the top management of selected local companies . All those interviewed tended to be optimistic about the future in Ithaca in relation to their business. The bankers felt that the national economic climate affected the level of local prosperity more than the efforts of local businessmen. Of all the local industries, Ithaca Gun is expanding the most rapidly. All the management people interviewed indicated that their industries have recently expanded or intend to expand. The businessmen considered the most serious obstacles to future growth to be: ( 1) the labor shortage in Ithaca; ( 2) high tax rates; and ( 3) the problem

0 These figures include both the state and endowed Schools.

17

of accessibility. All those interviewed did not feel that accessibility was a major problem, but all indicated that Ithaca's inaccessibility did present some difficulty to their businesses.

The businessmen interviewed felt that the housing shortage in Ithaca was responsible for the tight labor market. Up to 50 percent of all employees are now commuting into the city. Additional low and middle income housing within the city limits would probably alleviate the labor problem, improve the housing situation, and increase the tax rolls.

All the companies interviewed had located in Ithaca for historical reasons. Most new industries in the area are small and often founded by, or affiliated with, Cornell professors. These "spin-off" industries are often strongly related to specific persons and programs and are often likely to disappear when the professor leaves Cornell or the research program is completed.

There is little likelihood that new manufacturing industries will locate in Ithaca, if the industries already here are unable to expand because of the labor shortage.

Ithaca cannot compete with the economic advantages of the metropolitan location. However, Ithaca can attract those industries and institutions which are closely related to the city's natural advantages-prominent educational institutions and rugged beautiful terrain on a fresh-water lake. Ithaca can attract businesses related to education and tourism. The National Arts and Recreation Center, a regional center for cultural activities and recreation, is a prime example of the direction of Ithaca's future growth. The city's location and general economic condition, as reflected in the average income figures, indicates that Ithaca is highly eligible for state aid and support.

Many of the contemporary theories of regional economic development stress the potential of small cities within a market area. It appears that there is a limit to metropolitan city size. Once the urban area reaches a certain density, the undesirable elements of urban life such as water and air pollution and inefficiencies of transportation outweigh the advantages of proximity to other producers, accessibility, and other locational advantages. These disadvantages resulting from metropolitan density are improving the growth potentials of medium-sized and small cities. It is important that Ithaca be aware of its advantage as a potential location for the decentralizing economic activities of the larger urban areas.

18

Summary

Ithaca's history reflects the shift from industry to education as the major employer in the city. Certainly this shift in emphasis is reflected in the increase in employment in the professional and related services sector of the economy.

Concomitant with the increase in the professional and services sector is the notable concentration of Ithaca's labor force into the 18-24 and 45-64 age categories. The tremendous in-migration of students and their wives not only distorts the median age figures for the Ithaca labor force but also indicates the peculiar transient nature of Ithaca's labor force. Individually these young members of the labor force tend to be short-term residents . The on-going nature of the University and College is such, however, that the loss is continually replaced by new individuals. Therefore, as long as students and their wives are considered part of the labor force, there will continue to be this constant and perhaps increasing younger group in the labor force.

Another aspect of Ithaca's employment situation is the balance between employment and unemployment. Enough flexibility must be maintained in this ratio that industries will be willing to locate in Ithaca without feeling that they will have to pay abnormally high wages to attract labor. Moreover, if Ithaca is going to continue to grow, new jobs will have to be provided to attract more labor.

The high rate of commutation into Tompkins County, and its major employment center, Ithaca, indicates that the county and city already have great attraction powers . If the trend is to continue, improvement of access to Ithaca may not only become necessary in the near future but may determine whether Ithaca will continue to grow.

An examination of the economic base and occupational distribution of Ithaca reveals its present dependence on education. The secondary occupational concentration in the professional and service sector, coupled with the natural terrain and lake, indicates the potential of the area for a more fully developed recreation industry.

Given the shortage of semi-skilled and skilled labor in the city, it is unlikely that Ithaca will become the site for major industry in the future . However, as large cities become less desirable as places to live in, the larger service industries, such as insurance companies, may begin relocating. Ithaca, with its many environmental-cultural advantages and excellent school system, will become an increasingly good location for such service industries.

I_.

4 )

(

(

f . , . r

r ,

19

l

LAND USE

The Ithaca land use maps of both existing and projected future land use are designed to provide basic data on the various activities which occupy and will occupy land within the city and to provide insight into the present and future spatial distribution of functions within the city. Land use map data may be used for such purposes as analyzing the current pattern of urban land uses for zoning revisions or for formulating a long-range land use plan for the city. Such a map can help determine potential commercial markets and can be used for the location of institutions. The data on which the land use map is based, however, is collected at a single point in time. The city is a dynam-

ic, changing system. The process of annually collecting data for the land use map will indicate the changes in the city over time; therefore, the land use map also provides valuable comparative information on the city.

Residential land uses are divided into three levels of density on the land use map: low, one to four units per gross acre; medium, five to 11 units per gross acre; and high, 12 to 25 units per gross acre. These densities are represented on the existing and proposed land use maps by a color code; yellow, lowdensity; gold, medium-density; and orange, high-density. The Belle Sherman and West Hill neighborhoods contain the most low-density housing, while the East

TABLE 11.1: Tabulation of Kind, Condition, and Construction Material of All Structures in the City of Ithaca by Neighborhoods, 1969

Total Structure Condition Construction Establishments

-n s: w~Z OJ "'0 z "'o c ::J ~!=' 0 :E s: _c [i) Cl> 3::J o;::;: a. 0 OJ ~ 9. 0 ~

::JV> f'T1 ::J cjQ ' ~~ ~ - · §:~~ (/) Q) 0 s: ~s·z 3z ::J -cr- ~ "' ~ ::r m"£ ~ '< (D 0 '0 a. ~ffi9 "Q.o ::J cr O::J =ct> c sr 0:

(J)

~- OJc a_ .....

~ 0 ~ o·

OQ Q ~a. :r ""T1 :;· o ~ ::J "' ::J d".~ 0 '<0

::r ~--l OQW .... c=.::

OQ- a. ~ [ "' ~ "' OV>- 9:-c CV>Q. 0 "'3 ,.... -·-· (J) Cl> 3 3 ::Jw ::J =:~ - · ::J ::J (J)

;:::.: 0 dilo Oct>OQ a. Cl> Cl> "'::J a. '< ~~(/) a. (J)

I Cornell Hgts. 76 52 5 133 129 4 - 102 31 - 5 36 Percent 57 39 4 100 97 3 0 77 23 0

II University 94 97 52 243 217 24 2 191 51 1 40 4,836 Percent 39 40 21 100 89 10 1 79 21 0

Ill Belle Sherman 511 82 36 629 604 19 6 560 64 5 22 340 Percent 81 13 6 100 96 3 1 89 10 1

IV East Hill 141 241 67 449 391 58 - 343 104 2 76 456 Percent 31 54 15 100 87 13 0 77 23 0

v Fall Creek 731 55 79 865 816 48 1 809 54 2 62 308 Percent 85 6 9 100 94 6 0 94 6 0

VI North Central 549 61 96 706 544 131 31 635 62 9 87 558 Percent 78 9 13 100 77 19 4 90 9 1

VII Central 191 51 317 559 378 155 26 306 236 17 494 4,021 Percent 34 9 57 100 68 28 4 55 42 3

VIII South Hill 431 115 41 587 544 43 - 504 83 - 17 1,562 Percent 73 20 7 100 93 7 0 86 14 0

IX South Central 485 60 78 623 483 119 21 566 52 5 65 527 Percent 78 10 12 100 78 19 3 91 8 1

Inlet Valley-X Elmira Rd. 79 - 80 159 135 15 9 86 46 27 64 628

Percent 50 0 50 100 85 9 6 54 29 17

XI West Hill 378 10 34 422 363 43 16 394 25 3 10 65 Percent 90 2 8 100 86 10 4 93 6 1

XII Cayuga In let 19 - 91 110 60 35 15 43 43 24 76 643 Percent 17 0 83 100 54 32 14 39 39 22

TOTAL 3,685 824 976 5,485 4,664 694 127 4,539 851 95 1,018 13,980 Percent 67 15 18 100 85 13 2 83 15 2

SOURCE: Land Use Study, City Planning Office, City of Ithaca, N. Y., Spring 1969. 21

f I

j [ '

!

CA YU G A L A KE

j [

~J ! ~ 1 a i ! [

MAP I .1 :~:::·:::: ~IG BORH

I I

Hill neighborhood contains the most high-density housing. Despite the high percentage of structures in the city which are residential, 82 percent, only 28 percent of the acreage within the city limits is consumed in residential land uses.

Business and institutions occupy 18 percent of the structures in the city on the existing land use map. Five percent of the total acreage in the city is used by business; eight percent is consumed by institutions. The red and grey colors on the map indicate the distribution of business and institutional land uses. Inspection of the existing land use map reveals that the major business and institutional land uses are concentrated in Neighborhoods 2 (the University), 7 (the Central Business District), and 10 (the bulk of the West End Business District).

The distribution of industry and wholesale activities are indicated in black on the land use map. Three

percent of the city's land is used by industry and wholesale land uses. The majority of the city's industrial use is located in Neighborhoods on the vVest End ( 10 and 12) .

The green indicates the distribution of open space and park area in the city. Table II .2 shows that 13 percent of the acreage in the city is presently devoted to recreation and open space. The two largest blocks of park lands are concentrated in Neighborhood 12, the future site of the National Arts and Recreation Center, and Neighborhood 10, the Inlet Valley-Elmira Road.

Once evaluation of existing land uses in the city was completed, several criteria were used as a basis for the direction of future growth within the city. First, importance of education as both the basic industry and a major contributor to the character of the city was recognized. However, the value of diversi-

TABLE 11.2: Existing Land Use by Acreage and Percent for the City of Ithaca by Neighborhoods

z s --l S" :::c

<1> AJ' A)~ A)::!= A) ""'Co. 0 Oii' ~ <

Oii' ffi~ <1> Q) .-+ c 0 ::r Q) Q)

<1> - · (l)OQ !ll A) ()

::r VlC Vl::r !!!. --l ~@$ 3 -o s ~- -o .-+ (JJ Q) --l o- i'io 0:3 i'io 0.0 3 c rn ~. "' ~ !ll [ ::!. s. 0 (1).-+

""' <1>(1) ~0 <1> <1> ::::JW 3. ffi- <1> ~ 0. ::::J 0 :><" )> ~ ::r ::::l::::J ;:!.::::J .-+-

~ ()' c Q) Q) Vl ~ r

0 ~(/) .-+(1) ~

ww"'O () 0. Vl Q)

0 ~~ ~~ ~~ 6-6.2: ~ Q) Q) ::::J

0. '< .-+ Vl 0. Vl ;:;: ::::J () ' c;·

'< ::::J

Corne ll Hgts. 20.2 74.2 29.2 123.6 - - - 10.0 - - - 17.2 57.6 16.9 225 .3 Percent 9 33 13 55 - - - 4 - - - 8 25 8 100

I University 12 .8 68.4 18.1 99.3 4.6 - - 205.2 - - - 4.3 26.1 50.3 389 .8 Percent 3 17 5 25 1 - - 53 - - - 1 7 13 100

II Belle Sherman 53.2 43.2 17.6 114.0 3.8 1.2 3.3 - - 1.0 19 .9 8.3 81.9 23.6 257 .0 Percent 21 17 7 45 2 - 1 - - - 8 3 32 9 100

v East Hill 0.3 7.6 74.5 82.4 3.9 8.2 3.8 - - - 8.4 - 38.1 10.3 155.1 Percent - 5 48 53 3 5 2 - - - 5 - 25 7 100

v Fall Creek - 106.3 - 106.3 - 4.4 13.7 - - - 3.4 5.0 66.8 3.8 203.4 Percent - 52 - 52 - 2 7 - - - 2 2 33 2 100

v I North Centra l - 93.6 - 93.6 5.5 15.0 10.3 - - - 3.4 - 54.7 1.2 183.7 Percent - 51 - 51 3 8 6 - - - 2 - 30 - 100

v II Central - 28.3 2.7 31.0 2.7 53.7 9.7 - - - 2.1 - 51.2 - 150.4 Percent - 19 2 21 2 36 6 - - - 1 - 34 - 100

v Ill South Hill 21.9 64.7 17.7 104.3 19.0 3.2 3.3 - - 0.7 7.5 9.1 59.8 43.9 250.8 Percent 9 26 7 42 8 1 1 - - - 3 4 24 17 100

X South Central 16.1 54.9 19 .3 90 .3 0.6 25.3 1.8 - - - 6.5 6.1 42.3 18.2 191.1 Percent 8 29 10 47 - 13 1 - - - 4 3 22 10 100

Inlet Valley-X Elmi ra Road 32.3 1.9 - 34.2 68.0 60 .6 - - - 11.8 65.0 18.4 39.6 209.4 507.0

Percent 7 - - 7 13 12 - - - 2 13 4 8 41 100

X I West Hill 145.1 53.4 - 198.5 - - 3.0 - - - 5.1 1.3 80.2 224.7 512.8 Percent 28 11 - 39 - - - - - - 1 - 16 44 100

l X II Cayuga Inlet 2.6 - - 2.6 12.0 35.4 21.1 5.0 8.7 19.3 415.0 373.4 25.2 5.3 923.0 40 3 1 100 Percent - - - - 1 4 2 1 1 2 45

TOTAL 304.5 596.5 179.1 1,080.1 120.1 207.0 70.0 220.2 8.7 32.8 536.3 443.1 623.5 607.6 3,949.4 Percent 8 15 5 28 3 5 2 6 - 1 13 11 16 15 100

SOURCE: Land Use Study, City Planning Office, City of Ithaca, Spring 1969

23

[

[ '

[ '

Map II.2 EXISTING LAND USE, 1969 -----------....._

[ '

' • • .• I

:. ... . · . :.

: ·, ; ... · . . · .· "

. . . .. .. ".

MUNIC I PAL. GOl.ll'"

COURSE

LEGEND

USE, 1969

SPACE

"' '\ '\ \

fying the industrial base by working to attract light service industry and by developing a viable recreation industry were considered essential to a healthy, growing, future Ithaca.

Second, the housing shortage and deteriorating housing stock within the city made it imperative that the number of residential units within Ithaca be increased. This increase of units should be, however, compatible with the densities considered appropriate to maintaining the residential character of the city. It was felt that existing vacant land in the city should be opened up for residential use by increasing access to these areas and by extending utilities to the areas.

Third, the city streets should be suited to the land uses they serve. New streets should be provided where necessary to accelerate the guided development of open land within the city.

Finally, parks and open space play an important role in maintaining the small city character of Ithaca and in reinforcing the recreational-educational character of the city. These recreation areas and green open spaces tie the developed parts of the city into its unique natural environment. For these reasons and to meet the recreational needs of the residents, the provision and maintenance of neighborhood parks and open space was encouraged throughout the city.

In this section each neighborhood in the city is described and proposals for future improvements are listed. It is anticipated that the execution of any or all of these proposals will bring the city closer to its goal-a small residential city, of and for man.

CORNELL HEIGHTS, NEIGHBORHOOD 1

The Cornell Heights Neighborhood was one of the first residential areas adjacent to the University to develop. At the turn of the century many well-to-do visitors and local residents built fine homes in this area . Today some of the larger of these homes have been purchased by the University, sororities or fraternities and converted into student dwellings. Also located in this neighborhood is the area called "North Campus." \Vithin this North Campus area dormitory units house some 1700 students. The majority of the high-density land use in the neighborhood is contained in the North Campus area.

Residential land use is by far the largest single land use in the area. Thirty-three percent of the acreage is devoted to medium-density residential land uses. Twelve percent of the land in the neighborhood is employed in higher education and water uses. These include the Girls' Athletic Department, the Observatory and Beebe Lake. Eight percent of the land in the area is vacant and potentially developable.

TABLE 11.3: Distribution of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 1.

ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residential 20.2 9 Medium Density Residential 74.2 33 High Density Residential 29.2 13 Total Residential 123.6 55 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation - -Commercial - -Public - -Higher Education 10.0 4 Marina - -Railroad - -Parks - -Water Areas 17.2 8 Streets 57.6 25 Vacant Land 16.9 8 Total Land 225.3 100

Despite the age of many of the structures in the area, they have been well maintained. Ninety-seven percent of the structures in the neighborhood are sound, three percent are deteriorated, and none are dilapidated. This is the highest percentage of sound structures in any neighborhood in the city.

Neighborhood 1 is a fairly densely developed, quiet, residential area with winding local streets which have come to serve as collector streets. The main north-south roads are Stewart A venue on the west side of the neighborhood and Thurston, Wait, and Triphammer Avenues on the east side of the neighborhood. Thurston Avenue forms the main east-west collector in the neighborhood.

East of Thurston, Wait, and Triphammer Avenues is an open area, owned by the University, which has been designated for high-density student housing. It is anticipated that, including the presently existing dormitories in the North Campus area, the area will house 3,000 men and women in the next decade. Additional University housing in this North Campus area will most likely be beyond the city limits.

Over the years the University has purchased a number of the old homes on the property adjacent to the University proper. Presently these houses are run as small living units for students. The future use of these lots has not been determined by the University.

Although there are no actual parks in Neighborhood 1, the bank of Beebe Lake has been left in its natural state, with a simple footpath along the shore of the lake. Beebe Lake is used for swimming, boating, and skating.

25

Proposals

1. Efforts should be made to control the growth, to retain the quality of the residential stock, and to maintain the medium-density residential character of the Cornell Heights Neighborhood.

2. Collector streets through the neighborhood, particularly the Triphammer to Thurston and Thurston to Stewart Avenue connections, should be improved to facilitate traffic flows through the area.

UNIVERSITY, NEIGHBORHOOD 2

Neighborhood 2 contains the portion of Cornell University which is within the city limits and the residential area along the west boundary of the University. In the past one hundred years the University's physical plant has expanded east beyond the city boundaries into the town.


ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential 12.8 3 Medium Density Residential 68.4 17 High Density Residential 18.1 5 Total Residential 99.3 25 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 4.6 1 Commercial - -Public - -Higher Education 205.2 53 Marina - -Railroad - -Parks - -Water Areas 4.3 1 Streets 26.1 7 Vacant Land 50.3 13 Total Land 389.8 100

A review of the land use by acres on Table II.4 indicates the predominance of the University in this area. Only 22 percent of the land in the neighborhood is devoted to uses other than higher education and residential. Only Neighborhood 12, the Cayuga Inlet, has less land in streets than the University Neighborhood. Although the neighborhood has no areas specifically devoted to parks, there is a great deal of grassy open space on the campus. Most of these spaces serve as intrinsic parts of the University such as the Arts Quad, Ag Quad, Library Slope, and the Engineering Quad. While some of the open space presently on campus may be consumed because of the need for classroom, office, and laboratory space both now and

26

in the future, the University Planning Office wishes to maintain the open spaces inh·insic to the structure of the University. Two of the best community recreation areas in the neighborhood are the rugged gorges. Both of these gorges have footpaths in them maintained by the University.

New construction is almost continual on campus. The University Planning Office does not anticipate any slowing of this building in the next decade. Concomitant with the physical expansion of campus are plans for the extension of several campus roads to facilitate traffic movement on and around campus. These road extensions will provide two needed east-west campus collectors and a new east entrance to the campus. The roads will facilitate campus traffic movement and promote the movement of non-University traffic around the campus. The University Planning Office is also working toward moving much of the on-campus parking to peripheral lots served by buses.

The most dominant land use, education, sets the tone for the entire neighborhood. The large academic buildings, residence halls, and converted houses all reinforce the collegiate character of the area. The rambling collector streets are indicative of the lowdensity development which was once typical of the area. Through the years the University has increased in size, while the access roads have not kept pace with the growth. Because it is bounded on the north and south by rugged gorges, it is anticipated that the future expansion of the University will be to the east beyond the city limits. The residential area on the west side of the neighborhood, now typified by convetted houses, may, in time, be redeveloped into denser housing. It is likely, however, because of its proximity to the campus, the area will retain its residential character.

Proposals

1. The city encourages Cornell University's suggestions to improve on-campus roads and to provide peripheral parking.

2. Plans to facilitate traffic movement around the University, on a circumferential road designed to protect the pedestrian quality of the campus, should be undertaken with city approval and with consideration for the effects of the new traffic pattern on the city's internal circulation system.

BELLE SHERMAN, NEIGHBORHOOD 3

The Belle Sherman Neighborhood is residential in character. The homes in the northwest section of the neighborhood, the area closest to the University, have been converted into multiple family units. The majority of these multiple housing units are concentrated in

( I

the area bounded by Linden Avenue, Mitchell Street, Delaware Avenue, Dryden Road and Cascadilla Gorge. The remainder of the neighborhood is composed of medium- and low-density residential units. Of the total acreage in the neighborhood, 45 percent is devoted to residential use. Residential land uses are fairly evenly divided between low- and medium-densities. The least amount of residential land in the neighborhood is employed in high-density residential land uses. Nine percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is vacant.


ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residential 53.2 21 Medium Density Residential 43.2 17 High Density Residential 17.6 7 Total Residential 114.0 45 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 3.8 2 Commercial 1.2 -Public 3.3 1 Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad 1.0 -Parks 19.9 8 Water Areas 8.3 3 Streets 81.9 32 Vacant Land 23.6 9 Total Land 257.0 100

Of all the structures in the neighborhood, 96 percent are sound, three percent are deteriorated, and one percent are dilapidated. This neighborhood ranks second highest in structural condition in the city. The majority of the deteriorated and dilapidated buildings in the neighborhood are located in the northwest section where old homes have been converted to multiple family units for students. The few remaining units in poor condition are scattered through the area bounded by State, Water, and Giles Streets. Eighty-nine percent of the structures in the neighborhood are wood and ten percent are masonry.

The Belle Sherman Neighborhood is crossed by two state arterials, Route 79, State Street, and Route 366, Ithaca and Dryden Roads. Route 366 is the most incompatible to the residential character of the neighborhood because it cuts diagonally across the area. Heavily traveled by truck traffic, this arterial is a serious safety hazard to pedestrians who ~ust cross it. The major north-south collector street in Neighborhood 3 is Cornell Street. Cornell Street is also a connector between the two arterials, Routes 79 and 366.

Of all the collectors and arterials in the neighborhood Cornell Street presents, perhaps, the greatest hazard since children must cross this collector to gain access to Belle Sherman Park and part of the elementary school.

There are four parks in the Belle Sherman Neighborhood. Each of these parks now serves as an undeveloped neighborhood play area. South of the new addition to Belle Sherman School on the east side of Cornell Street is a four acre park owned by the city. Particularly accessible to children on the east side of Cornell Street, this park will be maintained as an undeveloped neighborhood play area.

Although, in the future, the residential densities may increase in the Belle Sherman area, it seems fairly clear that the character of the neighborhood will continue to be residential. The greatest increase in density can be anticipated in the area bounded by Linden Avenue, 11Iitchell Street, Delaware Avenue, Dryden Road, and the gorge. Increased pressure for student housing may result in the continued conversion of large homes in this area into multiple dwelling units. The large high rise apartment unit on Cornell Street at Maple Avenue acts as a harbinger of the extension of the high residential densities beyond Delaware Avenue and Dryden Road. However, with the developable land and present graduate student housing beyond the city limits, it is anticipated that future high-density development will be outside of the city limits. The remainder of the neighborhood is fully developed as single family residential units and is zoned to remain in this use. The expansion of Belle Sherman School anticipates the increase of school age population and residential densities within the northern portion of the neighborhood and in the area adjacent to the neighborhood but beyond the city limits.

Proposals

1. To provide a choice of kinds of residential environments available in the city, single family residential land uses, already prevalent in the neighborhood, should be encouraged and maintained, particularly in the southeast portion of the area adjacent to Belle Sherman School.

2. High-density housing units should be permitted in the northwest corner of the neighborhood where student housing demand is greatest.

3. Heavy through truck traffic should be eliminated from Routes 366 and 79 by the construction of a peripheral highway around the city.

EAST HILL, NEIGHBORHOOD 4

Over the years the East Hill Neighborhood has become increasingly occupied by students. Adjacent

27

to the University and composed of large old Victorian mansions easily converted into multiple units for students, most of the land in the area is devoted to residential and commercial uses. A convenience shopping area along Eddy Street between Williams and Buffalo Streets and along College Avenue from Cascadilla Place to Catherine Street provides the essentials for the student residents.

The two main uses of the acreage in the neighborhood are residential (53 percent) and streets ( 25 percent). There are two small parks in the neighborhood, and little vacant land to set aside for park purposes. Table II.6 indicates the distribution of land within the neighborhood. As the acreage distribution shows, the commercial center in this area is highly concentrated ( 5 percent of the land).


ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential 0.3 -Medium Density Residential 7.6 5 High Density Residential 74.5 48 Total Residential 82.4 53 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 3.9 3 Commercial 8.2 5 Public 3.8 2 Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad - -Parks 8.4 5 Water Areas - -Streets 38.1 25 Vacant Land 10.3 7 Total Land 155.1 100

While the East Hill Neighborhood is second smallest in size, it contains the largest number of multiple family dwellings in the city. There is, however, a concentration of single family units on the block bounded by College A venue and :tvlitchell, Blair and Cook Streets, and along State Street southeast of Mitchell Street.

The East Hill Neighborhood contains no dilapidated structures. Eighty-seven percent of the structures are sound. These figures indicate, however, that 13 percent of the structures in the area are deteriorating, and sizable capital investment will be necessary to prevent these structures from becoming dilapidated in a period of time. Most of the deteriorating buildings are located in the area on the north side of Buffalo, across the east side of the neighborhood between Eddy Street and College Avenue, and west

28

along the south side of State Street. Many of the structures in this area are large wood frame homes converted to multiple living units. Seventy-seven percent of the structures in the neighborhood are wood and 23 percent are masonry.

Despite its size, the convenience shopping area generates considerable traffic. In addition, the increased density in the neighborhood due to the conversion of old homes to multiple units has created considerable traffic congestion in the area. The main north-south collector streets are College A venue and Stewart Avenue. The east-west collectors are Buffalo Street and Seneca Street. Both of these east-west streets have been built on steep, dangerous grades. The grade on Buffalo goes from 10 percent to 18 percent. Seneca, the parallel east-west collector street, has a grade from nine and a half to 17 percent. The two main north-south collectors are Stewart and College Avenues. State Street, a state arterial (Route 79), runs across the southern portion of the neighborhood.

The major park area in the neighborhood is Lower Six Mile Creek Park which follows the southern boundary of the neighborhood. Presently this park area is an undeveloped natural area.

The East Hill Development Corporation, working in conjunction with the State Urban Development Corporation, is exploring the possibility of redeveloping the block bounded by Dryden Road, Cascadilla Place, and College A venue. The proposed development will include office space, store space, and housing units . Off-street parking will also be provided.

As the University continues to grow, the future of the East Hill Neighborhood becomes more clearly high-density. Little expansion of the convenience commercial area is anticipated. The need for considerable rehabilitation in the future is becoming increasingly clear. The proposed redevelopment at College A venue and Cascadilla Place is an indicator of the type of redevelopment and renovation needed in and suited to the area.

Proposals

1. Because of the unique character of the area, highdensity housing should be continued in the East Hill Neighborhood.

2. In order to provide the best quality shopping environment and to protect adjacent residential land uses, commercial expansion in Collegetown should be restricted, until fully developed, to the areas between Catherine Sh·eet and Oak A venue on College Avenue, between College Avenue and Linden A venue on Dryden Road, and between Dryden Road and Buffalo Street on Eddy Street.

Further extension of the commercial area will require city action in providing additional parking.

3. Collegetown is predominantly a pedestrian-oriented convenience shopping center. As such, improvements in pedestrian and vehicular circulation are needed.

4. East Hill School provides both a neighborhood focal point and makes a unique contribution to the quality of education in the Ithaca School System; efforts should be made to continue the school in its present use.

FALL CREEK, NEIGHBORHOOD 5

The Fall Creek Neighborhood is a quiet, shady residential area. Scattered throughout the area are small neighborhood shopping clusters. In the southern part of the neighborhood, bordering on the Central Business District, some of the fine old houses have been converted to multiple dwelling units. At the northern extremity of the neighborhood stands the new Ithaca High School.

Table II .7 indicates that the predominant land use in the area is residential. Fifty-two percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is devoted to medium-density residential uses. The third largest land use after residential and streets is public. The public


ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential - -Medium Density Residential 106.3 52 High Density Residential - -Total Residential 106.3 52 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation - -Commercial 4.4 2 Public 13.7 7 Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad - -Parks 3.4 2 Water Areas 5.0 2 Streets 66.8 33 Vacant Land 3.8 2 Total Land 203.4 100

land use in the area consists of the two schools, Fall Creek Elementary School and Ithaca High School. Five acres are consumed by Cascadilla Creek ·which flows along the south and west boundaries of the neighborhood. The banks of the creek have been reinforced, but the creek bed has been left in its

natural state . Trees and shrubs growing next to the running water make the creek an asset to the adjacent property and to the neighborhood. The only other sizable land use in the area is commercial use (two percent) which is scattered throughout the neighborhood in convenience type shopping areas.

Neighborhood 5 is one of the oldest of Ithaca's residential areas. The data indicates, however, that the area is also in good condition, ranking third in the city in terms of condition of buildings. Of the 865 structures in the area, 94 percent are sound. Ninetyfour percent of the structures are wood frame.

Two percent of the acreage in the highly residential Fall Creek Neighborhood is devoted to parks. Increasing the size of existing park areas in this neighborhood is an important aspect of the city's Recreation Plan. Additional park land will reinforce the residential character of the neighborhood.

Three collector streets, two north-south and one east-west, take traffic through the Fall Creek Neighborhood. Of the two north-south collectors, Cayuga Street is the widest and most heavily traveled. Cayuga Street is a major tie between the Central Business District and Ithaca High School and Stewart Park. Tioga Street, the second of the north-south collectors, carries through traffic to Fall Street, the east-west collector, where the traffic turns to Cayuga Street or to Lake Street.

It is anticipated that the residential character of the Fall Creek Neighborhood will continue in the future . The conversion of the large homes to multiple dwelling units and offices is an increasing trend in the neighborhood. Because of the large size of the buildings south of i\tlarshall Street, it is anticipated that the conversion of the buildings will be contained within this area. The increased open space suggested by the Recreation Study should enhance the residential character of the area.

Proposals

1. The majority of the Fall Creek Neighborhood should be maintained as a medium-density residential area . To assist in meeting the ever-increasing need for housing in the city, higher-density residential uses may be permitted in the neighborhood's southern portion between Cascadilla Avenue and Marshall Street.

2. The convenience commercial centers in the northern end of the neighborhood should not be permitted to expand. Constraints should be placed on the neighborhood commercial center between Cascadilla Avenue and Marshall Street. New convenience shopping centers in the area should not be permitted.

29

3. Neighborhood commons should be developed in the Fall Creek area to meet the great need for play and open space.

NORTH CENTRAL, NEIGHBORHOOD 6

The grid pattern in the North Central Neighborhood was laid out on a northwest to southeast diagonal to the established city grid pattern in 1836. The unique street pattern and early development in the area have been major conh·ibutors to isolating this medium-density residential area. Today the area contains three schools, a neighborhood house and a major neighborhood park. Despite the neighborhood's proximity to and pressures from the Central Business District the area has retained its medium-density residential character.

Residential land uses are the largest single land use in the North Central Neighborhood. Fifty-one percent of the total acreage in the neighborhood is consumed by medium-density residential land uses. T he majority, 78 percent, of the housing units in the neighborhood are single family units . Next to streets ( 30 percent of the neighborhood acreage), commercial and public are the single largest land uses . About two percent of the total acreage is in parks. The area contains an insignificant amount of' vacant land.


' ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residential - -Medium Density Residential 93.6 51 High Density Residential - -Total Residential 93.6 51 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 5.5 3 Commercial 15.0 8 Public 10.3 6 Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad - -Parks 3.4 2 Water Areas - -Streets 54.7 30 Vacant Land 1.2 -Total Land 183.7 100

Route 13, which marks the northern boundary of the neighborhood, has been expanded to a four lane arterial. This expansion effectively cut the four blocks bounded by Cascadilla, Meadow, Buffalo, and Fulton Streets off from the major portion of the North Central area. Easy access to this severed area has resulted in commercial and warehouse development there.

30

The North Cenh·al Neighborhood is serviced by seven collector sh·eets. Four of these collectors Buffalo, Seneca, Meadow, and Cayuga Streets ar~ major city traffic carriers. Court Sh·eet, Albany Street, Hancock Street, and Cascadilla Avenue serve as neighborhood collectors. The proposed solutions for the traffic problems on the west side of the city include the elevation of Route 13 over Fulton Street and the relocation of Route 96 which will funnel traffic into Court Street at the south end of the neighborhood. The increase of traffic movement along Court undoubtedly will cause a shift away from the present medium residential densities to high residential densities. The eventual elevation of Route 13 over Fulton Street will shift the through traffic off the p resent Route 13 and integrate this five block area back into the North Central Neighborhood. The five block area, however, will most likely continue to specialize in commercial land uses rather than shift back to residential uses.

Presently two percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is devoted to park use. Several types of facilities are available: a school playground, neighborhood house, a poorly developed major park, and two scattered small open grassy play areas. There are eight tenths of an acre of recreation and open space per 1,000 residents in the neighborhood.

An effort to increase the density of the neighborhood is being made with the public housing project on Hancock Street. The park at Hancock and Fourth Sh·eets, adjacent to the new housing d evelopment, should be expanded and developed with the whole age range of children considered, particularly the preschoolers.

Proposals

1. The North Central Neighborhood is characterized by medium-density residential land uses. Residential land uses at the southern end of the neighborhood adjacent to the Central Business District, however, should be intensified to create a proper transition between the commercial and mediumdensity residential areas.

2. Washington Park, a neighborhood focal point, should be more fully developed as a neighborhood park with a tot-lot, benches, and an open grassy space for games.

3. To control commercial pressure on residential land uses, convenience shopping centers in the area should be concentrated in one or two accessible locations.

4. Consistent with the accessibility of the area, mixed residential and commercial land uses should continue in the area between l\lleadow and Fulton Streets from Cascadilla to Buffalo Streets.

5. To improve the residential quality of the area, the existing commercial and light industrial land uses bordering Route 13 on the south should be eliminated. Medium-density residential land uses should be developed up to a green strip bordering Route 13.

6. Appropriate pedestrian access across or under Route 13 should be provided in the vicinity of Dey Street to link the residential neighborhood to the adjacent recreation area.

CENTRAL, NEIGHBORHOOD 7

The Central Neighborhood was the first area settled in the city. The same kinds of land uses can be found in the neighborhood today as could be found there 100 years ago: mixed residential and commercial. Moreover, the corner of Tioga Street and State Street, the core of the business district in 1820, is still the center of commercial activity in the city.

The three major land uses in the neighborhood are commercial, streets, and residential. The major land use in the neighborhood is commercial, 36 percent. Streets consume 34 percent of the acreage. Of the 21 percent of the acreage devoted to residential land uses, the majority is employed in medium-density residential uses.


ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential - -Medium Density Residential 28.3 19 High Density Residential 2.7 2 Total Residential 31.0 21 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 2.7 2 Commercial 53.7 36 Public 9.7 6 Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad - -Parks 2.1 1 Water Areas - -Streets 51.2 34 Vacant Land - -Total Land 150.4 100

The Central Neighborhood is also the hub of governmental activities, not only for the city but for the county as well. This governmental activity is reflected in the fact that six percent of the land in the neighborhood is devoted to public use.

In 1964 Ithaca began an Urban Renewal Project in the Central Business District. Not only was this seven block project designed to alleviate the blighted conditions which were developing in the area ( 28 percent of the structures in the area are deteriorating), but it is also anticipated that the renewal will help to stop the trend of business migration away from the Central Business Dish·ict. The urban renewal program also recognized the increasing importance of pedestrian movement to the retail businesses in the business district. A shopping concourse on State Street flanked by convenient parking on Seneca and Green Streets is suggested as a means of encouraging pedestrian movement.

The core of the retail-commercial area of Ithaca has remained the same since 1820. However, the Central Business District has begun to move noticeably to the south in the past 35 years, invading the residential area bounded by Clinton, Cayuga, Titus and Albany Streets. Less exaggerated expansion of the Central Business District has taken place to the north in the residential area bounded by Court, Aurora, Cascadilla, and Cayuga Streets.

Commercial development becomes less dense in the neighborhood west of Cayuga Street. The area between Geneva, Green, Albany, and Seneca Streets is particularly underdeveloped. ·west of this area on State Sh·eet the businesses are increasingly traffic oriented.

The one-way pair, Green and Seneca Streets, provides a circular traffic pattern accommodating both local and through traffic around the core of the Central Business District. This pair is linked at the east by the tuning fork at State Street and at the west by the state arterial, Meadow Street. This traffic pattern, accompanied by the provision of additional parking on Green and Seneca Streets at the Central Business District, has relieved much of the downtown h·affic congestion.

One of the most historically important open spaces in the city, DeWitt Park, is located in the Central Neighborhood. This park was designated by Simeon DeWitt ·when the first plat of the city was laid out in 1806. Since then the area has come to be an important focal point for civic activity.

Proposals

1. To stimulate pedestrian movement, a concourse of wider sidewalks and controlled vehicular access should be created in the Central Business District on State Street. A pedestrian concourse between Tioga and Cayuga Streets would further stimulate the retail activity in the Central Business District.

31

2. Action should be taken to complete renovation of the good-quality commercial structures facing State Street, to increase the Central Business District's attraction for pedestrian shopping traffic.

3. To facilitate access to and remove excess vehicular traffic from the Central Business District, and to improve pedestrian circulation within the core, peripheral public parking facilities should be developed on the north, south and west sides of the retail area.

4. Commercial development in Neighborhood 7 should be concentrated so that it does not invade adjacent residential neighborhoods. Tighter development in the core of the business district up to Geneva Street will intensify pedestrian traffic.

5. A subordinate node of concentrated, mixed professional and residential uses should be developed in conjunction with a parking facility in the blocks between Green, Seneca, Albany, and Geneva Streets, acting as a termination of the intense commercial development in the core.

6. Looser commercial development, oriented to the vehicular trade, should be encouraged to the west of Albany Street.

7. Residential land uses in the neighborhood should be intensified, particularly along Green and Seneca Streets, and in the area bounded by Six Mile Creek, Geneva, and Green Streets.

8. The portion of the Central Neighborhood abutting Neighborhoods 5 and 6 is well suited as a location for professional services and offices. A use such as this, which can be mixed with highdensity residential land use, will help protect the residential areas from the traffic and economic pressures of the commercial areas.

9. The area around De'Nitt Park should be preserved as an area of historical and architectural importance to the city.

SOUTH HILL, NEIGHBORHOOD 8

Generally, Neighborhood 8 is a residential neighborhood of well-maintained wooden structures. The northern part of the neighborhood, along Six Mile Creek, vvas the first portion of the area to develop. Many of the structures in this area were built in the early decades of the nineteenth century. It is not surprising, therefore, that the majority of the deteriorated buildings are in this portion of the neighborhood. The most recently built area of the neighborhood is the southernmost portion along Hudson Place and Coddington Road. This portion of the area was annexed to the city in January 1963. The extension of the city sewer services into this area, the continued housing shortage in the city, and the move of Ithaca

32

College to South Hill beyond the city limits have further stimulated multiple family units in the South Hill neighborhood.

Forty-two percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is devoted to residential land uses . The great majority of this residential land is in medium-density uses . The high-density residential area of South Hill is composed primarily of old converted homes and new apartment units.


ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residential 21.9 9 Medium Density Residential 64.7 26 High Density Residential 17.7 7 Total Residential 104.3 42 Industry, Public Uti lities

and Transportation 19.0 8 Commercia l 3.2 1 Public 3.3 1 Higher Education - -Marina - -Rai lroad 0.7 -Parks 7.5 3 Water Areas 9.1 4 Streets 59.8 24 Vacant Land 43.9 17 Total Land 250.8 100

An evaluation of the condition of the buildings in the area indicates that the great majority are sound ( 93 percent). Only seven percent of the structures in the area are deteriorated and none are dilapidated, e.g., structurally unsound.

Although there is considerable open space along the gorges and undeveloped land within the neighborhood, there is little developed park area. The major play area is the three acre South Hill School playground. The school playground has the standard equipment and is open continually to children in the area. The City Recreation Plan has recommended that if the neighborhood requests additional facilities on the playground, the city should cooperate with the Board of Education in supplying them.

While the South Hill Neighborhood is predominantly residential, eight percent of the neighborhood's acreage is devoted to indush·y and utility uses. Morse Chain, one of the city's basic industries, is located just inside of the city limits which mark the boundary of the neighborhood. These industries, both in and adjacent to the South Hill area, generate commuter traffic through the neighborhood.

The South Hill Neighborhood is serviced by two major collector streets, Hudson Street and South

Aurora Street. Both of these sh·eets are built on a steep incline and are heavily used by commuter h·affic to the industries within and adjacent to the city. South Aurora Street also serves as State Highway 96B. Route 96B leaves Aurora at Prospect Street and continues across the neighborhood along Prospect and Clinton Streets. Both Prospect and Clinton Streets would normally be local streets. With the use of 96B as an access route to the city, there has been an increasing incidence of "run-away" trucks on the steep Aurora Street incline. Proposals are presently being developed to re-route 96B at a more gradual slope beyond the city limits. Such a road would not only reduce the danger from "run-away" h·ucks, but also relieve the heavy traffic along South Aurora, Hudson, Prospect, and Clinton Streets. The reduced use of these local and collector streets will improve the residential character of the South Hill Neighborhood.

Proposals

1. The core of Neighborhood 8 should remain in medium-density residential use, focusing on the elementary school. Because of the continued demand for housing in the city, however, the more central northern portion and the southern portion, near Ithaca College, should be expected to develop higher-density residences.

2. The east side of South Hill should be opened for residential development. This development can be accomplished by extending an east-west connection from Hillview Place into Giles Street which crosses Six Mile Creek. Such an extension would help relieve the traffic congestion in the Central Business District by providing an alternate route between East Hill and South Hill.

3. The Columbia Street School should be removed and the site made into a playground for children on the west side of South Hill, eliminating the need for these children to cross the heavily used South Aurora Sh·eet to the South Hill School playground.

4. Route 96B should be relocated beyond the city limits. Such a relocation will not only provide a safer access to the city but will also be a great asset in maintaining the South Hill Neighborhood as a quiet, well-kept residential area.

SOUTH CENTRAL, NEIGHBORHOOD 9

The South Central Neighborhood is best described as a medium-density residential-commercial area. Eighty-eight percent of the structures are residential units and 12 percent commercial buildings. A look at the distribution of land use by acres on Table II.ll

further confirms the residential-commercial character of the area .

TABLE 11.11: Distribut ion of Land Use by Acreage and Percent in Neighborhood 9.

ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential 16.1 8 Medium Density Residential 54.9 29 High Density Residential 19.3 10 Total Residential 90.3 47 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 0.6 -Commercial 25.3 13 Public 1.8 1 Higher Education - -Marina - -Rai lroad - -Parks 6.5 4 Water Areas 6.1 3 Streets 42.3 22 Vacant Land 18.2 10 Total Land 191.1 100

A survey of the condition of the structures in the neighborhood indicates that while the great majority are sound (78 percent), this neighborhood ranks third highest in the city in terms of the number of deteriorated ( 19 percent) and fourth highest in dilapidated (three percent) buildings. In addition to the high rate of dilapidation and deterioration, 91 percent of the structures in the area are wood frame.

Despite its residential character, Neighborhood 9 is crisscrossed by major arterials and collector streets. Meadow Street (Route 13) which marks the west boundary of the neighborhood and West Clinton Street (Route 96B) which cuts across the middle of the neighborhood are both designated state highways. Green Street at the northern boundary of the area is a major one-way collector for the city; South Albany Street serves as a collector for Neighborhoods 8, 9, and 10. Elmira Road, which cuts across the neighborhood just above the southern boundary, brings traffic to Albany Street and into the center of the city.

The acreage data on Table II.ll indicates only four percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is devoted to parks and open space. The major existing neighborhood recreational facility is the Southside House. This old building serves as a neighborhood center for a variety of adult and youth programs. The Southside House facilities are old and heavily used. They need replacement.

The commercial uses, 13 percent of the acreage in the neighborhood, center along Elmira Road, :rvlead-

33

ow Street, and along residential Clinton Street. The most recent of these commercial developments is the strip commercial development along Elmira Road and the drive-in eating places on Meadow Street. Earlier commercial complexes include the Agway Agricultural Center and the Co-op Shopping Center, a cooperatively owned grocery store and privately sponsored services complex used heavily by the neighborhood residents.

Proposals

1. To help meet the city's d emand for housing and to reinforce the residential character of the neighborhood \ovhere it abuts the Central Business District, high-density residential land uses should be encouraged in the sector of Neighborhood 9 north of Six Mile Creek. The portion of the neighborhood south of the creek should continue in medium-density residential land uses .

2. Residential development should be encouraged along the portion of Spencer Road contained in the neighborhood. A sidewalk should link the neighborhood with Buttermilk Falls State Park.

3. Recognizing the shortage of play space in the neighborhood, the city should immediately pursue the Recreation Plan's proposals for the creation of two block parks, the conversion of Cleveland A venue to a play street, and the development of the Titus A venue Park.

4. To protect the residential character of the neighborhood there should be no further expansion of commercial land uses in the area.

5. The South Central Neighborhood should have a high priority for a neighborhood project with a limited amount of redevelopment and an emphasis on rehabilitation of existing units . Some vacant land exists in the neighborhood where construction could be undertaken for relocation units.

INLET VALLEY-ELMIRA ROAD, NEIGHBORHOOD 10

The Inlet Valley-E lmira Road Neighborhood has just begun to develop. Industry is the major economic land use in the neighborhood. Only the Cayuga Inlet Neighborhood to the immediate north has proportionately less land devoted to residential land uses than Neighborhood 10. Forty-one percent of the acreage in the neighborhood is vacant. This neighborhood ranks third in the city in percent of commercial land uses and second in railroads.

Consistent with the relatively recent development of Neighborhood 10, 85 percent of the structures are sound and only six percent dilapidated. Many of the deteriora ting or dilapidated structures are strung out

34


ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residentia l 32.3 7 Med ium Density Residential 1.9 -High Density Residential - -Total Residential 34.2 7 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 68.0 13 Commercial 60.6 12 Public - -Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad 11 .8 2 Parks 65.0 13 Water Areas 18.4 4 Streets 39.6 8 Vacant Land 209.4 41 Total Land 507.0 100.0

along Spencer Road at the southern boundary of the neighborhood. This Spencer Road area was developed in residential land uses many years before other development commenced in the neighborhood.

Neighborhood 10 is distinguished by trafficoriented strip commercial development such as car sale lots and drive-in restaurants and by wholesalers, storage areas, and heavy industrial uses along what was Cayuga Inlet and is now the new flood control channel. The entrance to the city's sanitary land fill is also located in this northern area of the neighborhood. The dumping area extends south between the Lehigh Valley Railroad lines and the relief channel from Clinton Street to the Southwest Park. The city, however, anticipates that the capacity of the dumping area will be reached within three years. Therefore, the filled land soon will become developable. At present all the land along Meadow Street, back to the relief channel is vacant. The northern portion of this section constitutes the old city fairgrounds. Presently this fairground area is undeveloped. To facilitate the development of this filled land and the fairgrounds, the city is proposing to build a city street, the Southwest Parkway, across the area. The proposed street would not only open the interior of the filled parcel, but it would also provide direct access to the south side of the city for \ iV est Hill residents.

In the center of Neighborhood 10 is a city-owned park. This area is being held in an undeveloped state. It is anticipated that, in the future, the park will serve as a link between the city park system and Buttermilk Falls State Park.

I I

I .

It is expected that Route 13, presently Meadow Street, will be relocated between the Lehigh Valley Railroad tracks and the flood control channel. This relocation will take through traffic off Meadow Street and increase the usefulness of this arterial to local traffic.

Much of the future character of the Inlet ValleyElmira Road Neighborhood will be determined by the future use of the developable area between Meadow Street and the Lehigh Valley Railroad tracks.

Proposals

1. Residential land uses should be continued along Spencer Road. A sidewalk should link the neigh-

[ borhood with Buttermilk Falls State Park.

2. The portion of the neighborhood southwest of the levee must be held vacant as a flood plain.

3. Auto-oriented commercial development should be allowed along Elmira Road and Meadow Street, but should continue no further than the proposed Southwest Parkway.

4. A city collector street, the Southwest Parkway, should be developed across the neighborhood along the old city line, opening the area to development and improving east-west access in the city.

5. lvledium-density residential land uses should be developed south of South Street Extended, between Meadow and the relief channel, and below the proposed Southwest Parkway between the relief channel and the park.

6. The portion of the neighborhood north of the proposed Southwest Parkway, between the relief channel and the flood control channel, should be developed as an area for light industry. Serviced by the railroad and major highways, this area is well suited for manufacturing. Also developable for light indush·y is the area between Elmira Road, the Southwest Park, and the levee.

7. The mixed retail-wholesale area north of Clinton Street should be allowed to expand to the south to Center Street Extended.

WEST HILL, NEIGHBORHOOD 11

The West Hill Neighborhood is the most recently developed of all the city's neighborhoods. As Table II.l3 showing the distribution of land use by acreage indicates, 44 percent of the land in the area is vacant.

Twenty-eight percent of the remaining land in the neighborhood is devoted to low-density residential land uses . A look at the rankings indicates that in terms of low-density residential land use, Neighborhood 11 ranks first in the city.


ACREAGE PERCENT

Low Density Residential 145.1 28 Medium Density Residential 53.4 11 High Density Residential - -Total Residentia l 198.5 39 Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation - -Commercial - -Public 3.0 -Higher Education - -Marina - -Railroad - -Parks 5.1 1 Water Areas 1.3 -Streets 80.2 16 Vacant Land 224.7 44 Total Land 512.8 100

Running along the east boundary of the West Hill Neighborhood are two state arterials, Route 13A and Route 96. Paralleling these arterials are the two major collector streets for the neighborhood, Elm and Hector Streets. These two collectors run parallel eastwest. The proposed relocation of Route 96 east of Cliff Street would take through traffic off the steep grade on Cliff Street and increase the safety of truck and auto access to and from the city and the county hospital.

There are two neighborhood play areas .in the West Hill Neighborhood: MacDaniels Park, recently donated to the city, which, presently, is being developed; and the West Hill School playground which has play apparatus and playfields open for use.

Despite the high percentage of vacant land ( 44 percent) in the West Hill Neighborhood, it is anticipated that future development in this area will be residential. Present rapid subdivision in the area has created the need for the extension of local streets to provide efficient and well situated collector streets. The absence of park land in the neighborhood is not a detriment at present. The quantity of vacant land in the area conveys the feeling of open space. In the future, however, the 'West Hill area promises to be fully developed. As a result, the provision of city park land is a wise step for the future. Of all the city's neighborhoods, the most rapid growth can be anticipated in the West Hill area. The large quantity of vacant land within the neighborhood and the need for housing and the shortage of residential building sites within the city are two of the factors which will help to insure future growth in this neighborhood.

35

Proposals

1. Medium-density residential uses should be encouraged to develop along the eastern and southern boundaries of the neighborhood. The remainder of the neighborhood should continue to be developed in low-density residential uses.

2. To stimulate development in the center portion of the neighborhood, two north-south collectors, connecting with the proposed Southwest Parkway, should be constructed.

3. Care should be taken to provide adequate park land and open space to meet the future recreational needs of this developing residential neighborhood.

CAYUGA INLET, NEIGHBORHOOD 12

The northern portion of the West End Business District and the vacant land on the inlet are among the most dynamic areas within the city in terms of changing land use. A new flood control channel the realignment of Routes 13 and 96 and the creati~n of the National Arts and Recreation Center are all contributing to the rapid change of land uses in the area.

A look at the conditions of the buildings in the neighborhood indicates that the area is, indeed, in transition. Of the structures in the area 32 percent are deteriorated and 14 percent are dilapidated. This is the most extensive dilapidation and deterioration in the city.

There are 19 single family residential units and no multiple family units in the neighborhood. The 91 commercial and industrial enterprises employ 643 people. A look at these comparative land uses indicates that the predominant existing land use as indicated by buildings is commercial. The allocation of land use by acreage indicates, however, that only five percent of the acreage in the area is devoted to industrial and commercial uses. The majority of the acreage in the area ( 95 percent) is, or will soon be, devoted to parkland, water, and water-oriented businesses. Thus the real land use emphasis is on parks and recreation. The area presently contains Cass Park, Stewart Park, the Bird Sanctuary, and the Municipal Golf Course. This neighborhood will continue to serve as a community recreation center. Moreover, the addition of the National Arts and Recreation Center will make the area a center for community and regional cultural life as well.

The recently completed flood control channel brings several advantages to the city. The channel provides drainage for the otherwise swampy Inlet Valley; it opens up new areas for badly needed marinas, and provides an excellent crew racing course. The development of water-oriented uses along the

36


ACREAGE PERCENT Low Density Residential 2.6 -Medium Density Residential - -High Density Residential - -Total Residential 2.6 -Industry, Public Utilities

and Transportation 12.0 1 Commercial 35.4 4 Public 21.1 2 Higher Education 5.0 1 Marina 8.7 1 Railroad 19.3 2 Parks 415.0 45 Water Areas 373.4 40 Streets 25.2 3 Vacant Land 5.3 1 Total Land 923.0 100

flood control channel and inlet will give the city a closer orientation to the lake and its tourist potential.

The construction of the flood control channel cut the site of Taughannock Boulevard from the foot of West Hill and converted the land at the end of the boulevard into an island. There are eight residential buildings on the island. Seven of these residential buildings are deteriorated or dilapidated. The remaining buildings are devoted to commercial or industrial uses. The businesses located along Taughannock Boulevard are highly traffic-oriented. The construction of the flood control channel has now placed these traffic-oriented businesses on a dead-end street. Since relocation of many of the present businesses appears to be imminent, the city will provide new zoning for the island which will encourage the location of residential and marina-oriented business uses in the area. Such specialization on the island will provide not only a unique residential environment, but also, the proximity to the state marina will provide a lucrative location for boating and boat-related businesses.

Proposals

1. The island created by the flood control channel and the Cayuga Inlet north of Buffalo Street should be developed to exploit its unique wateroriented character and view. The area should be developed in marine-oriented commercial land uses.

2. The city, state, and private all-season culturalrecreational facilities on the lake front should be further encouraged. These facilities should be

[ '

I

MUNICIPAL GOt...F

COUNSK

.3 CTED

. ____-/ ~-·

LEGEND -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL

USE, 1990

I ,

l .

Map 11.3 -+-------------- PROJECTED LAND USE, 1990

developed in such a way as to attract both vacationers and local residents to the multiple-purpose area.

3. The portion of the neighborhood bordering Route 13 should be used for light industry and warehousing. Careful control over the use of the warehouse area should be exercised in order that an appropriate separation be created between it and the residential and recreational neighborhoods.

4. The Cayuga Inlet Neighborhood is the cornerstone of the city's recreation system. E asy pedestrian access to the area from all the city's neighborhoods must be provided by developing a network of pathways enabling all residents to gain the full beneRt of the all-season park facility.

5. A foo tbridge should link the Inlet Park and Newman Municipal Golf Course, providing a major connection in the chain of pedestrian ways linking the city neighborhoods to the inlet. The pedestrian ways along the flood control channel create a spine of recreation areas from Stewart Park to Buttermilk Falls.

THE FUTURE

Map II.3 shows the land use for the City of Ithaca projected for 1990. As shown on Table II.l5, by 1990 there will be no undeveloped land left in the city. The most signiRcant changes in land use from the present land uses are in the amounts of land devoted to residential, industrial-warehouse, and marina land uses. The distribution of new land into various kinds of residential land use is fairly even among the three densities. The amount of land in industrial-warehousing land use has doubled between the existing and proposed maps. The development of a marina in the Inlet Park and the use of land adjacent to the park for marina and marina-oriented uses will place one percent of the land in the city into marina uses by 1990.

As the map indicates, development in residential Neighborhoods 1, 3, and 4 will merely reinforce the existing character of these areas. On the "Flats," highdensity housing will expand to encircle the Central Business District which will become more densely developed along State Street with a higher concentra-

TABLE 11.15: Projected Land Use by Acreage and Percent for the City of Ithaca by Neighborhoods, 1990

z ::us; -;c- I co ;ur coco ::UI ~ - "' ()

<iQ' <iQ ' coo ~. a. Bl oQ'

;u -; Ql ::.:a. ::r !!!.=: g-c· co o ~ a:~ 0

~ :;::: ;u ::r Ci:::T "'- 3 -u ~ r::r a.o :o3 -· ll> -oro-

~ ~ ro o a. - o"'.:< 3 c rn '"co g·o "' "' co ;:l.ll> " co <;!: a. :;· 0

::r ;;.:J ~.;:) ;;. O> :J-u (; ' c "' 0 ru · ~. - co ;:; () "' a. :J "'"' ~ =: a.c 0 -~ -~ ~ ~ a. V1 0 r::r V1 ~ :J (; ' c;·

:J

I Cornell Hgts 14.4 79.7 32.9 127.0 - - - 10.0 - -

Percent 6 35 15 56 - - - 4 - -

II University 8.4 109.6 24.3 142.3 6.6 - - 205.2 - -Percent 2 28 7 37 2 - - 52 - -

Ill Belle Sherm an 70.1 47.6 21. 2 138.9 1.5 0.2 5.6 - - 1.0 Percent 27 19 8 54 1 - 2 - - -

IV East Hi ll 6.0 2.0 67 .8 75.8 0.4 7.0 7.1 - - -Percent 4 1 44 49 - 5 5 - - -

v Fall Creek - 92.7 16.1 108.8 - 3.1 15.8 - - -Percent - 45 8 53 - 1 8 - - -

VI North Centra l - 47.5 47. 1 94.6 4.5 16.6 10.8 - - -Percent - 26 26 52 2 9 6 - - -

VII Centra l - 10.6 20.8 31.4 1.9 52.2 11.6 - - -Percent - 7 14 21 1 35 8 - - -

VIII South Hill - 112.4 38.2 150.6 20.4 3. 2 3.4 - - 0.7 Percent - 45 15 60 8 1 2 - - -

IX South Centra I - 65.8 42.8 108.6 1.4 24.4 1.5 - - -

Percent - 34 22 56 1 13 1 - - -

X Inlet Vall ey-Elmira Road - 109.6 - 109.6 165.4 89.2 - - - 11 .8

Percent - 21 - 21 33 18 - - - 2

XI West Hill 278.8 104.9 23.3 407.0 - - 4.1 - - -Percent 54 20 5 79 - - 1 - - -

XII Cayuga Inlet 3.2 - - 3.2 34.1 9.3 22.9 5.0 27.0 19.3 Percent - - - - 4 1 2 1 3 2

TOTAL 380.9 782.4 334.5 1,497.8 236.2 205.2 82.8 220 .2 27.0 32.8 Percent 10 20 8 38 6 5 2 6 1 1

SOURCE: Land Use Study, City Planning Office, City of Ithaca, Spring 1969.

38

::;: < "'

-; ~ ~ () s. -u "' ~ ~ ~ "' ;;.

"' ~ r V1 )> r "' ~ V1 :J "' "' :J a.

V1 a.

13.5 17.2 57 .6 - 225.3 6 8 26 - 100

5.3 4 .3 26.1 - 389.8 1 1 7 - 100

19.6 8.3 81.9 - 257.0 8 3 32 - 100

26.7 - 38.1 - 155.1 17 - 24 - 100

3.9 5.0 66.8 - 203.4 2 3 33 - 100

2.5 - 54.7 - 183.7 1 - 30 - 100

2.1 - 51.2 - 150.4 1 - 34 - 100

3.0 9.1 60.4 - 250.8 1 4 24 - 100

6.8 6.1 42.3 - 191.1 4 3 22 - 100

67.0 18.7 45.3 - 507.0 13 4 9 - 100

12.1 2. 1 87. 5 - 512.8 2 1 17 - 100

397. 2 372.3 32.7 - 923.0 43 40 4 - 100

559.7 443.1 644.6 - 3,949.4 14 11 16 - 100

[ I

tion of traffic-oriented businesses at the west end of the street.

The shortage of housing in the city should encourage medium-density residential development along Meadow Street and adjacent to the city park in Neighborhood 10. A small portion of West Hill, Neighborhood 11, will develop in medium- and highdensity residential units ; the majority of the area,

however, will maintain its low-density residential character.

Development of the land in the National Arts and Recreation Center for local and visitors use will reinforce the city's regional recreational role. The development of activities along the lake front should help to orient the city more toward its unique natural environment.

TABLE 11.16: Change in Land Uses by Acreage and Percent from Existing to Projected Uses

$: -I 3" I

::o' :::0~ :::0~ ..,co. () liQ' :E < ~~

:::0 (I)""<= 0 =r (I) "' -I (!) -· roOQ (!) ~=:~ 3 !!l :::0 n s. U>C U>::T !!!. -I -o $: ....

~ O:o 0:3 O:o '0 o!:~ 3 c ~.

~. -o !!l "' ~ <t>ro

o.o 3. ~ - 5:!: IT1 - (I) (il ;:!. gjo <t>ro <I>"" (!) 0. 0 .... )> ::::l:::J ~:::J :::JI:I> a. ;:;· c :::J "' ~ r ~.U'J ""<I> .... - (1)(1)-o (I) (/1 (il r- (I)

~~ jij ':::J ~~ ~ g:g_Q: 0 (I) 0. (/1

"' :::J ~ ~ (I)

:::J -(/1 (/1 0. ;:;: '< :::J ;:;· Ci' 0.. '< :::J

Total Present Use 304.5 596.5 179.1 1,080.1 120.1 207.0 70.0 220.2 8.7 32.8 536.3 443.1 623.5 607.6 3,949.4

Percent 8 15 5 28 3 5 2 6 - 1 13 11 16 15 100

Total Proposed Use 380.9 782.4 334.5 1,497 .8 236.2 205.2 82.8 220.2 27.0 32.8 559.7 443.1 644.6 - 3,949.4

Percent 10 20 8 38 6 5 2 6 1 1 14 11 16 - 100

Increases 76.4 185.9 155.4 417.7 116.1 ( -1.8) 12.8 - 18.3 - 23.4 - 21.1 ( -607 .6) -Percent 2 5 3 10 3 - - - 1 - 1 - - ( - 15) -

SOURCE: Land Use Study, City Planning Office, City of Ithaca, Spring 1969.

39

l

CITY GOVERNMENT

Since the formation of Tompkins County in 1817, the City of Ithaca has served as the seat of county government. In 1821 Ithaca was incorporated as a village and remained as such until 1888 when it became an incorporated city. The present City Charter, which is the basis for city government, dates from 1908. Even though amendments and home rule laws have made changes in the charter, the organization and administration of services remains basically the same as in 1908. In 1960 an amendment to the charter authorized the formation of a Department of Finance. The creation of this department has resulted in some major changes in the financial procedures and practices of city government.

Administrative Organization

The City Charter provides for a government headed by an elected mayor and common council. The functions of city government are performed by these elected officials and the various officials and boards which are appointed by them.

The Common Council is composed of 14 aldermen, two from each of the seven wards in the city. The Council has three major functions: ( 1) to consider and pass laws and ordinances; ( 2) to levy taxes

and authorize expenditures; and ( 3) to act on appointments.

A city judge is elected for a four-year term and presides over the City Court. The city judge also supervises the Traffic Violations Bureau and is responsible for its functioning and personnel.

The mayor is elected for a two-year term. He presides at meetings of the Common Council and votes only in the event of a tie. The mayor serves as head of the Police Department and as such is responsible for the enforcement of laws and preservation of peace. The mayor also appoints some of the city officials and members of various boards.

The city government is divided into a number of functional departments and offices. Among these are the Finance Department, Office of the Chamberlain, Office of the City Clerk, Public Works Department, Fire Department, Police Department, Planning Department and Youth Bureau.

Some of these departments act as administrators for several city functions. The Department of Public Works, for example, houses the building commissioner's office and staff. Each of the departments is under the guidance of a board of citizens. In the case of Public Works, Planning, and Finance, the board selects, with the approval of the Common Council, the department's top administrator.

TABLE 111.1: Organization Chart for Ithaca City Government.

VOTERS OF THE CITY OF ITHACA

CITY JU DGE

city Attorney

p 1.

lannmg Board

I Civi l S

Commi ervice ssioner

I

MAYOR

Mayor Appoints

,I I City Police

Prosecutor Commissioner

I Housing Authority

I I Advisory Bd . City

of Historian Youth Bureau

I Exam

of E ining Board Examining Board lectric ian s

I Board of

Zoning Appeals

of Plumbers

I Board of Appeals on Building Code

COMMON COUNCIL CITY REPRESENTATIVES TO THE COU NTY

GOVERN ME NT Mayor Appoints with the

Approval of Common Council

dy I A I City ctmg

Controller Chamberlain City Judg e

I I l City Clerk Building Board of

I Commissioner Public Wor I

ks

Deputy City Supt. of Clerk Public Wor ks

I ,I I I

City Asst. to City Engineer Superintendent Forest er

I T I Fire Director of Sealer of Weights

Commissioner Youth Bureau and Measures

43

In addition to the administrative boards of citizens, there are boards of specially skilled citizens such as the Examining Board of Electricians and the Examining Board of Plumbers. Finally, there are boards of citizens which assist in the adminish·ation of city ordinances, such as the Board of Zoning Appeals and the Board of Appeals on the Building Code. The mayor makes all appointments to boards, some with the approval of the Common Council. The term of appointments to various boards are from two to six years depending upon the board.

The mayor also makes appointments which coincide with his term of office. Among these are the city attorney, the city prosecutor, and the city historian.

The great majority of city employees are civil servants. A Civil Service Commission, whose members are appointed by the mayor for six-year terms, examines and certifies persons for appointment. In 1967 a Civil Service Employees' Association was formed to represent the employees of city government.

Personnel

The City of Ithaca employs 335 regular full-time and part-time employees. Employment by the city has increased by 27 percent from 1960 to 1969. Since the regular full-time and part-time employees have remained rather constant, the bulk of the increase in city employment has come in the seasonal labor employed. This increase is particularly evident in the employment after 1965. Much of this additional seasonal employment is the result of special projects funded by other governmental bodies such as the beautification projects of the Youth Bureau and Urban Renewal Authority. The increase in city employment from 1960 to 1969 was less than the increase in county government (50 percent). The expansion in county government since 1967 has been chiefly the result of new activities assumed by the county, such as the library and assessment, rather than an expansion of seasonal employment. Table III.2, a graph comparing the increase in city and county employment from 1962

TABLE 111.2: Cumulative Graph of Percent Change in Employment by Tompkins County and City of Ithaca 1962 to 1969

48

44

40

36

32

28

24

20

16

12

8

4

0

-4

44

/ / ~OMPKINS

COUNTY

I'-

N 1.0 O'l ......

~THACA 1I

M 1.0 O'l ......

I

I I

-....... /

I

I I

1.{')

1.0 O'l ......

-.......

I I

I I

I

I

I h

...._____

l ........._

I I

I I I

I 1/

1-------I I

I I

00 l.D O'l ......

O'l 1.0 O'l ......

0 ,....... O'l ......

l-

to 1969 (estimated), shows that the county government has had a more steadily increasing employment rate than the city.

It is anticipated that the regular part-time and full-time staff of the city will not increase significantly in the next decade. The continued award of special projects, however, may mean that the city's employment figures might increase, reflecting increased seasonal employment by the city. A reorganization of city administration, creating the position of city controller, has increased operating efficiences and made it possible to anticipate little increase in regular staff. This does not, however, bar the possibility of the city shifting additional responsibilities to the county or of changes in staffing resulting from the passage of a new city charter. 0

City Facilities

The City of Ithaca owns 20 buildings which range in use from pumping stations to office buildings. The original city hall, built in 1844, which included offices for the Police Department and the Central Fire Station, was in the area of the Central Business District designated for urban renewal in 1963. In order to make room for urban renewal and to consolidate all the municipal operations in one building, the city hall was relocated to the other side of the Central Business District in 1965.

Despite the desire for consolidation of city offices, it was decided by the Common Council that the Central Fire Station and Police Department should be housed under separate roofs. As a result, a new $500,000 Central Fire Station was constructed in 1968 and Bibbins Hall was acquired from Agway Inc. for $164,000 to house the Police Department, City Court and Traffic Violations Bureau. All three of these city office buildings are within walking distance of each other. The Common Council allocated $35,000 for the renovation of the City Hall, built in 1939, and its adjacent annex, built in 1914. Both the main building and the annex were acquired from the New York State Electric and Gas Corporation for $250,000. The renovation of Bibbins Hall, built in 1940, cost $270,000. It is anticipated that these new and renewed office facilities should serve the city for at least the next 25 years .

In addition to the main city offices, the city also owns the water treatment facilities : the water filtration plant built in 1929 with additions in 1938 and 1951; the water building built in 1938 with an addition in 1941; and a sewage treatment plant built in 1895 with additions in 1959 and 1964. Seven pumping

• A new City Charter was proposed to the voters in 1968. The revised charter was defeated at the polls in November of that year.

station structures, ranging in age from 1909 to 1958, are also part of the water system owned by the city.

Ithaca is served by five fire stations. Two of these stations were built in 1968; the remaining three range in age from 16 to 86 years. The city has maintained a good program of preventive maintenance for all the stations.

Finally, the city owns the Municipal Airport now scheduled to become a part of the National Arts and Recreation Center; the Southside Community Center, built as a vV.P.A. project during the Depression and acquired by the city in 1936; and the City Cemetery in which the last acquisition was made in 1911.

City Finance

The major industry in Ithaca is higher education. Because much of this industry, Cornell University, is located within the city limits, Ithaca is in the unique position of having the six percent of its land owned by the University exempt from property taxes. An additional 17 percent of the city's assessable land and property is exempt because of such uses as public schools, parks and municipal services. As a result of both the University and other land uses, 33 percent of the total real property in the city is tax exempt. The support of city government; street paving, maintenance and lighting; and parks and open space to enhance the city's safety and environment comes from the taxes on 66 percent of the city's land and taxable property. In 1968 close to 35 percent of the city's total revenue came from property tax. It is estimated that the percentage of city revenue to come from property taxes will drop to 24 percent in 1969.

In the past five years the cost of city operation has increased by 32 percent. However, Table III.3 indicates property tax revenues make up a smaller percentage of the total revenues in 1969 than they did in 1965. In 1968 a county sales tax was levied. The county transferred $500,000 of the sales tax revenue to the city. This new revenue made it possible for the city to begin to curtail increases in the property tax rates despite the increased cost of government. Action taken by the Ithaca Common Council in 1969 will entitle the city to one and one-half percent of the sales taxes collected from retail sales within the city. Therefore, in the future, sales tax revenue will continue as a signiflcant contributor to the city's spendable monies, helping to hold the city property tax rates to a minimum.

The total revenue for the City of Ithaca in 1968 was $3,148,276. This revenue came to the city from 25 different sources. The most important of these sources were property taxes ( 62 percent), state aid ( 13 percent) and special activities ( 8 percent). Both the Water and Sewer Divisions of the Department of

45

Public Works collect revenue, but each of these services is a self-supporting operation and are not included here in total city revenue. In 1968 Cornell University gave $25,000 to the city for fire protection and assumed one-third or up to $7,500 of the city's losses on the Community Transit System. The University has extended this agreement to include 1969.

The City of Ithaca allocates its annual General Fund working budget into the 11 categories indicated on Table III.4. The General Fund is one of the three working funds of the City Finance Department. The other two funds are devoted specifically to the operations of the Water Department and the Sewer Department. The General Fund handles all other city expenditures. Over the past five years ( 1965 to 1969) the annual General Fund expenditures of the city have increased by 60 percent. The major allocations are still in the same categories that they were five years ago: public safety and streets and sanitation. These major allocations, however, are proportionately less of the total budget than they were in 1965. As Table III.4 indicates, the allocations in all categories have increased since 1965.

While the total budget allocations for staff have increased by 35 percent in the past five years, the relative share of the city budget going toward staff has decreased from 12 to 10 percent. In the same

time period the allocation of monies for staff by deparhnent indicates that only the controller's staff and the planning staff have increased significantly.

In 1969, 14 percent of the city's total revenue was allocated for debt service. The total debt for the city was $5,084,560. Thirty-nine percent of the city's present debt is self-liquidating. In the past five years the city's total revenue has increased by 105 percent while its debt has increased by 253 percent. Despite the greater increase in debt compared to increase in revenue, the city is still well below the safe upper limit of 25 percent of revenue for debt services set by analysts.

POLICE PROTECTION

The Ithaca Police Department serves three major functions: traffic control, protection of property and protection of lives. In 1969 the Ithaca Police Department employed 49 professionally-trained policemen. In addition to these professionals the department hires three meter checkers, two meter maintenance men, and 13 school guards.

While the police force covers the entire city, special coverage is provided to commercial areas of the city-the Central Business District, the West End, the Elmira Road area, and Collegetown. Particular emphasis is placed on the Central Business District

TABLE 111.3: Actual revenues for the City of Ithaca, 1966 through 1968

1966 Type of Revenue $

Non-property taxes 63,923 Payment in lieu of taxes Franchises 2,567 Interest and penalties 9,162 Licenses 7,263 Permits 6,845 Interest & earnings on deposits 799 Rentals 21,540 Charges for services 23,903 Charges for services, other gov. 41,949 Rental fees 16,032 Income, special activities 225,480 State aid 367,821 Reimbursement, appro. expand. 38,516 Reimbursement, other services 3,324 Fines, penalties, forfeitures 74,406 Sale of assets, comp. loss 3,595 Contributions 3,849 Miscellaneous 5,826 I nterfund reimbursements 518 I nterfund transfer, debt service 13,000 I nterfund revenue 60,590 Property tax 1,619,406 Total revenue 2,609,911

SOURCE: Ithaca City Budgets, 1966 through 1968.

46

%

2.4

0.1 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.03 0.8 0.9 1.6 0.6 8.6

14.1 1.5 0.1 2.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.01 0.5 2.3

62.0 99.8

1967 1968 $ % $ %

65,687 2.2 69,681 2.2 25,593 0.8

2,829 0.1 3,035 0.1 8,101 0.3 9,637 0.3 6,194 0.2 7,210 0.2 7,518 0.2 8,266 0.3

14,386 0.5 10,818 0.3 24,109 0.8 22,716 0.7 18,170 0.6 34,896 1.1 41,128 1.4 43,005 1.4 17,523 0.6 14,608 0.5

263,945 8.7 250,393 8.0 405,278 13.3 411,394 13.1

11,633 0.4 27,372 0.9 1,920 0..06 921 0.03

45,829 1.5 52,086 1.7 224,726 7.4 6,370 0.2

34,784 1.1 83,078 1.1 54,852 1.8 6,884 0.2

846 0.03 503 0.02 24,122 0.8 59,980 1.9 42,060 1.4 96,127 3.1

1,722,443 56.7 1,953,733 62.1 3,038,063 100.1 3,148,276 100.2

r

TABLE 111.4: General Fund Budget Allocations by Dollar and Percent for the City of Ithaca, 1964 to 1968*

1965 1966

General Fund $ $ o/o Item Change

Legislative 7,328 7,541 + 3 (Council) Judicial 25,158 36,018 + 4 Executive 4,513 12,054 +167 Staff 298,779 284,088 + 6 Public Safety 709,372 790,328 +11 Streets & Sanitation 425,837 573,638 + 35 Health 3,013 3,004 -Recreation 129,996 139,949 + 8 Special Activities 80,329 116,620 + 45 General (Miscellaneous) 532,038 588,272 +11 Debt Service 197,537 274,443 + 39

Total 2,413,900 2,825,955 + 17

*The adopted budget.

which is covered by four regular footbeats. The residential areas are, in turn, covered by three mobile units.

The police force is already short of manpower. Citizen requests for additional footbeats in the ·west End Business District and in the Collegetown area are going unanswered. The Police Department anticipates that in the next five years they will have to add ten men to the police force. Despite the manpower shortages, it is expected that the new police facility which went into operation in the fall of 1969 will accommodate the Police Department's equipment needs for well over a decade.

Facilities

After the demolition of the old City Hall, the Police Department was located in the basement of the new City Hall. In October 1969 the department moved to its newly renovated quarters in the Hall of Justice. The city purchased the building from Agway for $163,786. The renovation of the building, constructed in 1940, cost the city $52,158. In addition, $54,251 was put into equipment for the Police Department and the new facility. The Hall of Justice contains eight detaining cells, two for women and six for men, as well as a new radio communications system for the city's eight patrol cars and one radar wagon.

FIRE PROTECTION

The purpose of the Fire Department is to protect the residents, their property, and the community infrastructure from damage and destruction by fire. The City of Ithaca has five fire stations, 50 full-time employees, and 550 trained volunteer firemen.

1967 1968 1969

$ o/o $ o/o $ o/o Change Change Change

7,911 + 5 66,615 +742 41,720 -37

42,484 + 18 40,843 - 4 43,972 + 8 12,323 + 2 13,722 + 12 15,730 + 15

304,448 + 7 361,062 + 19 403,706 + 12 828,251 + 5 981,951 + 19 1,087,888 +11 563,847 - 2 620,198 + 10 709,218 + 14

3,009 - 3,012 - 3,512 + 17 170,025 +22 200,699 + 15 240,392 +20 78,816 -32 114,048 + 45 126,743 +11

587,363 - 537,976 - 8 723,728 +35 365,394 +33 350,979 - 4 477,321 +27

2,963,771 + 5 3,291,100 + 11 3,873,980 + 2

Service Area

The Ithaca Fire Department serves the city and contracts with the Town of Ithaca to service a portion of it. The city's contract with the town gives the Fire Department the responsibility for all of the town except the Village of Cayuga Heights and the northeast portion of the town east of the village line to Forest Home. The city Fire Department also provides service to the portion of the New York State College of Agriculture at Cornell outside of the city. The town's contract with the city was $20,885 in 1969.

Facilities and Equipment

Three of the city's five fire stations are located in the Central Business District. One each is located in the East Hill and Fall Creek Neighborhoods. The city owns seven engines and two ladder trucks. It is anticipated that one aerial will be replaced by 1971 and one engine will be replaced in 1972 or 1973. Both of these nevv machines will be larger than the two being retired. VVithin the next six years it will be necessary to replace an additional two engines. The life expectancy of Fire Department machinery is 20 to 25 years. In addition to the present equipment needs, the increasing cost of fire equipment will require an increase from $12,500 to $25,000 in the city's appropriations for capital equipment in the next five years.

Of the five stations in the city, two are new, completed in 1968. Although the other three buildings are old, a good program of preventive maintenance has forestalled deterioration. The only construction anticipated for the next 15 years will be in response to condemnation of an existing station for highway rightof-way or consolidation of the city and town into one

47

TABLE 111.5: Quantity and Descript ion of Machinery Owned by the Ithaca Fire Department in 1969

Machine Tota l No. Number and Capacity

Engine 7 3 1250 gal./m in . 3 750 gal./min. 1 500 gal./m in .

Aeria ls 2 1 75 feet (Ladder trucks) 1 85 feet

fire district. It is possible that the fire station at the west end of the Central Business District, Neighborhood 7, may be in the right-of-way of the relocated Route 13. The exact location of the highway has not yet been determined. Should the city consolidate with the town into one fire district and considerable new development take place adjacent to the new Ithaca College location, an additional station may have to be built on South Hill. Consolidation of the fire district has not, however, been officially proposed.

Manpower

The Fire Department operates on a 24-hour-a-day basis. Full coverage requires 12 men, 24 hours a day. The department employs 50 men to maintain this continuous coverage. The deparb11ent's annual payroll is $404,131 plus the health insurance and retirement benefits paid by the city.

The 550 trained volunteer firemen work directly with the professionals. In addition to their initial training and answering calls, these volunteers participate in one or tvvo drills a month. It is estimated that the volunteer fire force saves the city $500,000 a year.

Quality of Fire Protection

The city's five fire stations are fairly centrally located within the fire districts and the areas of most dense population. All neighborhoods within the city are within a reasonable run (in time and distance) from adequate machinery. Evidence of the quality of fire protection in Ithaca is the American Insurance Association's Class 4 rating. A Class 4 is the highest grade a city with a professional-volunteer fire force can achieve. The class grade is assigned on the basis of the city's building code, the enforcement of the city's building code, an adequate water supply and distribution system, the quality of the city's alarm system, and the overall quality of the Fire Department in terms of administration and staffing. 'While it is evident that the costs of maintaining service will increase, it is anticipated that Ithaca will continue to retain its Class 4 rating in the future.

The Ithaca Fire Department is further supported by a countywide mutual aid coordinating group.

48

Begun in 1948, all the fire departments in the county agreed, in the case of need, to pool their equipment and manpower. This cooperation makes specialized equipment and trained manpower readily available in the event of a fire which exceeds the capabilities of a local fire department. The assisting department will either participate in fighting the fire or covering the locality's stations while its equipment is employed in fighting a major fire.

CIVIL DEFENSE PROTECTION

It is the objective of Civil Defense to coordinate local government operations in any natural disaster or national emergency and to provide guidance and assistance in developing local emergency preparedness. In addition to developing and provisioning a fallout shelter system in existing buildings, this agency and its volunteer citizens are equipped and trained to assist in the event of a natural disaster such as a flood, tornado, major fire, or blizzard.

Since 1950 Civil Defense has been a department of the county government. As provided in the New York State Defense Emergency Act, the chief executives of the county, city, villages, and townships are responsible for Civil Defense within their political subdivisions in both national emergencies and natural disasters .

Civil Defense has a full-time paid director and secretary, as well as a part-time shelter officer. Nearly 2,000 volunteers have registered in Civil Defense. Of these, several hundred are currently trained and active. The annual budget for the agency is about $20,000. Civil Defense maintains a local government radio system which provides adminish·ative communications among key agencies in the city and county in times of emergency. The agency also owns a number of mobile two-way radios, base stations, and a relay station.

A natural disaster coordinating center is maintained in Ithaca. This local center includes extensive communications capabilities. The agency owns a fully equipped light rescue truck which is on call for any local emergency.

An increase of at least two persons on the full-time staff of the Civil Defense Agency is projected for the next 15 years, with additional equipment and stockpiles to be procured as needed.

Fallout Shelters

There are 44,222 shelter spaces in structures within the City of Ithaca. These city shelter spaces represent 78 percent of the shelter spaces in the county. Of the 44,222 spaces in the city, 23 percent of them are stocked with medical and food provisions. Stocking and licensing of shelters is clone only with the

r

permission of the building owner. Shortage of storage space accounts for the low percentage of stocked shelters in the city.

Designation of any additional shelter spaces will be made as new buildings are constructed in the county. As a result, it is difficult to determine the number of shelter spaces which will be added in the future. If the Civil Defense Agency is to meet the national goal of providing a space for each county resident, it will have to make provisions for an additional 23,564 shelter spaces by 1970 and 36,077 shelter spaces by 1980."'

LIBRARY FACILITIES

Good public library service is an important factor in the continuing efforts of the community to meet the educational, cultural, and recreational demands of its citizenry. The recently completed Tompkins County Library, located in the City of Ithaca, plays an important role in community activity. The library's current book collection consists of about 110,000 volumes, including books purchased with State Book Aid, and 185 magazine and 15 newspaper subscriptions. The collection also includes 2,500 long-playing records and 30 sets of foreign language records. A growing collection of 16mm films is available through the Finger Lakes Library System. The data on the number of registered borrowers, Table III.6, indicates that there has been almost a steady increase in city and county residents taking advantage of the library's facilities. The most rapid increase in borrowers has come in the past two years, 1968 and 1969. The library staff anticipates a continued increase in usage now that the new building is completed. Counts for the

TABLE 111.6: Number of Registered Borrowers from Tompkins County Library 1965·1969

Number of Percent Increase/ Decrease Year Borrowers in Borrowers

1965 14,789 1966 15,843 + 7.1 1967 15,812 - .2 1968 16,720 + 5.7 1969 17,019 + 1.8

SOURCE: Director, Tompkins County Library, July 1969.

first five months in the new building show a 23 percent increase in circulation and a 63 percent increase in reference requests. The increased demand on reference personnel has exceeded all expectations. The dire~tor of the library does not, however, foresee an expansion of his staff of nine full-time professional

0 These figures are based on the state Office of Planning Coordination's population projections for Tompkins County. The OPC estimates Tompkins County's population will be 79,952 in 1970 and 92,465 in 1980.

librarians and 11 full-time non-professionals in the next decade. Rather, it is anticipated that there will be shifts in responsibilities to accommodate the expected increase in library use.

Care was taken in the construction of the new building to provide for future expansion. Not only may two rooms be added, but provision has been made for double-tier stacks when they are needed. Construction of a branch library provides a third alternative for expansion. 'i\lhile it is not anticipated that the present library facility will need expansion before 1990, it is possible that a branch library may be established in the county before then.

Finger Lakes Library System

In 1958 the Tompkins County Library became the central library for the newly established State Finger Lakes Library System. Five counties are members of the Finger Lakes Library System region. State aid is provided to each region on the basis of the number of counties, the population, and the size (by square miles) in the region. The staff of the Finger Lakes Library System provides a number of services to local libraries who choose to join the system: ( 1) they order and process new acquisitions; ( 2) they provide grants-in-aid; ( 3) they make consultants available for collection, selection, acquisitions, cataloguing, inventory, renovation and training; and ( 4) they compile rotating collections for the member libraries . The Finger Lakes Library System covers 2,541 square miles and a population of 235,256. The Finger Lakes Library System also provides bookmobile service to 44 areas without libraries in the five counties. Nine of these areas are located in Tompkins County.

A comparison of the Finger Lakes Library System to other New York library systems similar in at least two of the three designating characteristics indicates that the Finger Lakes System ranks about the middle in terms of the number of books held and low in terms of total circulation and total operating fund receipts from local, state and federal sources.

Representatives of the Finger Lakes Library System anticipate that in the future all libraries in the region will become members of the system. Presently 27 of the possible 29 libraries are members. A future goal of the library system is to establish a number of reading centers in communities which are too small to support a library but wish to provide some facility for educational, cultural, and recreational reading. The library system would loan books to the local reading center for a period of time.

EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES

Education is of greater importance to Ithaca than to most cities of the same size. The local residents and

49

employees and students of Cornell University and Ithaca College have a vital concern in education as a process and a way of life, and in turn they take particular interest in maintaining an outstanding public school system for their children. The extent of this dedication is reflected in the fact that approximately 90 percent of the children entering the Ithaca public schools finish high school and over 60 percent of those who graduate continue their education.

Every child in the community directly benefits from the high quality of elementary and secondary education in Ithaca. Similarly, every member of the community benefits directly or indirectly from the economic presence of institutions of higher learning in Ithaca.

Ithaca City School District

The Ithaca City School District includes about half of Tompkins County. The dish·ict contains one high school, two junior high schools, and 13 elementary schools. Ten of these 16 schools are presently located within the city. The remaining six are located in the suburban and rural areas of the district. The rest of the county beyond the Ithaca City School System is served by the Central School Districts of Dryden, Groton, Lansing, Newfield and Trumansburg.

The City of Ithaca has within its limits seven elementary schools, two junior high schools, and a senior high school. These schools served 5,950 students in 1969. The average age of the elementary school buildings is 42 years while the average age of the junior high school buildings is 49 years. The Ithaca High School was built in 1960. According to the standards laid down by the Board of Education as listed on Table III.7, five of the city's elementary schools have less than minimum enrollment and only two meet the City Board of Educations's recommended site size. The data on Table III.8 indicates that the average number of students per room in 1970 ranged between 17 and 28. Only one of these elementary schools lacks a cafeteria and gym; all have a library. It is anticipated in the City Education Plan that Boynton Junior High School will be remodeled into a new, 16 room elementary school when the new junior high school is completed. This newly remodeled facility will relieve some of the pressure on Henry St. John Elementary School.

Two obsolete buildings presently serve 1,873 junior high school pupils. DevVitt Junior High School is the oldest, built in 1912, and largest of the two junior high schools in terms of students per classroom and enrollment. The School Board plans to replace these with two new junior high schools. Both of these new junior high schools will be beyond the city limits.

50

Together the two new junior high schools will be equipped to handle 2,100 students . In response to the actual concentration of school age population, the two proposed school sites favor the northeastern section of the district. Enrollment projections for 1990 anticipate 2,750 students in junior high school. By 1990 the southern and western areas of the district will probably gain sufficiently in population to warrant the building of a third junior high there.

TABLE 111.7: Public School Standards as Determined by the Ithaca Board of Education

TYPE

Recommended Walking Distance

Recommended Site Size

Recommended Building Capacity

StudentTeacher Ratio

SOURCE:

STANDARDS

National Standard-1/2 mile for elementary schools and 1 mile for secondary schools.

Ithaca City School District-4!10 of a mile for elementary schools and 2 miles for secondary schools.

Elementary-3 acres plus 1 acre for each 100 pupils enrolled, with a minimum of 5 acres.

Junior and Senior High Schools-5 acres plus 2 acres for each 100 pupils up to an enrollment of 500; above 500, 1 acre is added for each 100 pupils. The minimum size is 10 acres.

Elementary-Minimum 405, maximum 810 Junior High-Minimum 750, maximum 1500 Senior High-Minimum 1000, maximum 2500

Sixty-five professiona ls for every 1000 pupils at each level. Professionals include administrators, teachers, and academic specialists.

Ithaca Board of Education, August 1969.

The district is presently well-served by its high school. Future space needs should be easily met: the design of the high school is such that additions may be made at a reasonable cost, when and if this becomes necessary. Some buildings in the high school complex now being used for administrative purposes are also suitable for classrooms.

School population projections indicate that present high school facilities will reach their capacity in 1990. After that time facilities may need expanding.

Table III.9 indicates that the highest average increase in student enrollment to 1990 is anticipated in the K-6 or elementary school grades. The large number in the elementary grades in 1975 will mean that by 1990 the high school will feel increased pressure on its classroom space and teaching staff.

It is expected that the Ithaca Consolidated School District will eventually encompass the entire county. The resources of such a large school district would

I I

( I

! ,

TABLE 111.8: Description of Public Schools within the City of Ithaca by Age, Number of Rooms, Site Size, and Student Enrol lment, 1970

Age of Site Present Number Average Students Total

Schools Struc· Age of Size Student Maximum of per Number Within lure in Addition in Enroll· Student Class- Class· Has Has Has of Grade Ithaca Years if Any Acres ment Capacity rooms room Library Cafeteria Gym Buildings Levels

Be lle Sherman Elementary School 43 16 3.26 509 626 22 23.1 yes yes yes 2 K-6

Central Elementary School 46 7 1.29 258 297 11 23.5 yes yes yes 1 K-6

East Hill Elementary School 89 16 1.58 173 170 10 17.3 yes no no 1 1·6

Fall Creek Elementary School 37 5 1.81 301 405 12 25.0 yes yes yes 1 Pre-K-6

Henry St. John Elementary School 44 - 1.45 253 250 11 23.0 yes yes yes 1 K-6

South Hill Elementary School 15 - 4.39 475 540 17 27.9 yes yes yes 1 K-6

West Hill Elementary School 17 - 6.25 278 351 11 25.2 yes yes yes 1 K-6

Boynton Junior Hi gh School 39 14 1.30 816 825 28 29.1 yes yes yes 1 7-9

DeWitt Junior High School 59 29 1.55 1,057 1,000 29 36.4 yes yes yes 1 7-9

Ithaca High School 9 5 48.00 1,833 2,258 55 33.3 yes yes yes 10 10-12

SOURCE: Board of Education, Assistant Superintendent of Education, February 1970.

make it possible for the district to provide some of the specialized services to the smaller school districts in Tompkins County now made available by the Board of Cooperative E ducational Services ( BOCES).

After the completion of the two new junior high schools, the school board does not anticipate any new construction until 1978. Pressures may be felt in the \i\1 est Hill and Belle Sherman schools as the areas they serve in the Town of Ithaca become more developed. The Board is considering acquiring sites for a new elementary school and new junior high school on West Hill and building an addition to the new Belle Sherman school to meet the needs in these areas as they develop after 1975.

Board of Cooperative Educational Services ( BOCES)

Initially form ed in 1948, BOCES administers educational programs to a multi-county area. BOCES provides special educational services which the individual counties cannot themselves afford. The Tompkins-Seneca-Tioga BOCES provides services ranging from a film library to data processing, occupational education, specialized teachers, special education for mentally, emotionally, or physically handicapped children, and adult education.

Each school district participating in the BOCES program pays according to the extent to which it uses the various services. Over the past four years the BOCES budget has exceeded two million dollars.

TABLE 111.9: Enrollments and School Population

Percent Increase

1960-1965 1965-1970 1970-1975 1975-1980

Projections by Percent Increase from 1960 to 1980

K-6 7-9 10-12 K-12

8 9 19 10 2 1 6 2

17 5 4 12 14 18 10 14

Average Increase 10 8 9 10

SOURCE: Ithaca School District: Population and En· ro llment Stud ies, Table 1: Enrollments, Continuity Rates, Projections. Egner and Niederkorn Assoc. Inc. , Ithaca, New York, April 1967.

TABLE 111.10: Absolute Enrollment Projected for 1970 through 1990

K-6 7·9 10-12 K-12

1970 4,578 1,911 1,775 8,264

1980 6,056 2,312 2,036 10,404 1990 7,905 2,750 2,271 12,926

51

CITY OF ' ~I~~~~ .. ~' ·.

·- - ·-- ~ , .·- ··-··-·· I " '"" I "" \ \

SCHOOL

TABLE 111.11: Distribution of Staff by Responsibility, Sex, and Level of Education in 1966

MA or Total Men Women BA Equiv. MA Ph.D. Median

No. % No. % No . % No. % No. % No. % Salary

Classroom Teachers 419 127 40 292 70 230 55 146 35 40 10 3 1 $ 7,000

Special Service 39 17 45 22 56 3 8 19 49 14 36 3 8 $11,000 Personnel

Administrators 31 25 81 6 19 2 7 19 61 6 19 4 13 $13,000

SOURCE: League of Women Voters of Tompkins Co., Know Your Schools, February 1967, p. 6.

At present, the activities of BOCES are housed in scattered classrooms throughout the participating districts. A referendum was passed in the spring of 1968 authorizing the construction of a $3,500,000 center which will accommodate all activities of BOCES.

Presently BOCES is placing its emphasis on physically, mentally, or emotionally handicapped children. It appears, however, that more federal funding is being made available for occupational training. With the availability of this additional funding, there may be some shift in program emphasis to occupational training.

The enlargement of the Ithaca Consolidated School District may make unnecessary some of the services which BOCES now provides.

Higher Education

Three schools for higher education are located in Tompkins County: Cornell University, Ithaca College, and Tompkins-Cortland Community College.

The Tompkins - Cortland Community College, founded in 1967, will have the commitment to an "open door" admission policy for residents of the two counties. The comprehensive community college is designed to provide a two-year course of study for three groups of students: those interested in advancing to a bachelor degree program after high school; those wishing to get some training before they enter industry, business, or government; and an adult education program in conjunction with BOCES for those who are out of school for a period, but who are interested in continuing their education .

Of the present enrollment of 143 full- and 250 parttime students, approximately 60 percent are from Tompkins County and 40 percent are from Cortland County. It is anticipated that the College's enrollment will expand to 1,500 full- and 2,000 part-time students by the end of the 1970's.

The Tompkins-Cortland Community College is presently housed in the old Groton High School. A site in Dryden has been selected for a new multimillion dollar campus which will adequately serve those residents in Tompkins and Cortland Counties who are eligible for the community college.

Cornell University was opened in 1868 as one of the first land-grant colleges. Over the past century the curriculum has grown in complexity and size to include fourteen schools and colleges, ten of which are privately sponsored and four of which are operated as units of the New York State University.

The original student body of about 100 has grown to roughly 14,000 with an additional 7,485 faculty and staff in the Ithaca area. No really accurate prediction can be made of Cornell's enrollment, but estimates place the 1990 enrollment at 21,000.

To meet the pressures which this numerical growth will exert upon the existing facilities , Cornell will focus on redeveloping itself as a pedestrian campus, with academic buildings concentrated between Cascadilla and Fall Creek Gorges . Achieving this concentration will necessitate more intensive building in the core of the campus. High rise buildings will be employed in order to minimize land coverage.

Ithaca College was founded as the Ithaca Conservatory of Music in 1892. The school was, up to 1967, located in the heart of the city facing onto DeWitt Park.

The College is privately endowed and now offers degrees in the social sciences, humanities, sciences, mathematics, art, business administration, physical education, physical therapy, speech, speech therapy, pathology and audiology, and television and radio.

The geographical distribution of the student body is oriented toward New York State. Fifty-eight percent of the student body is from New York State. The present enrollment of Ithaca College is 3,600 undergraduates and 100 graduate students. The college employs 700 staff members .

53

TOMPKINS COUNTY SCALE

> 8::8 :m" =·~~=:E===~=" Mtl(S

I 1\ 0 I 2 J " 5 KILO'.'EHRS

50.000 b>t 1•d bued en Nno YO<lt. COOidn.tlf S)"\'em.. cenrriolzorw

10.000 m~ltr crd boNd on u,.~,ul Tr.aruwne J.'•r{..ltgr 51st..._ •- 18

H.'I'.S O£C0.!8£R 1967 OPC

MAP 111.2 INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER &

LEGEND

~LANSING SCHOOL DISTRICT ~ for GIRLS

G ELEMENTARY SCHOOL @] ~~~~~~UBLIC ~ JR. HIGH SCHOOLS ~ T()M)I(f&CORTLAND L::::':J a DISTRICTS (new) ~ COMMUNITY COLLEGE

W HIGH SCHOOL [iJ ITHACA COLLEt n=:-i] B.QC.E.S. CAMPUS ~ CORNELL UNIV. ~ a DISTRICT ~ CAMPUS S LANDS

CONTINUING EDUCATIO~J

In 1967 a new campus on South Hill just beyond the city limits was dedicated. This fine complex of buildings will eventually be completed by the construction of two dormitory buildings, a chapel, and a fine arts building.

Ithaca College, with its intentionally small programs and its emphasis on the performing arts, speech, and physical education, offers a different type of program from those of either Cornell University or Tompkins-Cortland Community College. This unique dimension adds a healthly balance to the scope of higher education in Ithaca and Tompkins County.

SOCIAL SERVICES

An important aspect of community development is the level of community organization. As more emphasis is placed on citizen participation in decision-making in federal, state, and local community development programs, it has become increasingly important to define the community's experience in working together and its potential for effective organization.

There are 378 organizations in Tompkins County. The City Planning Office has classified 141, or 37 percent, of these county organizations as specifically social service in nature. Of these 141 organizations 47 percent serve the city, which represents about a third of the county's population.

Table III.12 shows the distribution of social service organization headquarters in the City of Ithaca. A review of the number and percent of organizations located in each neighborhood reveals that 48 percent of all social service organizations in the county are located in the Central Business District, Neighborhood 7. There are, no doubt, several explanations for the social service centrality of Neighborhood 7. First, Ithaca is the county seat and as such the county government offices are located here. Second, most

TABLE 111.12: Social Services with Headquarters in the City, by Interest

Percent of No. Located Social Service

Type of Social Service in City in County

Hea lth 22 59 Youth 6 86 Religious 3 100 Coordinating Bodies 6 55 Education 15 94 Law Enforcement and Government 8 94 Special Interest 16 73 Recreation and Conservation 18 80 Development and Neighborhood 15 82

Improvement

TOTAL 109 77

neighborhoods in the city are within walking distance or have some bus service to the Central Business District. Third, office space with adequate parking is more readily available in the Central Business District. Finally, the location of existing social services in Ithaca has acted as a stimulus to the location of new social service organizations in the same area. This physical proximity facilitates communications and exchange between organizations.

In recent years the United Fund, which offers some financial support to 14 percent of the local and county social service organizations, created the Social Planning Council as a coordinating body for services receiving United Fund monies. The main purpose of the Social Planning Council is to increase interorganization communications and reduce duplicate or overlapping functions among agencies serving Tompkins County, the City of Ithaca, and the towns within the county.

According to the Social Planning Council's 1969 annual financial report, five cents of every dollar of effective buying power in the county is spent on social services. The Council figures 49 percent, or almost $9,000,000, of the gross budgets of the county, the city, and the United Fund go to social services. Of this amount, 87 percent comes from the county, two percent from the city and ten percent from the United Fund. Table III.13 indicates expenditures on social services by program area of service. The county concentrates its monies on health services; the majority of the city's monies go to group work which includes recreation; and the larger part of the United Fund monies go to group work and family counseling. Programs for the elderly receive the smallest percentage of support (two percent) .

In a survey completed in 1968, the United Fund measured community response to and use of the social services which it supports. A review of the responses from city residents indicates that the most highly valued social services to city residents are the Association of Mental Health, the Boy Scouts, the Family and Children's Service (a private counseling and adoption agency), the Girl Scouts, the Salvation Army and the Senior Citizens. The services most frequently used by the city residents who responded were the Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, SPCA, 'Nomen's Community Building, and the YMCA. The emphasis on youth programs among the agencies most frequently used may be explained, in part, by the fact that 70 percent of the respondents were married and 59 percent of the respondents had at least one child.

The fact that the most highly valued programs and the most frequently used do not overlap more is not unusual. Some of the services provided are designed for highly specific clientele. There were, for

55

CITY OF ~ ITHACA ~: ······ NEW YORK I CITY PLANNING SOARD • JUNE, 1970 m_ o ~"'i

r , I .

CAYUGA LAKE

THE 1969

example, 3.2 times as many young people (zero to 18 years) as there were senior citizens ( 60 years and over) in Tompkins County in 1960. W hat is important, however, is that the residents of the city recognize the importance to the life of the community of providing special programs such as programs for the elderly. The Social Planning Council is trying to attack the fund distribution problem on the basis of what the community itself values, rather than on what exists. The hope is that by coordination and communication the existing social services can reduce the overlap in their programs and free up monies for new social services which the community feels it needs. Such an operation is a cooperative one. Without the kind of direction sh·essed by the Social Planning Council the multitude of social services can

become inflexible and fail to respond to the real needs of the community. With 141 social service organizations, Ithaca and Tompkins County have no need for an increase in absolute numbers. V/hat is really needed is flexibility, communications, and community understanding by the existing organizations.

Certainly the very existence of 378 organizations, 141 of which are social service organizations, and the expenditure of almost $9,000,000, indicates that the county and city residents are not apathetic about their community and the services and opportunities it offers to its residents. These non-social service and social service organizations provide the city and county with a backlog of interes ted and experienced people to assist in the community's development programs.

TABLE 111.13: County, City, and United Fund Expenditures on Social Services

United County Percent City Percent Fund Percent Percent

Class Dollars of total Dollars of total Dollars of total Total of total

Health 6,242,138 79.4 3,010 1.9 161 ,292 17.7 6,406,460 71.6

Percent of total Health 97.4 .1 2.5 100.0

Family Counseling 1,560,841 19.8 5,700 2.9 250,174 27.6 1,816,715 20.4

Percent of total Family Counseling 85.9 .4 13.7 100.0

Group Work 50,929 .8 172,682 94.3 478,934 52.9 702,545 7.8

Percent of total Group Work 7.4 24.5 68.1 100.0

Elderly 0 .0 1,710 .9 14,170 1.8 15,880 .2

Percent of total Elderly 0 10.8 89.2 100.0

Total 7,853,928 100.0 183,102 100.0 904,570 100.0 8,941,600 100.0

Percent of total 87 .8 2.1 10.1 100.0

SOURCE: Social Planning Council Evaluation Committee Financial Report, February 5, 1969, p. 5.

57

WATER SUPPLY

W'ater supply is one of the most important factors in urban life. At the present time there are two water supply systems serving the Ithaca area: the Ithaca \Vater System and the Cornell University ·water System.

The City Water System

The Ithaca Water System currently serves an estimated population of 29,400. This system derives its supply from a reservoir on Six Mile Creek impounded by the Sixty Foot Dam. The dependable yield of this source is estimated to be five and two-fifths million gallons per day ( MGD). The city treatment plant has a present capacity of eight MGD and a potential capacity of ten MGD.

Water flows by gravity from the reservoir to the city h·eatment plant on \i\Tater Street where it is settled, filtered, and chlorinated. About half of the water processed flows from the treatment plant by gravity to serve the lower part of the city. The balance of the treated water is pumped by seven pumping stations to the higher areas on the hills to the west, south, and east of the city.

The service area of the present system includes the entire City of Ithaca, exclusive of Cornell University, and 25 water districts in outlying portions of the towns of Ithaca, Lansing, and Dryden including the community of Varna. All areas outside the city which are served by the City Water System are charged rate and a half for their water.

The Cornell University \iVater System

The Cornell Water System is owned and operated by the University. It serves the Cornell Campus (including the New York State College of Agriculture), and also supplies the small residential area of Forest Home (a community of about 90 water customers). The Cornell supply is drawn from Fall Creek and is processed in a rapid sand filtration plant. Fall Creek has a minimum seven-day flow of about three MGD; Cornell uses two and a quarter rviGD of the Fall Creek seven-clay flow. The University also maintains reservoirs with slightly more than a clay's supply. The Cornell water system is connected to the city system for use in emergencies .

Capabilities of Ithaca's Water System

The source of untreated water for the city system is Six Mile Creek, which has a watershed of approximately 40 square miles. There are times when the daily flow of water in Six Mile Creek is insufficient to meet the daily need of the city. The U.S. Geological Survey reports a ten-year minimum seven-day consecutive

average flow of four and three-tenths MGD and a minimum of two and eight-tenths MGD. 0

Extensive hydrology studies indicate that the city's present water source on Six Mile Creek cannot be depended upon to meet demands greater than the present demands. The present storage capacity is inadequate to meet the present level of use in a drought similar to that of 1964-65.

Storage and Distribution System

The city's distribution system consists of a network of serviceable cast iron water mains, seven pumping stations, and 17 storage tanks. As development occurs on the west side of \Vest Hill an additional vvater storage tank will have to be constructed. Because of the topographical differentiation in the

TABLE IV.1: Drawing Capacity of the Ithaca City Water Reservoir in 1970 and Projected for Daily Increases of .08, .16, and .25 Mil lion Gal lons

Daily Water Annua l Average Demand Peak Period Demand*

Consumption (days of safety) (days of safety)

in MGD****

Low Flow** Average Flow••• Low Flow•• Average Flow•••

5.50 100 255 90 180 5.58 97 210 87 170 5.66 94 198 85 162 5.75 91 186 83 154

*Maximum demand in the City is in the months of September and October.

**Ten year low flow is 2.8 MGD. ***Ten year average flow is 4.3 MDG.

* * **Figures assume that average per capita consumption wi ll re· main constant, while number of users increases.

TABLE IV.2: Water Treatment Plant Use and Capacity

Present Use Present Capacity Capacity with Maximum Expansion

of Existing Faci lities

5.5 MGD 8.0 MGD

10.0 MGD

Ithaca area, water must be pumped to the higher elevations where it is stored in tanks and distributed to individual consumers at the required pressure by gravity flow. The primary purpose of the storage tanks is to provide a uniform pressure as well as a water supply for fire fighting ( 1,000-4,000 gallons per minute) and other emergencies.

0 Minimum flow is the least amount of flow that is likely to occur within a gi\·en titne span.

61

TOMPKINS COUNTY scm

50000 toll ! &"d ~ud on /leo .. YOfk c:oo<d.n.o!e snt~ cer\111! ~~

10 000 me!ft &•od bJW<I on Un•n<,_.l h~1verse l..,rUIO< S11ttm. zor.e \8

NYS OECUJBE.R 1967 0"

MAP IV.l

LEGEND

D CITY WATER SYSTEM AREAS SERVICED

~ CITY SYSTEM ~WATERSHED

r=-1 CITY r:-1 CITY SYSTEM ~ WATER TREATMENT PLANT ~ STORAGE TANKS

I I

I

WATER TREATMENT PLANT SERVICE AREAS, 19)J

l 1

System Adequacy

Since renovation has increased the volume of water that can be processed by the Ithaca water treatment plant, the most limiting factor in the water supply system is the quantity of raw water available in Six Mile Creek. The question of the source of raw water is now being considered by the C ayuga Lake Basin Board and county and city officials. Three possible solutions have been proposed: Cayuga L ake, Fall Creek, and Six Mile Creek. Cayuga Lake provides a limitless source of treatable water ; however, pumping treated water over the hills to areas of the Town of Ithaca and beyond would be quite costly. A higher dam on Six Mile Creek would increase the available quantity of raw water but the treatment plant would require expansion and, due to villages on the banks of the creek upstream, the size of the reservoir is limited to 10,000 acre feet. The third alternative is construction of a dam on F all Creek. The probable sites are located on or near the Tompkins-Cortland County line. The preferred site would place the 10,000 to 15,000 acre foot reservoir in Cortland County.

None of the three alternatives have been selected by the groups involved-the Cayuga Lake Basin Board, the county government, and the city government. The implication of the Fall Creek and Cayuga Lake solutions is that the county government would assume the responsibility for both city and county water service and the service provided w ould be slightly more expensive than the present city service . In the case of the expansion of the city reservoir on Six Mile Creek, the responsibility for adminish·ation and extension of service is less clear.

Proposals 1. To meet city needs for the n ext ten years, the

city will have to expand its supply of raw water.

2. A fur ther solution to the water supply problem should be sought by the city in concert with the county and Cayuga Lake Basin Board.

SEWAGE COLLECTION, TREATMENT, AND DISPOSAL

The entire City of Ithaca is served by a sanitary sewer system discharging to a water pollution control plant located at First and Franklin Streets. All sewage in the city system is given primary and secondary treatment, and all storm water is handled by a separate system of storm sewers.

Construction of the city water pollution control sys tem began in 1895. The system has been modified and expanded until it p resently includes:

( 1 ) gravity systems serving East, South, and West Hills, and a large portion of the central city business and residential area;

( 2) pumping systems serving much of the flatlands along Cayuga Inlet and the Renwick Heights area;

( 3 ) siphons carrying sewage across Cayuga I nlet and Fall Creek; and

( 4) a water pollution control plant.

The collection system is divided into a number of subsystems of sewer service areas, each served by a trunk or intercepting sewer and, in some cases, a pumping station.

Since 1964 the cost of treating sewage has increased by 47 percent. The city's annual daily flow, however, has increased b y 51 percent, indicating that the cost of treatment p er gallon has not changed significan tly in the pas t five years.

TABLE IV.3: Description of the Cost of Treating Water and Water Quantities by Absolute Numbers and Percent Change 1964 to 1968

Cost of Treating Water Water Quantities

Total Average Expenditures Cost Per Average Total Daily Con-at Filtration Total Water Million Daily Population sumption Plant Filtered Gallons Flow Served* Per Capita

Percent Million Percent Percent Million Percent Percent Percent Year $ Change Gallons Change $ Change Gallons Change Number Change Gallons Change

1964 58,570 1,519.9 38.54 4,145.0 28,196 121.9 1965 64,266 + 9.7 1,528.6 +0.6 42.04 + 9.0 4,183.3 +9. 2 28,512 +1.1 121.3 + 0. 5 1966 73,178 +13.9 1,679.0 +9.8 43.56 + 3.6 4,580.0 +9.5 29,086 +2.0 129.1 +2.3 1967 98,655 +34.8 1.711.0 + 1.9 57.66 + 24.5 4,686.7 +2.3 29.244 + 0.5 135.8 +5. 1 1968 104,867 + 6.3 1,872.3 +9.4 66.01 + 14.5 5,114.2 +9.1 29,392 +0.5 148.2 + 9.1

*As of January 1 the following year.

SOURCE: Board of Public Works, Annual Reports 1964-1968.

63

TOMPKINS COUNTY

I '• 0

500CIOiooll•o:lt>I~CIO'IIIe-owYO<kwordoruU..-1 \1B"nUnlr,J,Il~

IOOOOmettr pdbnedon Un;.~rw-1 Tr;on~,"~t.'~•utOt S,s•rm lont18

HTS O{CO.'BER 1967 OI'C

MAP IV.2

LEGEND

D CITY SEWERAGE SYSTEM -AREAS SERVICED

~CITY L....:::_j SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT

~ CORNELL UNIVERSITY- MAINTAINED ~SUBSYSTEM

SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT SERVICE AREAS, 19~ J

( '

Plant Capacity

The capacity of the sewer system is determined by the least capacity of any of the separate elements of the total system. In the sewer system there are two major elements-the treatment plant and the collection mains.

The treatment plant capacity is 11.5 million gallons per day. The plant can actually handle 15 MGD for short periods of time; but for a 24 hour period the plant's limit is 11.5 MGD.

The absolute capacity of the collection system is difficult to determine. Given certain pipe sizes and known slopes of delivery, rough estimates may be made of the capacity of the mains. The effect of peculiar characteristics of terrain and ground water and storm sewer infiltration through leaks in the sanitary sewer system (particularly in the older pipes) on the carrying capacity of the pipes is hard to measure. Generally, however, the capacity of the sewer system has been placed at ll.5 MGD, which is the capacity of the treatment plant.

The committed service area for the sewer system is considerably smaller than the committed service area of the water system. In only a few places does the sewer service area for the city extend beyond the city limits.

Adequacy of the Sewer System

Given the relative stability of the population in Ithaca, the present sewer system and treatment plant should be adequate to meet the city's needs for the next 25 years . It goes without saying that the continual improvement and updating of the present facilities must continue.

It should be noted here that the increasing awareness of the need to control pollution of Cayuga Lake and its tributary streams should be a stimulus for continuing to follow and even exceed the guidelines established by the New York State Pure Water Authority.

In 1966, A Comprehensive Sewerage Study of Tompkins County was undertaken by O'Brien and Cere Engineering Consultants. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the sewage collection and water pollution control requirements for the county for the next 50 years. The study placed the city within one sewage district, except for Cornell University which has its own sewage collection system. (The University sewage is treated by the city plant.)

Two proposals for the solution of the city's future treatment problems have been suggested. One solution is that the towns form sewage districts which would construct collection facilities and contract with the city for the sewage treatment. The second solution is identical to the first but proposes the formation of a county sanitary district. This district would purchase the existing major city treatment facilities and upgrade them with the increased demand for treatment in the city and adjacent areas. The difference in cost between the two alternatives was so slight as to be within the margin of error of the estimate. Rates in the city should average from $19 to $24 per household per year and $45 to $59 per household in the town districts serviced by the city. The study strongly recommends that extension of the treatment facilities be staged to keep pace with the actual growth rate in the area.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL Throughout the City of Ithaca, refuse is collected

at least once a week. Two collections a week are made in the downtown business district and in Collegetown.

Disposal of the collections is made at the city's land fill located just south of Clinton Sh·eet between the railroad and the Relief Channel. The land fill site is leased by the city. The Board of Public ·works estimates that the present site will be exhausted by the end of 1970. Adjacent to the land fill site the city owns the Southwest Park which, because of its low elevation, is also available for a sanitary fill. This area will be exhausted by 1972.

TABLE IV 4· Cost of Sewage Treatment Plant Operations for the City of Ithaca, 1964 to 1968 ..

Sewage Average Cost Per Treatment Annual Average Daily Flow Million

and Disposal Costs Flow Daily Total Per Capita Gallons Flow Population

Percent 1,000,000 Percent (1000 Served Percent Percent Year Dollars Change Gallons Change Gallons) Gallons Change Dollars Change

1964 73,262 1,343.6 3,858.7 32,500 118.7 54.53 1965 71,317 -2.6 1,658.3 23.4 4,552.9 32,600 109.0 -8.2 43.01 -21.1 1966 79,781 11.9 1,635.9 -1.4 4,490.1 32,600 137.7 26.3 48.77 13.4 1967 98,568 23.5 1,827.9 11.7 5,013.9 32,600 153.8 11.7 53.92 10.6 1968 110,106 11.7 2,034.9 11.3 5,567.4 32,600 170.8 11.0 54.11 0.4

SOURCE: Annual Report of the Sewer Division, Board of Public Works, City of Ithaca, 1964·1968.

65

With the limit of the city's land fill site fast being reached and the increasing pressures from the state for the city to conform to new and more stringent sanitary land fill standards, the City of Ithaca must look for a new dumping site. In its search, the city has joined forces with the county.

The present countywide Refuse Disposal Plan under study includes two primary dumping sites, two secondary dumping sites in the county and a transfer site within the City of Ithaca. The possibility of eliminating the two secondary sites and increasing the size of the city's transfer site to accommodate the added volume is also under study.

The two primary sites are both a considerable distance from the city. This distance necessitates the transfer site. One primary site will be in the general area bounded by Routes 13, 38, and 34, 11 miles from the city. The exact site has yet to be determined. The second primary site will be located in Tioga County just over the Tompkins-Tioga County line off Route 96. This site is 13 miles from the city. These two primary sites would be open six days a week. The two proposed secondary sites, one in the vicinity of Enfield and the other in the Caroline area, would be open two days a week.

The proposed transfer site is sugges ted to keep collection rates low. Packer trucks would dump their refuse at the transfer dump where it would daily be loaded onto trailers and hauled to one of the primary sites. This transfer process would eliminate the long run to the primary site for the packer trucks. The city would operate the transfer site and it would b e open six days a week. One suggested location for such a transfer site is the present city land fill area between Meadow Street and the flood control channel.

Should the city and Enfield and Caroline all agree to use the transfer site-primary site alternative rather than building two secondary sites, the county would assist the city with the cost of operating and maintaining the transfer site.

The estimated cost of creating and maintaining the four sites proposed in the Refuse Disposal Plan is $450,000 the first year and $140,000 each succeeding year. The annual operating cost of the transfer site is estimated at $33,000.

The present plan would provide county residents with a total of 400 acres for land fill purposes, sufficient to meet their refuse disposal needs for the next 20 years . It is estimated that the proposed refuse disposal plan will cost each resident of the county $1.75 a year.

None of the governing bodies involved, the city, villages, towns, and county, have come to any decision on the refuse plan. The pressure to meet state sanitary requirements and the short life expec-

66

tancy of the city's site make decisive action on the plan or some modification of the plan imperative.

Proposals

1. The city should support and cooperate with the county in providing sites and facilities for solid waste disposal.

NATURAL GAS

The entire City of Ithaca is serviced or serviceable with natural gas. In 1969, there were 7,013 gas customers in the city. The New York State Electric and Gas Corporation does not anticipate any sizeable increase in gas service within the city in the next decade because the market area within the city is saturated.

Distribution

The Consolidated Gas Supply Corporation is the major supplier of natural gas to the Electric and Gas Company. The Consolidated Gas Supply Company pipes gas from as far away as Texas and keeps reserve supplies in depleted gas beds in Pennsylvania and New York. The City of Ithaca is serviced by a double gas line, with substations on Slaterville Road beyond the city limits and on Spencer Road at Albany Street. Either one of these stations alone can handle the present gas service for the city. However, the Electric and Gas Corporation is working toward a certification of the Slaterville Road line which would permit doubling the existing pressure. Also scheduled during 1970 is the replacement and enlargement of the line serving the Spencer Road regulator station. This line taps the main Consolidated Gas line near the Ithaca-Danby town line just off Route 96.

The city gas distribution system connects to both stations . A network of medium pressure lines carry gas throughout the city to the low pressure lines which service the bulk of the residential area. The city's gas distribution system is controlled by 24 underground pressure regulators . The major industrial gas users in the city, or adjacent to it, are: Morse Chain, Therm Electric, National Cash Register Company, Ithaca Gun, and Cornell University.

Since the provision of the double line feed from the Slaterville Road and Albany Street stations to the city in 1955, Ithaca has been well-served with natural gas. The present consumer market within the city is almost saturated, according to the Elech·ic and Gas Corporation. Therefore, additional demand will come primarily from new single family residences, new industry, or a shift in types of fuels used b y existing industry. In any of these cases, by laying new lines or upgrading existing lines, the Electric and Gas Corporation will be able to meet local needs for the next 20 years.

J TOMPKINS COUNTY I ·~ 0

SCAlE

I '• 0 I 2 J 4 5 Ktt0'.'£1£R5

50 000 ADo! £•od NH\1 en Plr. Ytwlt tOOtcbutt srsttm ce..tr.tl zon.

IOOOO"""k' llod tws..:l on Ufl .. ~l.ll l t.AnJ•••~ Metulo:)l S;IIHn..z- 18

HYS O(([!,H!£R 1967 O~C

MAP IV.3

LEGEND

' f--j SERVICE AREA BOUNDARY

rnJ REFUSE DISPOSAL SITE

I @ I PROPOSED SITE

PROPOSED COUNTY.WIDE REFUSE DISPOSAL SITES

ELECTRICITY

In 1969 the 8,400 electric customers in the City of Ithaca were serviced from four substations-one each on East Hill, South Hill, \i\1 est Hill, and the "Flats." Only the Fourth Street substation on the Flats serves Ithaca exclusively. Each of the other stations serves the hill and adjacent areas beyond the city limits. Like the natural gas service, all housing units and industries in the city can be serviced with electricity.

Source of Electricity

New York State E lectric and Gas Corporation generating plants are backed up by interconnections with power systems in the northeast, including generating stations and consumers in the New England states, New York, and the Province of Ontario, Canada.

All of the city-serving substations except East Hill are serviced with 23 kv lines. The East Hill substation is served by two 115 kv lines. Cornell University is serviced from this substation.

VVithin the next decade the Electric and Gas Corporation will build a new substation betvveen the Cayuga Inlet and Route 13 at Fourth Street Extended. A 115 kv line will service this new substation, increasing the amount of electricity available to downtown Ithaca. From 1955 to 1969 the average customer's electric consumption in Ithaca increased from 4,000 to 6,000 kilowatt hours annually. The Electric and Gas Corporation anticipates that the average customer's electric consumption will continue to increase at the same rate as the national trend. This would establish an annual consumption of 9,900 kilowatt hours by the year 1980. The construction of the new Fourth Street substation will cover the potential residential and industrial demands for electricity in the city until at least 1985.

STREET LIGHTING

Many variables, both economic and esthetic, affect roadway lighting. Key among these variables are the light source, type of fixture, traffic information and traffic safety. The City of Ithaca has accepted the standards established by the Society of Illuminating Engineers.

City Lighting Plan

In 1966 an evaluation of the City of Ithaca's street lighting was completed by the Board of Public Works. The major thrust of the study was that the lighting provided by the city was inadequate and should be upgraded to meet the minimum standards of the Society of Illuminating Engineers. Pursuant to meet-

58

ing the society's standards all the roadways within the city were classified according to the criteria of the Society. :Map IV.4 shows the classification of all the roadways within the city for lighting purposes. After classifying the roadways, the city was divided into five priority areas. Priority area one was upgraded in 1967, the first year of planned development. The city is presently proceeding on the third of the five areas. When completely upgraded the new street lighting system will cost the city $110,000 to $117,000 a year.

To date the City of Ithaca has been buying light, not electricity, from the New York State Electric and Gas Company. The purchase of light includes the fixtures, maintenance, and the electricity. Presently mercury vapor lights, as recommended in the Lighting Plan, are being installed. Lighting in city-owned parking lots is included in the same Electric and Gas Company agreement.

The city owns some two dozen ornamental poles in the city. The bulk of these poles are located in city parks. In addition, the city owns the light fixtures on Route 13, a state arterial. The poles on Route 13 are maintained by the city.

TABLE IV.5: Recommended Lighting for Major, Collector and Local Streets within Downtown, Intermediate, and Outlying Areas

Roadway Area Classification

Class ification Outlying Downtown Intermediate and Rural

Major 2.0f.c. 1.2f.c. 0.9f.c. Collector 1.2f.c. 0.9f.c. 0.6f.c. Local or

Minor 0.9f.c. 0.6f.c. 0.2 '~*f.c.

*The average horizontal footcandles recommended represent average illumination on the roadway pavement when the illuminati ng source is at its lowest output and when the luminaire is in its dirtiest condition.

* * Residentia I.

SOURCE: American Standards Association, American Standard Practice for Roadway Lighting (New York: Illuminating Engineering Society, 1964 ), p. 11.

No expansion of the street lighting system is anticipated unless there is a shift in uses within the city, such as an expansion of the Central Business District. The Ithaca Common Council has directed its Charter and Ordinance Committee to draw up an ordinance which would place the wires for all new areas and for areas scheduled for replacement throughout the city underground. Such an action would conh·ibute greatly to the appearance of the city in the future.

r

(

~

CITY OF ~ ITHACA -~ .. _.,_ NEW YORK CITY PLANNING BOARD · JUNE, 1970 1 ,.,~· ,_,~·

I

~

Presently underground w1rmg is scheduled for the urban renewal area and for new development in the Central Business District. The development of Cass Park, partially financed by state and federal funds, also includes underground wiring. The Common Council's action would further extend underground wiring in keeping with the recreational orientation of Ithaca.

Proposals

1. The City Street Lighting Plan should be completed and continually reviewed and upgraded.

2. \iVithin the next 10 years the city should purchase the lighting infrastructure. All provision of street lighting in areas of the city not presently serviced should be undertaken by the city government.

3. To enhance the appearance of the city, and to facilitate maintenance of city streets, all street lighting lines, along with other utility lines, should be placed underground.

PARKS AND OPEN SPACE

The City of Ithaca is located on Lake Cayuga in the heart of the Finger Lakes Region of New York State. Thousands of visitors come to see the rugged gorges and wooded hills in this lake's area annually. Surrounded by this natural beauty, the city should work to make it more accessible to its residents and better known to its visitors .

Today 13 percent of the city's land is employed in parks or open space. Ninety percent of this land is, however, located in two neighborhoods, Inlet Valley-Elmira Road and Cayuga Inlet. The remaining ten percent of city-owned open space is scattered through eight of the remaining neighborhoods. This means that, to date, two of the city's 12 neighborhoods contain no city-owned park or open space land.

The 1968 Recreation Plan suggests the addition of 165 acres of park land and open space to the city's 1968 holdings. The study's proposals for the provision of additional open space and park land focuses particularly on the neighborhoods without parks and open space and on the most densely settled areas of the city.

The objectives of the Recreation Plan are five-fold:

1. To encourage the location of recreation and openspace facilities to preserve the unique natural features in the city.

:2. To distribute open space and park facilities throughout the city according to the density of population and accessibility of the site.

3. To locate open space and park facilities so that they will be available to the residents of developing neighborhoods as well as in the developed areas of the city.

70

4. To make the most efficient use of existing school and park area recreation facilities.

5. To encourage and involve local citizens in park development and improvement.

The final recommendation is seen as a key one in the development of Ithaca as a tourist and vacation center.

The Recreation Plan proposes ten types of parks and open spaces, ranging in size from a tenth of an acre to 100 acres or more. The Recreation Plan standards were based on the standards of the National Recreation Association but adjusted to fit the size, diversity and physical characteristics of Ithaca.

Community Parks - Community parks are designed to serve not only local residents, but visitors as well. These parks should contain 50 to 100 acres and should have sports fields, hard surface courts, open grass game areas, picnic areas, and rest rooms. Four of Ithaca's 52 parks are classified as community parks. These parks range in size from one and six-tenths acres in historic De Witt Park to 177 acres in the developing National Arts and Recreation Center.

Neighborhood Parks-These parks provide open space and play area three-tenths of an acre to two acres for all children, including pre-schoolers. Neighborhood parks are designed to service all residents to a maximum of 3,000 within a quarter mile radius. Thirteen of the existing or proposed parks and open spaces in the Recreation Plan are classified as neighborhood parks.

Neighborhood Commons-A commons, smaller than a neighborhood park, is designed to serve residents on a single block or within no more than a four block radius. Such a commons, no more than half an acre, could be a vacant lot, interior parcel, or a seldom-used street or alley. Five neighborhood commons have been identified in the Recreation Plan.

School Playgrounds-School playgrounds provide active play space, hard and grass surfaces, and play apparatus. Such playgrounds, attached to schools, should be three to seven acres and serve the area within a quarter mile radius. Each elementary school, one junior high school and the high school have such play areas.

Waterways-vVaterways are a special natural resource which should be used in a variety of ways. The development of these areas for boating, fishing, swimming, or picnicking may be city or neighborhood oriented. The size of the recreation areas is dependent upon topographical and drainage patterns .

Focal Points-These have been defined by the Recreation Plan as noticeable visual relief in the landscape or historically significant physical features. The development of such areas may include a sitting area or special landscaping treatment. Nine focal points have been identified within the city.

r

\ '

I ,

Connections-Connections provide a physical or visual link between recreation facilities. The Recreation Plan proposes creating ten connections. These connections developed by walk-ways and/or bicycle trails will increase the accessibility of many of the city parks.

Indoor Facilities-Indoor facilities for programs, meetings, and indoor games are provided at 15 of the city's 57 recreation areas. There is at least one of these indoor facilities in all but two neighborhoods. Such facilities are particularly important to recreation during the long winter.

Special Facility-Special facilities provide an unusual recreation opportunity, something which might not be expected in a city's normal recreation system. The Recreation Plan identifies 16 special facilities within the city, a few of which are yet to be developed. The facilities range from a community center to the zoo.

Undeveloped Open Space-The Recreation Plan recommends that five acres within the city be held, in a natural state, to act as transitions between the urban center and the surrounding countryside.

Table 1V.7 lists the 57 recommended and existing parks and open spaces in the city and their functions. It is important to note that a few areas serve only one function. By using the code number or letter, all of the parks and open spaces may be located on Map IV.5.

The proposals of the Recreation Plan, as Table IV.8 indicates, will provide the city with 19.4 acres of park and open space land per 1,000 residents. The largest amount of acreage per thousand is provided in the Cayuga Inlet Neighborhood, the site of the future regional National Arts and Recreation Center. The neighborhood with the least amount of city-owned park land is Neighborhood 2, University. While the city owns little park land in this neighborhood, a great deal of open space, playfields, and recreation area has

TABLE IV.6: Recreation Area Standards as Set by the 1968 Recreation Plan, City of Ithaca

Type of Recreation Service Area Area Size and Population Development Location

Community Parks 35-100 ac. 15 min. by car; Sports fields, hard-suriaced courts, open grass areas, Should be adjacent to other special 20,000-30,000 people picnic areas, rest rooms facilities, i.e. nature preserves, etc.

Neighborhood Parks .3-2 ac. '!. mile radius; Area for modified field games, quiet sitting area, Centrally located within neighborhood-up to 3,000 people pre-school play area may be developed in conjunction with an

elementary school

Neighborhood Commons .1- .5 ac. 1-4 block radius; Flexible; each unique, the development should be Anywhere within a residential block-up to 1,000 people based on the individual needs of the neighborhood a vacant lot, interior parcel or seldom-

used street or alley

School Playground 3-lac. '!. mile radius; Apparatus area, hard and grass suriaces Adjacent to elementary schooll 3,000-5,000 people

Waterways Varies Varies; waterways are Flexible ; pedestrian ways, bicycle paths or streets which Depends upon topographical and within walking distance of all homes in city; provide public access to the water. drainage patterns

entire city, sometimes neighborhood -oriented

Focal Points Varies Varies; entire city or None ; sitting areas or special landscaping treatment Varies neighborhood-oriented may be developed

Connections Varies Varies; entire city or Pedestrian ways, bridle paths, bicycle paths Dependent on natural features neighborhood -oriented

Indoor Facilities Governed Within walking dis- Provision of wide variety of activities to be carried Centrally located within a neighborhood, by type lance of all homes in on simultaneously, including basketball, arts and crafts, if possible, in conjunction with a school of neighborhood; approx- swimming, ping pong, billiards, games and meetings service imately '!. mile radius;

3,000-5,000 people

Special Facility Varies Varies ; neighborhood Flexible; may be an outdoor facility such as a In conjunction with a community park, or entire region marina or zoo, or an indoor facility such as the if possible

Festival Theater

Undeveloped Varies Dependent on None; occasional brush removal Varies Open Space natural features ;

entire city

SOURCE: Recreation and Open Space Plan, City of Ithaca, October 1968, p. 14·21.

71

r ·---------~----------::.1-----:----

11 II

TABLE IV.7: Recommended and Existing City Parks and Open Spaces by Fu nction

Cayuga Lake Shore Park (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Newman Municipal Golf Course &

Biological Field Station (2) .. . ....... . ..... Proposed Pier Road Parking Facility (3) ..... ... Fuertes Bird Sanctuary (4) ........ . ......... Stewart Park (5 and 6) ..... . . . ............

BPW Material Storage Yard (7) .. ... ... ... .. . CYO Property-City Nursery (8) . . .. . . . . . . . . ... Inlet Shore Connection (9) . .. . . .. . . . . . . . .... Taughannock Blvd. Park ( 10) ...... . .. ... .. . Brindley Park (11) ........ .. . . ... . . . .. .. . .

Floral Avenue Connection (12) ......... ...... Proposed Parks-West Hill (13) ... . . . ..... .... MacDaniels Park (14) . . . ... . .... . ... . .... . West Hill School Playground (15) . ......... .. . Southwest Park (16) ... . ..... .. . . ... . .. ...

Buttermilk Falls Connection (17) . . . ... . .. . ... Buttermilk Fal ls State Park (18) ..... . . . . ... . . Baker Park (19) .... . ... .. ........ . .. . .... Wood Street Park (20) ....... . . . ........... Six Mile Creek Connection (21) . . . ... . .. . ....

Fair Street Park (22) ......... . ...... .. .... Henry St. John School Playground (23) .... .. .. Proposed Neighborhood Commons (24 & 25) ... . Clinton Street Open Space (26) .......... . ... Washington Park (27) ...... ... . .. . . .... . ..

Central School Playground (28) . ... .. .. . ... . . Conway Park (29) . .. .. . . .. . . .... .. . .. . ... Thompson Park (30) .. . ...... .. . .... . . .... Auburn Park (31) .... .. . ..... . . . . ........ Ithaca High School Athletic Area (32) .. .. . . .. ..

Fa ll Creek Connection (33) •••• 0 ••••••• •• •••

Fa ll Creek Park (34) . .. . ..... .. . . . . ...... . Wil lard Way Park (35) .. . ............. . . . .. Lake Street Park (36) ....... . . .. . . .. .. . ... Fall Creek School Playground (37) .... . ... .. . .

Linn Street Commons (38) . . ....... . ... . ... c c

ascadilla Creek Connection (39) . . . . . .... . .. . ascadilla Avenue Walkway (40) . . . . . . . . . . . . .

DeWitt Park (41) ...... . .. . ........ . ..... . DeWitt Junior High School (42) . . . . . .........

East Hill School Playground (43) ......... . ... South Hill School Playground (44) . ... .. . .. ... Lower Six Mile Park (45) ..... . . . . . .... . .. . . v s

an Natta Dam-Six Mile Creek Park (46) ....... ix Mile Creek Watershed (47) ...... . .. . .... .

'0 '0 0 0 "' "' ~ 0 0 '0 "' c ·;: .<:: .<::v> c >. 0 ~ c :J "'

·c; :J 0 0 oe ~ (l_

E"' .D ;gE .J:::V) oOD ~ (ij E-t -~~ .<;!!IE .<::>.

"' " oro "'"' ., 0 u.!'l 0 (.)<l. Z <l. Z<..> UJ<l. :;: ...._

X X

X

X X

X

X X X X X

X X X

X X

X X

X

X X

X

X

X X X X X X

X

X X

X X

X

X X

X X X X

X X

X X X

X

(Continued on next page)

"' ~~ c 0 .Q~ ~ "' "' o:E

_., ~Ul ro~

c ·o~ <l>C c o== 'OQ>

'0" "'" 0 c"' c.ro ca. <..> _...._ Ul"- ::lO

X X

X X X X X

X X

X X

X

X

X X

X

X X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X X

X X

X X

X X

X

73

TABLE IV.7: Recommended and Existing City Parks and Open Spaces by Function (Continued) "0 "0 0 0 en

~ en ~~ ;?;- 0 0 "0 en c -E .r::.en c c ·c: ~c >- .Q a.ro

:::> 0 Co :::> ro ·a ~

en en .2a. Een

.0 ~E _o

~ Q_ ~ ·~ - <l.l ~ en .r::.en 0 ~ ro:.;:::; E'C .~-c ~~

ollll ~ Iii c o:~ ·u:: <l.lC .r::. >- o== oro "'"' u .!11 ro u c -ou <l.lu "O Q)

0 0 a.ro ca. (.)Q_ za. ZU en a. ~ u. (.) c"' enu. ::JO _u_

Belle Sherman Park (48) . X X Belle Sherman School Playground (49). . . . . X X Bryant Park (50). . . . . . . X X Maplewood Park (51) . . . . . . . . . X Beebe Lake (52) . . . . X X X

Northside House (A) . . . . ... . . X X Southside House (B) ... . . . . X X YMCA (C) . . . . X X Tompkins County Library (D) . . . . . X X X Senior Citizens Center (E) . X X

SOURCE: Recreation and Open Space Plan, City of Ithaca, October 1968, p. 22.

TABLE IV.8: Description of Actual and Proposed Park Land and Open Space by Neighborhood, Function of Park, and Population in Ithaca, 1969

"0 "0

.~ 0 Den en en en 0 oc "0 en c c

.r::.en -Eo -C >- 0 cen ~-" 0 :::> ro ·a :e ~~ _ en "'-" o ~ OE co ~ Q_ ·~:E E ~ .Oro ~E Q) g~ ~a_

.r::.~

E~ Ullll ~ Iii c ODO en >- c "0 ·- 2i'5 0 'iii ·o;u ro ro u cu 0 8 -"' en "' (.) z z a: ~ u. u. u.

Cornell Heights - - - - 2 6 1 - 1

(1) University - 2* - - 3 11 2 - 1

(2) Belle

Sherman 1 2 1 1 2 3 3 1 -(3}

College· town - - - 1 2 3 2 1 -

(4) Fall Creek - 3* 2* 2 3 3 1 2 -

(5) North

Central - 2 - 1 - 2 - 2 -(6)

Central 1 1 - 1 1 3 1 4 4 (7)

South Hill 1 1 - 2 2 2 1 1 -(8)

South Central - 3 2 * - 1 3 1 1 1

(9) Inlet Valley-

Elmira Rd. 1* - - - - - 1 - -(10)

West Hill - 4* 1* 1 1 2 2* 1 -(11)

Cayuga Inlet 4 - - - 6 4 - 3 7*

(1 2) TOTAL 8*' 18* 1 6* 9 23 1 29 1 15*' 16 14*

* Includes proposed parks 'Discrepancy in total due to double-counting 2Waterways, focal points, and connections not included in total

SOURCE: Recreation and Open Space Plan , City of Ithaca, October 1968.

74

enN -oen c .~

og~ "OQ) 0 00~ ~~~ oc "'u Z ~LL c 8.9 a.., ~enro 0 ca. roCL5 ~~br ·-Qien o:P ~.,

,§ v; .g ~-3 , _

a;~ -"' en=> roO.. c -c.E 0- 8. ~a. Q.>O.

"Oa. ~o

:So ~oil ~ .:iQ_ t-oo

2 2 13 .5 2,641 5.1

3 4 5.3 3,880 1.4

4 7 22.4 3,228 6.9

2 4 23.9 3,491 6.8

1 9 3.9 3,549 1.1

- 6 2.5 3,106 0.8

- 11 2.1 2,191 1.0

2 5 3.0 2,053 1.5

1 8 6 .8 2,690 2.5

3* 3 67.0 456 146.9

- 8 12. 1 1,492 8.1

4 11 397 .2 22 18,054.0

22*' 59 1 559.7 28,799 19.4

[ '

f

been, and will continue to be, held on the campus. Considering this, there is really no shortage of open space and park land in the University Neighborhood. Of all the residential neighborhoods in the city, the densely developed North Central Neighborhood has the least recreation area, eight-tenths of an acre per thousand. As Table IV.8 indicates, however, under the recommendations of the Recreation Plan each neighborhood has at least a minimum amount of open space and park land, three-tenths of an acre.

A further recommendation of the Recreation Plan was for the city to make the regional state parks adjacent to the city more accessible to city residents, particularly those residents in neighborhoods with few parks. In order to do this, the city would have to provide mass transit to the local parks. Table IV.9 lists the three adjacent parks, their size, facilities, and the extent of their use in the 1968 season. As the table indicates, at least two of these regional state parks, Buttermilk Falls and Robert H. Treman, are within six miles of the city, easy bus distance.

In addition to proposing an additional 165 acres of park and open space land, the Recreation Plan has evaluated every neighborhood and provided for as much additional open space and park land as the present development of the area permits. As Table IV.8 indicates, on completion of the plan the city will have 19.4 acres park land per 1,000 residents. The proposals of the Recreation Plan, therefore, gives the city a long-range plan for providing adequate recreation and open space for its residents. Implementation of this plan will greatly enhance the city's environment both to its residents and visitors.

Proposals

1. The city should strive to implement the 1968 Recreation Plan.

2. The city should undertake a program to make the regional parks adjacent to the city more accessible to city residents.

TABLE IV.9: Description of the Regional State Parks Adjacent to Ithaca by Distance, Size, Facilities and Population Served in 1968.

Distance Size in Number of Number of Number of

Regional Parks from City Picnic Population Special Facilities in Miles Acres Camp Sites Cabins Tables Served 1968

Swimming, hiking trails, Buttermilk Falls 3 675 60 7 161 14,029 recreation building, picni c State Park shelter

Fishing, swimming, hikin g Robert H. Treman 5 1020 137 14 351 140,031 trails, playground State Park equipment

Swimming, boat launch Taughannock Falls 10 793 84 16 551 214,550 ing ramp, 65-boat ma State Park rina, playfields

SOURCE: Finger Lakes State Parks Commission, 1969.

75

NATIONAL ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER

The Center, as the National Arts and Recreation Center at Ithaca has come to be known locally, is truly a community project. From the conception of the idea through its execution local citizens have spearheaded the drive for the new facility. After its completion, the Center will provide local residents with a base for a recreation industry, and with facilities for civic and community programs during the winter months.

The major elements of the Center will be: a 450-boat marina and boat launching area to be constructed by the State of New York; a golf course and park area already existing and owned by the City of Ithaca; a new 81-acre recreation complex to be constructed by the city; a federally constructed flood control channel which will serve as a boating and fishing stream and as an intercollegiate crew course; and a repertory theater, concert hall, museum-art gallery and a children's center to be built by a private organization known as the Center for the Arts, Inc.

Jointly the city and state governments will make the Cass Park and old municipal airport sites available for cultural and recreational development. The state will acquire 52 acres from the city and will develop 30 acres reclaimed by hydraulic fill at the north end of the area for a State Marine Park including a 450-berth marina. The Center for the Arts Inc., will lease 14 acres of land from the city for it; site overlooking the marina. On the southern portion of the park area, the city will build an extensive recreation area. All of the development will be coordinated in order to provide year-round recreational opportunities.

Center for the Arts

Four performing arts facilities will be provided by the Center for the Arts, Inc.: a Festival Theater, a Concert Hall, Museum and Art Gallery, and a Children's Center. These facilities will be developed in stages beginning with the Festival Theater.

The Festival Theater building will include more than 80,000 square feet of space. The building will include costume and scenery shops, dressing rooms, administrative offices, seminar rooms, a small auditorium seating 250, and the main auditorium seating 1,700. The total cost of the theater development will be $5,840,000.

Based on estimated figures the Festival Theater could make $1,272,840 from ticket sales and winter season use if it operated at 80 percent of capacity during the theater season. Spending an estimated $1,218,114 for salaries, operating expenses, debt service, and land, the theater should have a net profit of $54,726 or more per year.

The Festival Theater, by providing the highest quality theater experience during the summer season, will help to further Ithaca's reputation as a summer vacation spot. In addition, however, the theater will fulfill a much-needed community function, by providing a facility for community cultural and civic events during the winter season. Special community activities such as concerts, guest performers, and ballets will make Ithaca a more attractive community for potential residents.

While space has been allocated on the Master Site Plan for the Concert Hall, Museum, Art Gallery, and Children's Center, plans for the development of these facilities are pending the completion and operation of the Festival Theater.

The Marina

The Finger Lakes State Park Commission is responsible for the planning, construction, maintenance, and operation of the proposed State Marine Park. The new marina facility will initially provide 350 berths; ultimately 100 berths will be added. Berthing will be available for boats up to 50 feet in length. Slip rentals may be on an hourly, daily, or seasonal basis. A portion of the berthing capacity (50 to 70 berths depending upon demand) will be kept available for transient boaters . Facilities will include auto parking, electricity, water, a sewage disposal station, refuse collection, rest rooms with showers, and supervision, including night watchman service. Regular vehicular use charges will be collected for the boat launching ramp and parking area. A concessioner will provide gas, oil, and other services. It is estimated that the new marina will accommodate 100 to 325 yachtmen daily.

The construction cost estimate for the marina is $2,835,200. The facility will be built in three stages. The costs of goods and services necessary to sustain the marina's annual operation and maintenance have been estimated at $48,150. The estimate does not, of course, include debt service, construction costs, or land costs. Annual revenues are expected to exceed expenses by anywhere from $16,000 to $35,000. This surplus will help defray initial costs and building expenses.

City Park Facilities

The City of Ithaca has purchased 81 acres of land, adjacent to the state land, to be developed for picnic and year-round recreation uses. The facilities will include: an olympic size swimming pool with adjacent sun deck and 1,200 locker bathhouse; 13 baseball and softball diamonds; 4 tennis courts; an ice rink which will make use of the bathhouse lockers and dressing rooms in the winter months; lighting;

79

1-z w ~

1 ' \

Q.

0 ...... w I

~

> w c

' I I ~

I ' I ~

I <( I

Q.

1-w ...... z -c w

"' ... 0 ::> Q. \ a. 0 ~ ~ ~ Q.

( '

\ )

parking; storm drainage; sewer service; picnic areas; and undeveloped open play areas for touch football and other games. A ribbon of the park land with walkways will flank the flood control channel on the floodway levee for those interested in less strenuous exercise.

All of the city picnic and playfield facilities will be available free of charge for use by residents and non-residents alike. A small charge will be levied for the use of the swimming pool and ice rink in order to meet their operation and maintenance costs.

The development of these city park lands is being jointly funded by the Appalachia Commission, Federal Bureau of Outdoor Recreation, and the City of Ithaca. The $1,600,000 project will be built in three stages. The first stage, already completed, was the acquisition of the land for $500,000. Construction of the second stage, including the swimming pool, bathhouse, band shell, playfields, picnic area, roadways, sewers, walkways, and landscaping, was scheduled to begin in the summer of 1970. The cost of Stage 2 is $650,000; half of this $650,000 will come from the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

It is anticipated that Stage 3 of the city park project will be completed in 1971. This stage will include the ice rink, further landscaping, additional parking, walkways, roadways, lighting, picnic areas, and a playground. Stage 3 of the project will cost $450,000. These costs will be born equally by the city and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation.

Community Impact

A review of the employment figures for the City of Ithaca indicates that the city's economy has become increasingly dependent upon higher education as the major local employer. Higher education, however, is a growth industry and provides Ithaca with a stable economic base from year to year. One key factor about an economy based on higher education is that higher education contributes to the city's seasonal variation in economic activity. The exodus of some 12,000 students each summer affects the retail and service sector directly. vVhile Ithaca is in a superb location for campers and vacationers, the summer trade to date has not begun to make up for the student exodus.

A second important factor, concomitant with Ithaca's specialization in higher education, is the specialization in the entertainment and recreation service sector of the economy. Table V.1, listing the employment concentration ratios for the entertainment and recreational service sector in the western upstate counties with major urban centers, shows that Tompkins County is ranked third after Erie (Buffalo) and .Monroe (Rochester) in terms of the ratio of its

TABLE V.1: Employment Concentration Ratios (County !New York State) for the Entertainment and Services Sector in the Western Upstate Counties with Major Urban Centers

Representative Upstate Counties and Urban Centers

Entertainment and Recreation Services

Broome (Binghamton) .54 Chemung (Elmira) .66 Cortland (Cortland) .50 Erie (Buffalo) .82 Monroe (Rochester) . 77 Oneida (Utica) .62 Onondaga (Syracuse) .67 Tompkins (Ithaca) .70

SOURCE: Derived from 1960 Census of Population, Vol. 1, Part 34, Table 85.

labor force employed in the entertainment-recreation service sector. This specialization in the entertainment and recreation service sector indicates that Ithaca is a prime location for a recreation industry as represented by the National Arts and Recreation Center. Not only will the new facilities increase Ithaca's specialization in this part of the service sector, but this economic concentration reveals that Ithaca already has a head start on providing the additional entertainment and recreational services such as restaurants which the tourists attracted by the center would desire.

The main economic impact of the National Arts and Recreation Center is indirect. The center itself will operate in the black, but it will not produce great profits. Rather, the economic impact of the center will derive from the dollars spent by tourists attracted to the center. 'Vhile it is not anticipated that the new tourists will offset in all areas the decline in the retail and service sector created by the exodus of students, the added tourists should at least help support existing business and certainly will stimulate new additions to the service sector in certain areas such as overnight accommodations. Presently there is a need for expansion of the service sector during the academic year. Demand falls off sharply during the summer season. As a result of this drop, businessmen are discouraged from making needed expansion in their establishments. The increased summer demand created by a recreation industry would offset the seasonal fluctuation and encourage expansion in the service sector.

The potential market for the Ithaca Festival Theater can best be estimated by drawing a comparison between the Ithaca theater and the theater which most closely approximates the Ithaca theater in size and purpose-the Stratford, Ontario, Festival Theater.

81

The Stratford theater is located in a community almost the size of Ithaca. Total admissions to the Stratford theater during the season are close to 350,000. About one-sixth of the total admissions are students attending the five week student season. The Ithaca theater plans the same length season as Stratford, including a special student season. Annual attendance at the Ithaca Festival Theater is anticipated to be 218,500 to 251,000. Of this attendance, 75,500 to 80,000 are estimated to be students. At least half of the people in attendance will make use, to some degree, of the entertainment and service sector of Ithaca.

The variety of tourists who will be attracted by the range of facilities at the Center, the new theater, marina, and recreational facilities indicates that there will be an increased demand not only for costly accommodations and restaurants, but also for the less expensive. It will be necessary for the community to provide a wide range of services if it is to accommodate and stimulate the increased demand created by the Center. It will be necessary, for example, to provide clean and scenic campgrounds as well as commercial lodgings.

In considering undertaking the provision of additional public and private facilities, it is important to note that the Center at Ithaca is a long-term project. It is designed to meet present and future needs of tourists, vacationers, and local residents. Studies by the Department of Interior indicate that participation in outdoor recreation is growing rapidly. Between 1960 and 1965 participation in major summer outdoor recreation activities grew at a rate which exceeded eight percent per year . By the year 2000, participation is estimated to be four times the 1960 level. It is important to note that the National Arts and Recreation Center at Ithaca will include or promote nine of the ten outdoor activities which the Interior Department studies indicate are, and will be, the most popular: walking for pleasure, swimming, driving for pleasure, playing outdoor games and sports, bicycling, sightseeing, picnicking, fishing, attending outdoor sports events, and boating.

URBAN RENEWAL

Urban Renewal began in Ithaca in 1959 with the Floral Avenue Residential Urban Renewal Project. Eventually this project was abandoned; however, Urban Renewal continued. In 1961 a General Neighborhood Renewal Program was undertaken for 90 acres in the Central Business District. This Central Business District renewal area was divided into three project areas. In 1963 a Survey in Planning Grant was made to the city for the first of these three projects, Project I, a 25-acre, four block parcel at the eastern end of the downtown area, indicated on Map V.2. In

82

this same year, 1963, an Urban Renewal Agency was created as a department of the City.

Public hearings were held on the plans for the Project I area in 1964, and the plans were submitted to the Department of Housing and Urban Development in Washington for approval. Final approval on the Project I area plans came in May 1965 and land acquisition began in 1966.

The total cost of Project I will be $5,996,300. Of this gross cost, $1,116,300 will come from land sales, leaving a net project cost of $4,697,930. The Federal government will provide three quarters or $3,659,950 of the net cost. The state and city governments will split the remaining quarter; each will pay $609,990. The city will provide its funds by undertaking public improvements in the project area. These improvements include such things as sidewalks, underground utilities , and- street trees. The total public improvements needed in the area will exceed the city's share by some $200,000. The state will pay this sum to the city from its share.

Since the adoption of the Project I area plans, the city has installed improvements beyond those designated in the plan. For these improvements in excess of the plan, the city accrues credit of threequarters of the construction cost with the Federal government. These credits will total better than a million dollars and may be applied to any future urban renewal project undertaken by the city. In the event of no further renewal projects in the city, the credits will revert back to the Federal government.

Procedure

The Urban Renewal Agency is purely administrative. The initiative for new urban renewal projects, applications, and plans must come from the City Planning Board with Common Council approval. All changes in project plans, once they have been approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development, must be approved by the City Planning Board and Common Council.

The five-man Urban Renewal Board is responsible for hiring the director and staff of the Urban Renewal Agency and for the execution of the approved plans. The mayor and four citizens appointed for indefinite terms make up this Board.

Administration

Presently the Urban Renewal Agency employs five persons: the director, a rehabilitation officer, a relocation officer, an accountant and a secretary. If no further renewal projects are undertaken, this staff will be cut back in the next year to two, the director and a secretary.

I .

I I

::j w. COURT ST.

I ~ I

I

r 'o

I

:u ~~ (

I I I

I (

~ (I)

(I) ~ It: ~ ct ~ w (I)

• • 0

u-

LEGEND r--

rr--1 1961 GNRP AREA ll=:::J BOUNDARY

~l 1963 U.R PROJ. 1 ~ AREA BOUNDARY

I 0 I U.R. RELOCATION

VL_

.J Q..

w

Ia (,) <l It: It:

! w .... i 10

L J COMMERCIAL

fiiiiiil OFFICE a ~ PROFESSIONAL

~~~ PUBLIC e. ~~~ SEMIPUBLIC

I . I RESIDENTIAL

ITillill RENOVATION ~ PUBLIC PARKING

~] NEW FACILITY [QJ RESTRICTED PARKING

r NOTE• USES CONTINUING 8 BASICALLY UNALTERED 1961-70 ARE SHOWN IN U.R. AREA ONLY.

RENEWAL AREA, 1970

The Future

In the past year the Department of Housing and Urban Development changed its policy to focus on residential neighborhood renewal. The result of this policy change was that, in the future, funds would not be available for renewal programs which focus on the business areas. Funds, therefore, for the completion of Project II and III areas in Ithaca are not available. If Ithaca is to have any further urban renewal programs, they will have to be of a residential nature. No funds for residential renewal will b e allocated to Ithaca, however, without the provision of relocation housing. Not only has no local desire been expressed for residential renewal, but Ithaca's housing market is so tight that there is no relocation housing available.

In September 1968 the Development Act of the New York State Legislature was enacted and the New York State Urban D evelopment Corporation was formed. This non-profit corporation was established to assist municipalities and local entrepreneurs with their development plans. In D ecember 1968 Ithaca was one of the first communities to receive Urban Development Corporation assistance. To date the Urban Development Corporation has assisted the city and Ithacans with three projects: a parking structure in the Central Business District; low and middle income housing and a parking structure in Collegetown; and housing units on West Hill and b eyond Cornell Quarters.

The director of the Urban Renewal Agency sees the Urban Development Corporation's activities as an important contribution to the community's renewal. The Urban D evelopment Corporation has the advantage of being able to undertake construction , while the Urban Renewal Agency must wait, often for years, for acceptable private sponsors for proposed projects.

HOUSING

Because of the size of Tompkins County and the fact that Ithaca is the service and employment center for the county, the Ithaca housing market area and the county have been considered coterminous. The vacancy rate for the entire market area, 0.75 percent, however, is 0.35 percent higher than the vacancy rate for the city. The difference in these rates, plus the greater abundance of buildable and lower priced land has drawn residential settlement away from the city.

Population projections for the county as compared to projections for the city indicate a continuation of the trend toward the county for residence. The county population in 1970 is anticipated to increase by some 15,000, while the city's population is expected to increase by 700. Much of the anticipated

84

increase in city population will come from increases in student population from 1970 to 1990. In 1969, 50 percent of the undergraduate and 73 percent of the graduate students at Cornell University were living

TABLE V.2: Proportion of Students to Total Popu· lation of Ithaca, 1950 through 1990

Students and Total % Students of Year Dependents % Change Population Total Population

1950 11,602 --- 29,257 39.8 1960 12,750 + 9.9 28,799 44.2 1970 13,250 + 3.9 29,500 44.9 1980 17,300 +30.5 32,150 53.8 1990 21,800 +26.0 37,250 58.5

SOURCE: City Planning Office population projections, 1969.

in off-campus, non-University housing. Ithaca College anticipa tes being a residential college. The College's policy toward off-campus living, however, varies . In 1969, 450 seniors and 60 graduate students lived off campus. The College has no plans to provide housing for its graduate students.

Because of their large numbers and their ability to group together and divide rent, single students have the greates t impact on housing in Ithaca. 'iVhile the University anticipates maintaining its growth rate at two and a half percent for the next five years, projections for 1980 indicate an enrollment of about 17,200. It is anticipated that about one-third (5,700) of these students will be graduate students . About half of these graduate students will b e married. Therefore, the growth of the University by 1980 will place 2,800 graduate families in the housing market, and about 300 undergraduate families (providing the rate of married undergraduate students remains constant ) . 'i\' hat this growth means to the housing market is that, by 1980, 550 more student families and 2,500 more single graduate and undergraduate students will be seeking housing in the Ithaca market area. vVhat is more important is that the families must compete with the single students' ability to pay higher rents. A 1968 study by the D ean of Students Office at Cornell indicates that 70 percent of the sampled students living off campus have one to three roommates, and 77 percent pay $41 to $70 per roommate, monthly rent. The median rent paid by undergraduates for off-campus housing is $55 per month.

Estimates indicate that, in 1968, one-third or 7,400 families in Tompkins County made less than $6,000 a year. Median rents in Ithaca, $9 above the state median, place a squeeze on local low income families. In addition, real es tate appraisers indicate that onequarter to one-third of the housing stock in the county

i '

r \

r \

needs more than regular maintenance. Low-income and the poor conditions in the housing stock have been compounded in the 1960-1968 period by demolition of 286 units and a population increase of 13,400. From 1960 to 1968, 3,790 new units were built. In the same time period, the population increased by 4,962 family units, indicating that the increase in families exceeded the increase in housing by 24 percent.

TABLE V.3: Comparison of Housing Units per Struc· ture in Tompkins County, 1950, 1960, 1968

Units in April 1950 April 1960 January 1968 Structure # % # % # %

1 unit 10,450 64 13,546 68 14,285 60 2 units 2,796 17 2,116 11 2,495 10 3 and 4 units 1,789 11 1,568 8 2,190 9 5-9 units 823 5 1,363 7 1,615 7 10 or more units 228 1.5 716 3 1,915 8 Mobile homes 165 1.5 601 3 1,200 6

16,251 -- 19,910 +23 23,700 +19

SOURCE: U.S. Census of Housing, 1950 and 1960. 1968 estimated by students of Housing and Design 542, as part of student project at Cornell.

A study undertaken in 1962 by the New York State Division of Housing and Community Renewal found that, at $14 per room, there were 571 families and individuals eligible for low rent housing. Of these, 186 or 33 percent were aging individuals and couples. This meant that in 1962 there were 571 families and individuals in Tompkins County living in substandard housing whose net annual income did not exceed six times the rental of $14 per room per month, including utilities.

The Ithaca Housing Authority is committed to provide 300 of the needed 571 low income housing units by 1971. Contracts have b een let for 270 of these housing units. This construction of 300 units leaves 271 of the original need plus 283 units demolished, for a total remaining need for 544. In November 1969 the Common Council gave the Hous· ing Authority permission to explore provision of 400 more low and middle income units. Of this 400, the New York State Urban Development Corporation has already said that they would provide 160 to 180.

Estimates indicate that the Ithaca housing market area needs, from 1969 to 1971, 1,100 units in addition to the proposed low and middle income units. Of these units , the State Urban Development Cor· poration intends to provide 420 to 440.

Provision of adequate housing in the Ithaca housing market area for the present and future will demand strict code enforcement and continual review and changing of the city building codes to keep up with the new concepts, materials, and t echniques which are being developed in the building trades. One answer to the high cost of consh·uction to middle and low income families is prefabricated housing. Code and ordinance revisions should consider new efficient land uses and employment of such moneysaving construction techniques both in the city and county.

TABLE V.4: Housing Vacancy Rates for Selected Upstate Communities, 1967

Postal Vacancy Overall Residential Apartment Surveys Percent Percent Percent

Auburn Area (9/66) 2.5 1.8 10.0 Cortland (8/67) 2.8 1.4 12.5 Syracuse (6/67) 2.0 1.5 3.5 Utica-Rome (4/67) 2.6 1.6 4.5 Ithaca (4/67) 0.4 - -

Tompkins County Vacancy Rate 0.75% (4/67)

SOURCE: Housing Subcommittee of the Tompkins County Resource Development Committee, A Review of the Housinf of Tompkins County, December, 1968, able I.

TABLE V.5: Vacancy Rates for Areas of Tompkins County, 1967

Number of Vacancy Area Units Rate

Brooktondale 450 0 Dryden 620 0 Etna 126 0 Freeville 650 0 Groton 1,534 1.6 Ithaca City 13,405 0.4 Ithaca Town 2,776 1.6 Jacksonville 115 0.9 Ludlowville 564 1.8 Mclean 113 3.5 Myers 80 0 Newfield 925 0 Slaterville Springs 106 0 South Lansing 108 0.9 Trumansburg 1,373 0 West Danby 350 (Approx.) 0.6

TOTAL 23,295 0.75

SOURCE: Vacancy Survey by Post Offices in Tamp· kins County, April to December 1967, League of Women Voters.

85

! '

L

r-

L

l

CIRCULATION

The movement of men and materials through Ithaca is essential to the life of the city. This movement includes both point-to-point travel within the city as well as vehicular access to the city. The major public conveyances for men to and through Ithaca are bus and airplane. Materials come to Ithaca by truck and rail. Each of these means of circulation is considered here.

INTERNAL CIRCULATION

The focus of internal circulation must be on the existing land uses and street system and on the street system's ability to handle the present traffic flow and the future traffic demands .

All roads in the city have been classified as to their function: local, collector, or arterial streets. Local streets provide access to property abutting the public right-of-way. Collector streets are a residential phenomenon which filter h·affic from local streets into arterials and local generators such as shopping centers , schools, and community activity centers. Arterials move large volumes of traffic at relatively high speeds. The function of each street is determined by the land uses which it connects. A local street connects predominantly residential land uses to adjacent collector streets while a collector street connects residential areas to other medium-type traffic generators such as shopping areas.

!vlap VI.1 shows the existing classification of all streets in the City of Ithaca according to their function. As the map indicates, the Central Business District is traversed by arterials (Route 366 and Route 79) . Two arterials bisect rather than unify three predominantly residential ~eighborhoods, Bell~ Sherman (Ithaca Road, Route 366), South Central (Clinton Street, Route 96B), and South Hill (Aurora Street, Route 96B). In the remaining cases the arterials assist in defining the boundaries of the city's neighborhoods.

Several of the circulation problems which exist in the city are revealed on Map VI.l. Firs t, congestion problems are created by the fact that three collectors, a local street, and a state arterial all converge on the single bridge across the flood control channel at State Street. Second, access to the city is limited on three sides by hills with gradients in excess of ten percent. Each of these hills bears a major arterial access road to the downtown area. Third, the city collector streets provide poor access to the Cornell University campus. The map also indicates the primary, secondary, and tertiary traffic generators for the city. Some of these generators, such as Therm, are just beyond the city line; nonetheless, they generate traffic through the city.

A primary generator has been defined, for the purpose of this study, as a land use which generates a high volume of traffic daily. This class of generator is divided into two groups: those which generate a constant high volume of traffic and those which generate a high volume of traffic at peak h ours. The constant primary generators, Cornell University and the Central Business District, are considered to be the two major traffic generators in the city. The other primary generators such as Therm and Ithaca Gun are considered to be major h·affic generators at the peak hours, 7:30 to 9:00 A.M. and 4:00 to 5:30 P.M. Both types of primary generator place a maximum stress on the city's circulation pattern.

A secondary traffic generator has been defined as a constant medium volume traffic generator. This generator classifica tion includes areas like E lmira Road and Co'llegetown and specific land uses such as the Ithaca High School-Board of Education.

The tertiary traffic generators are those which are seasonal such as Stewart Park; periodic generators

TABLE Vl.l : Traffic Generators in and Adjacent to the City of Ithaca, 1969

Type Land Use

Primary Central Business District Cornell University

Peak-Hour Primary Ithaca College Ithaca Gun Company Morse Chain Company National Cash Registe r

Company Therm Inc.

Secondary Elmira Road Commercial West End Commercial West State Street Commercial Collegetown Ithaca High School - Board

of Education Hancock- Adams Streets

Commercial Area Co-op Shopping Center

Tertiary Elementary Schools Boynton Junior High·

Central -Immaculate Conception Schools

Stewart Park Cass Park Municipal Golf Course N. Cayuga-Farm Streets

Commerci al Area Peri pheral Tompkins County Hospital

Comm unity Corners Commercial Triphammer Shopping Center Tompkins County Airport

SOURCE: City Planning Board, City of Ithaca, 1969. 89

Map VI.l EXISTING MAJOR STREETS & TRAFFIC GENERATORS, 1970 ----+

I :

I I

I :

[ '

[ :

I ;

[ '

[ '

[ :

[ ~

[ I

[_:

[ ;

[ I

[ :

[ ;

[ :

[ I

[ ]

.YUGA LAKE

MUNtCI PAL GOLF

- -~

~--

. . . . . . . . ...

EET T

-- / -~

1

--::-

I

' 1

such as an elementary school which generates a high volume of traffic for a short period of time daily; or constant low volume generators such as a neighborhood shopping center.

Also indicated on Map VI.1 are the peripheral traffic generators. These generators are beyond the city limits, but attract considerable city traffic, as does , for example, the Tompkins County Airport.

In determining traffic generators, it is important to consider the volume of traffic produced by the individual land use. Through traffic passing by the site is not included in the traffic generated by a given land use. The existing traffic generators have a significant impact on the pattern of collector streets in the city. In order to have adequate traffic How each traffic generator should be supplied with internal collector streets correspondent to the traffic volume created by the land use. Map VI.2 shows the local collector and arterial streets and major generators as they correspond to the projected land uses in the city for 1990.

Several of the more important existing traffic generators are considered here in detail. The Central Business District, Cornell University, Collegetown, and the West End Business District have been selected from all the internal traffic generators because of the specific movement problems they create.

The Central Business District

An important aspect of the downtown circulation is access. The major collector streets used for access in the Central Business District are Green, Seneca, Cayuga, Tioga, and Aurora. Green and Seneca carry the largest single traffic volume in the Central Business District. Many of the cars which come into the Central Business District use the collectors Green and Seneca Streets to avoid the congestion created by the narrowness and on-street parking on State Street. Some of this traffic is passing through, the rest is gaining access to the downtown parking lots between Aurora and Cayuga Streets.

On all the streets in the Central Business District, except State westbound at Aurora and Tioga northbound at State, traffic counts indicate that the evening traffic volume exceeds the morning traffic volume. The evening peak is, in all cases, more abrupt than the morning peak which tapers off into shopping traffic.

Cornell University

Cornell University is the largest single employer and traffic generator in both the City of Ithaca and Tompkins County. The 6,400 full-time faculty and staff employed by the University represent more than 25 percent of the total employed labor force in Tomp-

kins County and more than 56 percent of the total employed labor force in the City of Ithaca. Combined students and staff at the University generate an estimated 16,000 vehicular trips per day. This base figure would be even higher if internal commuting into the city and occasional trips to the campus were also included.

These 16,000 daily trips to the University affect almost all of the major traffic carriers in the city. The two most heavily traveled approaches to campus are from the west and south. The main access route to the campus from the west is State Street to College Avenue. From the south the main access roads are Ithaca and Dryden Roads.

Traffic from the west and south flows through the Collegetown area creating heavy congestion at the intersection of East State Street and Ithaca Road, as well as a movement and parking problem in Collegetown proper. Only students living beyond a two-mile radius of the campus are entitled to a University parking sticker. As a result other campus commuters park their cars in Collegetown. More than 400 student cars a day park in the Collegetown area. The on-going parking problem in Collegetown is further compounded by the approximately 400 employees in Collegetown, many of whom must also park their cars in the area.

The redevelopment of the block bounded by College Avenue, Dryden Road, Eddy Street, and Cascadilla Place will provide office space, retail space, and living units. Off-street parking spaces will also be provided within the block. Despite the provided parking, the traffic generated by additional shoppers attracted to the area may add to the general parking problem in this densely developed area.

The north and east accesses to the campus are less congested. Stewart Avenue and Cayuga Heights Road are adequate to handle the present traffic How, as is Triphammer Road. The small segments of 'i\' ait and Thurston Avenues which must be used from Triphammer to the campus are in need of improvement. Most of the traffic entering campus from the north and east comes from the Village of Cayuga Heights and the Town of Lansing. Both of these areas are growing as residential locations for staff and students. If this trend of residential settlement increases in the north and east, the present campus access routes may become inadequate.

'Nest End Business District

The main access road in the " ' est End is Meadow Street. Traffic counts on Meadow Street indicate that the highest volume on the street occurs between State and Green Streets. The second largest volume of traffic occurs between Seneca and Buffalo Streets. The high

91

Map VI.2 PROJECTED MAJOR STREETS & TRAFFIC GENERATORS, 1990 ------+-

l '

--------------------- ---,-,,

UGA LAKE

~-) // .:c-J ( .

MAP

PROJ ~d 1,\

,, 1!

/;' ( J; rl

2

TE FFI

! :

(

I

l I

traffic volume at Meadow and Green Streets indicates that much of the traffic from the west comes into the city across Meadow Street instead of using Fulton Street for a more direct access to Green Street. A second point of congestion on Meadow Street is created by westbound traffic on State Street turning left onto Meadow.

Proposals

1. The main external highways should feed into the city street system in such a way as to provide ease of access to the city's primary generators.

2. Immediate attention should be given to improvement of the following intersections to increase traffic safety: a. Mitchell and State Streets b . Stewart and State Streets c. College and Mitchell Streets d. Eddy and State Streets e. Mitchell Street and Ithaca Road f. State and Aurora Sh·eets g. Elmira Road and Meadow Street h. State, Floral, Elm, Hector, Cliff, and Park

Streets

3. Consideration should be given to creating a pedestrian concourse, with limited vehicular access, between the tuning fork and Cayuga Street.

4. The circulation pattern should be improved by reconstructing, widening, straightening, and/ or leveling the following streets: a. Stewart Avenue b. Dryden Road c. University Avenue d. Thurston Avenue

5. To provide another direct access to the University campus, improvements should be made to Dey, Lincoln, Lake, and University Avenue, particularly at the intersection of Lincoln and Lake and the grade on Gun Shop Hill.

6. Safe movement of traffic along Elmira Road should be improved by installing curbs, by providing a median strip, and by limiting turning movements.

7. A collector street, the Southwest Parkway, should be built along the old city line extending from Floral A venue to :tvleadow Street, to provide an access from the developing south side of West Hill to the south side of the city.

8. To provide access to developable residential land, Hillview Place should be extended to Giles Street, and \iVatTen Place and Taylor Place should be completed to the Southwest Parkway.

9. Segments of streets adjacent to existing park and recreation areas should be closed and developed to expand recreation facilities designated by the 1968 Recreation Plan where there is a shortage of play space: a. Cleveland Avenue b . Adams Street between Dey and Auburn

Streets c. Madison between Fourth and Fifth Streets d. Titus behveen Fair and South Streets e. \iVillow between Marshall and Cayuga Streets

EXTERNAL TRAFFIC

Since the early post-war years traffic has continually increased in Ithaca. In addition to an increase in commercial and industrial traffic either attracted to Ithaca or passing through the city, visitor traffic has increased. The growth of Ithaca College and Cornell University have also contributed to the increase of traffic into the city. Since 1960 the number of vehicles entering and leaving the city has increased by 64 percent.

The ten major routes to the city have been studied to determine the volume of traffic gaining access to the city. These roads will be examined according to the direction from which they enter the city.

Northern and Eastern Access

In 1964 Route 13 was redesigned as a four-lane highway and relocated from the east to the north side of the city. Since its upgrading and relocation Route 13 has shown the largest increase in vehicle use of all the access roads to the city. Route 13 now carries an annual average daily traffic ( AADT) of about 14,000 vehicles and has relieved some of the pressure on the other east and north thoroughfares into the city. Much of the traffic on Route 13 is composed of trucks and other oversized vehicles. Not all of this truck traffic, however, could be diverted north to the relocated highway. Route 366, which follows the old Route 13 along Dryden and Ithaca Roads to Mitchell and State Streets and into the city, still provides a much-used east entrance to the city. Trucks and oversized vehicles make up 24 percent of the outbound and 13 percent of the inbound traffic on Route 366. Moreover, there has been an increase in the proportion of trucks to cars using Route 366 since 1962. Thirteen percent fewer cars and 14 percent more trucks are using Route 366 now than did in 1962. Despite the 12 percent grade on Mitchell Street, Route 366 is the fourth heaviest h·aveled access road in the city. Prior to the relocation of Route 13 to the north, the Dryden Road-Ithaca Road route was the second most traveled access to the city.

On Route 34, the third of the north and east access roads, incoming traffic has increased by 21 percent

93

while outbound h·afiic decreased slightly from 1962. Two other north and east access roads exist: Mitchell Street and East State Street (Route 79). On both of these access roads the volume of traffic is appreciably lower than on the other three. Like the other three roads, however, these access routes showed an increase in inbound traffic and a slight decline in outbound traffic.

The total traffic volume figures for all five roads indicate that truck and oversized vehicle traffic increased by four percent in the six-year period. These five major access roads from the north and east carried 49 percent of the total external traffic volume in 1969, a five percent increase over 1962 and an 11 percent increase over the 1950 external traffic volume.

Southern Access

In the south, Elmira Road (New York State Routes 13, 34, and 96) is the counterpart to Route 13 in the north. Elmira Road carries about the same amount of traffic as Route 13 in the north. Elmira Road's share of the total southbound h·affic, however, is higher than Route 13 on the north's share of the total northbound traffic. Elmira Road carries 50 percent of all southbound traffic.

A second southern access to the city is Route 96B, South Aurora Street. South Aurora Street has one of the steepest grades in the city, yet the volume of traffic on this street has increased by more than 120 percent in the last seven years. Although there was a slight decline in the percentage of trucks to passenger cars on South Aurora Street from 1962 to 1969, there was an increase in absolute numbers of trucks and oversized vehicles. South Aurora Street has shown the highest total increase in traffic of all the access roads to the city. The danger of this sharp increase in traffic usage is evidenced by the high incidence of accidents on the steep street.

Ithaca College, relocated from Ithaca's Central Business District to South Hill on Route 96B beyond the city limits, has contributed to the increased traffic on South Aurora Street. It is estimated that the College traffic represents 45 percent of the inbound traffic on South Aurora Street and 48 percent of the outbound traffic.

The third southern access to the city is Floral A venue. Floral A venue carries only three percent of the total southbound traffic.

Since 1962 the relative frequency of truck and oversized vehicle traffic has declined on the southern access roads; however, these roads have evidenced the largest absolute increase of total traffic carried of all roads studied. The southbound roads, then, are still heavily traveled by car and truck traffic. For the present, Elmira Road is large enough to carry the volume

94

of traffic. However, should 96B be relocated in such a way that its traffic feeds into Elmira Road, rather than down South Hill, the capacity of Elmira Road should be carefully evaluated.

VI/estern Access

External routes to and from the northwest and west include Routes 89, 96, and 79. Among these three, Route 89 has shown the largest increase in total traffic over the last seven years, an increase of more than 100 percent.

Route 96 handles the bulk of the northwest bound traffic and ranks third among access roads. The total volume of Route 96 has not changed significantly in the past seven years, but more trucks are using this road. There has been a relative decrease in the proportion of trucks to cars on Cliff Street but an absolute increase in the number of trucks on the street since 1962.

The existence of only one four-lane bridge across the newly constructed Hood control channel has made access to the city from the west and northwest particularly difficult and hazardous. The total average daily volume of traffic across this bridge is in excess of 17,000 vehicles. The relocation of Route 96 will provide a second bridge across the Hood control channel. This second bridge is anticipated to relieve about 60 percent of the inbound traffic, and 62 percent of the outbound traffic, at the present intersection. The relocation of Route 96 could also provide a more direct access for eastbound traffic going to Cornell University and Cayuga Heights, relieving much of the congestion downtown.

Peak Hours for Traffic

An evaluation of peak hours for traffic on the external access roads indicates that in the morning car travel peaks between 7:00 and 8:30 A.M., except for Cornell-bound h·affic which tends to reach its peak between 7:30 and 9:00 A.M. Route 96B is the only exception. Traffic on this road peaks from 6:00 A.M. to 8 :00A.M. The Route 96 morning traffic peak seems to correlate with the shifts at National Cash Register Company and Morse Chain. In the afternoon there is a constant increase in traffic volume on Routes 96B, 96, and 34. Traffic on the other access roads tends to peak between 4 :00 and 5:30P.M.

Proposals

Several proposals for reducing the hazard and increasing the future accessibility of Ithaca have evolved from the evaluative study of the ten major access roads to Ithaca:

1. Route 13 should be extended over Fulton Street and continue South along the railroad tracks.

I ~

I ,

2. The relocation of Route 13 should provide a half intersection at Meadow Street.

3. By constructing alternate routes around the city and by requiring trucks to use these routes, truck and other heavy traffic should be removed from Routes 366 and 79, alleviating the traffic pressure from the residential neighborhood.

4. The peripheral highway should b e located south and east of the city close enough to Ithaca to alleviate truck access problems. ·with the construction of the peripheral highway, South Aurora Street should serve only as a collector.

5. To alleviate the conditions of limited access across the flood conh·ol channel, it is essential that the relocated state arterial Route 96 North and the city's proposed Southwest Parkway be completed as soon as possible.

6. Through traffic now coming into Ithaca on Route 89 should be diverted onto Route 96 North and brought into the city. Such a diversion of traffic from Route 89 would relieve the pressure on the Inlet Park Road now being used to bring Route 89 traffic to the city. The park road would then serve exclusively as an access to the Inlet Park complex.

PARKING

As indicated in the 1968 Central Business District Parking Study, urban renewal has changed the character of the Central Business District. Not only has urban renewal made the Central Business District less dense, but it has also provided much additional space to alleviate the pressing parking problem in the area.

The parking study indicates that there is a shortage of parking along State Street. Additional parking lots on Seneca and Green Streets, adjacent to State Street, have been recently provided by redevelopment of the area for more parking for those destined for State Street.

The evaluation of total parking available in the Central Business District according to demands of the City Zoning Ordinance indicates that presently there is adequate parking in this area. As construction for urban renewal proceeds there may be slight decreases in the number of parking spaces available, but on the whole it is expected that parking in the downtown area will remain adequate for the foreseeable future.

Parking in the vVest End Business Area should be considered in conjunction with the presently changing character of that part of the city. The new and proposed relocations anticipated in the ' iVest End and the fu ture industrial and commercial development in the area will generate new parking demands. Specific solutions to the parking problem will have to wait for the development of the area.

Collegetown, the third major business district in the city, has a definite parking problem. Campus commuters, unable to qualify for on-campus parking, frequently park in Collegetown. In addition, employees in Collegetown also use the on-street parking in the area. New developments in the area are in accordance with the City Zoning Ordinance in providing their own off-street parking, but many of these new developments will create traffic in excess of what they can or are required to provide for. Therefore, some of the redevelopment in the area will simply compound the existing parking problem.

Proposals

1. Parking structures should be built in both the Central Business District and Collegetown to relieve the congestion presently created by onstreet parking and to provide more parking for the additional traffic which will be generated as these areas develop further. As the Central Business District develops, parking structures should be built on the north, west, and south periphery of the shopping area.

2. A study should be undertaken for solution of the parking problems in the West End Business District which extends along Elmira Road and Meadow Street and along the west end of State Street.

3. The University should be encouraged to continue to provide as much parking as possible for its staff and students. The location of such facilities should be coordinated with the city.

OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES

COMMUNITY TRANSIT SYSTEM

The city took over the bus system in August 1961. In December of that year the executive committee of the Community Transit System recommended to the Common Council ( 1) that service be extended to those parts of the city which seem to indicate the need for service and the willingness to patronize the line, and ( 2) that the city acquire new equipment to reduce the high cost of maintaining the old equipment. The administrative committee agreed that "mass transport is a public service like the Youth Bureau, library, water supply, boat marina, golf course, street paving or fire protection," and that since bus service was a public service the city should absorb the annual deficit accrued by the system.

Use

Passenger use of the bus system declined by 62 percent from 1957 to 1960. Nationally, in cities of comparable size, passengers riding the bus decreased

95

by approximately 20 percent in the same four-year period.

An origin and destination study done in 1961 revealed that almost 60 percent of passenger trips were made between the Cornell University campus and the Central Business Dish'ict. The percentage increase in use between the summer, July-September, and the school year, October-December, indicates that the transit system is still dependent to a great extent on the Cornell-Central Business District traffic. Fortyfive percent of all the trips were made to and from work, 23 percent to and from shopping, 17 percent to and from school, 9 percent on personal business, none for social reasons, and 6 percent for other reasons. Table VI.2 indicates that only slightly more than 50 percent of the transit system's use was daily. Seventy percent of the bus users indicated that a car was not available for their use for the trip . The 1960 census data on mode of transportation to work indicates that of the 11,085 people going to work in Ithaca, only

TABLE V1.2: Frequency of Use of the Transit System by Percentage, 1961.

Persons interviewed who: Percent

Use the bus da ily 54 Use the bus once or twice a week 34 Use the bus occas ionally 12

SOURCE: Wilbur Smith and Associates, Mass Transportation in Ithaca, New York, Vo l. 1, April 1961, p. 15.

three percent took the bus. These figures indicate, therefore, that while about half of the bus system's passengers are daily users without a car, this is really a small proportion of the people going to work in the city. In 1960, 16 people drove to work for every one that took the bus and 10 people walked to work for every one that took the bus.

Table VI.3 indicates the number and type of bus users, annual revenue, and annual loss to the transit system from 1964 to 1968. The figures indicate that there has b een a spasmodic decline in passenger use

since 1964. 'Vhile the 1964 figures are only two percent below the 1960 figures of 276,658, a comparison of the 1957 to the 1967 figures reveals a 66 percent loss. In the first eight years of the 1960's, the transit system lost 16 percent of its riders. A look at the type of users reveals that there has been less change in cash fares than in student fares. This decline in student fares is primarily the result of the decision in 1965 to limit sh1dent tickets to high school students. The number of riders using tokens has increased since 1964. Table VI.3 also indicates that the revenue from the transit system has increased overall, although irregularly, from the 1964 figures . This increase is the result, in part, of an increase in bus fares in January 1965.

The annual loss before capital expenditures has also fluctuated widely since 1964. The average annual loss before capital expenditures is $4,006 a year. This loss does not include the purchase of equipment. The average annual loss on the system including equipment is $16,410.

Equipment

In 1969 the city had six operable buses. Two of these buses were purchased in 1962, three in 1966, and one in 1968. Three of the city's buses are 19 passenger mini-buses and three are 35 passenger buses. Presently the city is on a six-year replacement schedule; it is anticipated, hovvever, that the new equipment will have a longer life expectancy. The city added three buses in 1969, one mini-bus and two 35-passenger buses. Of the three newly acquired buses, t\vo were used as replacements for old vehicles and one was used to extend city service.

Service and Need

Today the city is providing the six bus routes shown on Map VI.3. Five of these routes service East A venue, the main north-south Cornell campus road. One line each runs to the Village of Cayuga Heights (Route 3), Elmira Road (Route 2), West Hill (Route 3), and South Hill (Route 4). The addition of a seventh operable bus allows the addition of service to the

TABLE Vl.3: Number and Type of Bus Users, Annua l Revenue and Annual Loss of the Transit System From 1964-1968

Cash Fares Tokens Used Student Tickets

Percent Percent Year Number Change Number Change Number

1964 186,149 46,298 38,428 1965 162,206 -13.0 55,155 + 19.0 16,128 1966 180,151 +11.0 49,913 -10.0 8,176 1967 176,056 - 2.0 63,157 +27.0 8,685 1968 170,739 - 1.0 52,759 -16.0 8,530

SOURCE: Commun1ty Trans1t System, 1969.

96

Percent Change

-58.0 -97.0 +6.0 -2.0

Annual Loss

Tota l Riders Annua l Revenue Before Capital Expenditure

Percent Percent Percen Number Change $ Change $ Change

270,875 54,720 3,838 233,489 -14.0 58,711 +7.0 206 -95. 0 238,240 +2.0 59,577 + 1.0 6,408 + 301.0 247,898 +4.0 66,392 +11.0 - -232,028 -1.0 58,700 -12.0 10,719 +46. 0

r .

I ) (

f rOMPKINS COUNTY SCAt£

50.000 loot &<d b.IHd 0'1 llu• YO<lo. COO<~tt 1j1ltn\, CMtt .. lone

10.000 mettr &nd bi!Md on Unn~rw.j h¥U·~·~ Mt:rutO< Stst~ ~~ 18

HYS ()(CEMB£R 1961 O'C

MAP Vl.3

AREA TRANSPORTATION

LEGEND

'-=J LIMITED-ACCESS i6,d HIGHWA'I'S

c---J OTHER ~ STATE HIGHWAYS

SYSTEMS

r-:::::-J ITHACA CIRCUMFERENTIAL LJ ROUTE

/ ........ I INTERSTATE BUS LINES

County Hospital on ·west Hill and an increase in the frequency of service to Elmira Road and South Hill. The addition of another bus has made it possible to extend the service hours to the hospital and Cornell campus from 6:00 A.M. to midnight six days a week.

Proposals

1. The policy that the bus system is a necessary community service and should be provided despite possible financial loss to the city should be continued.

2. During the summer season bus service should be extended to the lake front parks and Buttermilk Falls State Park.

LONG DISTANCE BUS SERVICE

Two main lines of the Greyhound Bus Service cross at Ithaca. These two lines run from Syracuse to Elmira, and from Rochester to Binghamton to New York. Each of the Greyhound lines has five or six buses traveling both directions through Ithaca daily. Through the years, particularly since the termination of passenger rail service to Ithaca in 1963, the Greyhound line has experienced a steady increase in the number of passengers handled at the Ithaca terminal. The local agent estimates that, at present, more than 250 passengers leave the terminal daily while more than 1,000 leave the terminal on a holiday. Approximately 100,000 passengers leave Ithaca by bus annually.

The Trailways Bus Line passes through Ithaca enroute to Binghamton and New York City. About 900 passengers a year use this service.

RAILROADS

The City of Ithaca is serviced by the Lehigh Valley Railroad line five days a week. Cornell University is serviced at its East Ithaca Station three days a week. For five years the railroad sharply curtailed its passenger service to Ithaca, and in 1963 passenger service was eliminated altogether.

The Ithaca freight line nms from Sayre, Pennsylvania, via Ithaca to Milliken Station on Cayuga Lake. Spur lines connect the Ithaca line to Morse Chain on South Hill and to the wholesale-industrial area in the Inlet Valley. The East Ithaca freight line runs from Sayre to East Ithaca and to Cortland.

In 1968 16,276 carloads of freight entered the Ithaca area and 3,339 carloads of freight were shipped out. The railroad does not anticipate any significant change in the volume of freight to and from the city in the next decade. The only significant change would come from any new industry which located on the rail line.

98

TABLE Vl.4: Freight Shipments In and Out of the Ithaca Station by Carload in 1968

IN OUT

Type Carloads Type Carloads

Mil liken Station 15,600 Wa llace Scrap 156 Lumber Yards 416 Morse Chain 108 Brick 52 Cayuga Rock Sa lt 3,000 Agway 156 Agway 75 Beer 52 Tota l 16,276 Tota l 3,339

SOURCE: Mr. A. Schmidt, Lehigh Va lley Railroad, Auburn, New York, 1969.

In 1964 the city purchased the Lehigh Valley Railroad switching yard on Cayuga Inlet. The city is using the old switch yard site as part of the National Arts and Recreation Center development being planned for the lakefront at the inlet. The new railroad switch yard was relocated south of Clinton Street in the Inlet Valley.

Monday through Friday between midnight and 8:00A.M. a train crosses the Elmira Road-Inlet Valley Neighborhood to the switch yard. Between 8:00 A.M. and noon daily the h·ain crosses town, past the North Central Neighborhood to the Cayuga Rock Salt Mines and Milliken Station. Periodically trains are sent on spur lines to Morse Chain. The main Ithaca line is frequently used by 100 car trains. Since a speed limit of five miles per hour is necessary within city limits, these trains hold up traffic in the West End for ten to 20 minutes. The city's major east-west collectors and arterials are crossed by the tracks. An arrangement must be made for crossing these primary and secondary roads; the train crossing should be made during the off-peak traffic flow on the collectors and arterials. Such an arrangement would be predicated on the cooperation of the various industries supplied by the Lehigh Valley Railroad. Another problem is also caused by spur lines which cross South Aurora Street and Hudson Street on South Hill and create a safety hazard to vehicles on the hill. These tracks are rarely, if ever, used and should be removed.

Proposals

1. Although little expansion of rail service is anticipated in the Ithaca area in the future, rail movement should be rescheduled during the periods of lowest vehicular traffic on the city collectors and arterials which the train must cross.

AIR TRANSPORTATION

The old Ithaca Municipal Airport was located on the Inlet at the head of Cayuga Lake. In September

( I

TABLE Vl.5: Tompkins County Airport Air and Pas· senger Traffic 1965 to 1968.

Passengers Change Total Uses of Actual (Percent)

Year Departures Off On Over Preced· Airport for All

ing Year Purposes

1965 5,114 38,650 38,749 11.5 1966* 4,386 41,207 40,362 4.2 120,000 1967 4,102 46,188 44,552 10.4 145,000 1968 3,807 49,793 47,697 7.1 167,490

*Empire Airlines discontinued Tompkins County service in August 1966.

SOURCE: Tompkins County Airport Annual Reports, 1965 through 1968.

1956 the Municipal Airport was discontinued and its services relocated to the Tompkins County Airport, a 10 to 15 minute drive from the city. The County Airport serves several functions locally: passenger service on scheduled and chartered flights, freight, air express, air mail, and private aviation. Business at the airport also includes the local limousine services and car rental agencies.

Passenger Service

Until 1966 Ithaca and Tompkins County were serviced by two airlines. In August 1966 Empire Airlines discontinued its service to the area. The passenger and air traffic generated by the airlines using the airport is indicated on Table VI.5. Although the number of departures has decreased steadily over the past few years, passenger traffic has increased as a result of a shift to larger planes. Terminal facilities which were considered adequate to handle passenger and air traffic in 1960 are no longer able to accommodate the increased usage. The airport management anticipates the completion of a new terminal building by 1975.

Thirty-five percent of the passengers boarding flights at Tompkins County Airport in 1967 and 1968 were connecting with other flights. The high percentage of connections indicates a gap in the air services offered from the County Airport. This gap cannot be closed by a regional airline alone; however, flights from Ithaca to major airports are sufficiently infrequent to cause a loss of business to other large

airports within driving distance: Syracuse, Rochester, and Elmira. The market for air service in Ithaca is expected to remain rather constant; improvements in east-west service, however, may persuade more local people to take connecting flights out of Ithaca.

Presently the County Airport lacks an Instrument Landing System. Such a system would make it possible for aircraft to land at the airport in inclement weather. An Instrument Landing System has been proposed for the airport and will be financed and installed by the Federal Aeronautics Administration. Installation of the system is anticipated by 1972. YVith the installation of the landing system, the airport management anticipates enlarging the ramp to accommodate medium-sized jets. To date the air space within a five mile radius of the County Airport is controlled by the Elmira Airport Tower. 'iVhen the weather is poor, clearances for landing at Tompkins County are issued from the Elmira Tower.

Chartair, the chartered flight service out of Tompkins County Airport, carried some 5,000 passengers in the northwest region of New York State in 1968. This was a decline of 18 percent from 1967. However, the Chartair Service increased by 30 percent from 1966 to 1967.

An important segment of airport traffic operations come from the East Hill Flying Club and itinerant private pilots. These two users account for 48 percent of all traffic operations at the County Airport.

The total number of airport users has increased steadily. In 1968, 167,490 people used the airport facilities. This 1968 use was 16 percent higher than in 1967. The 1967 use was 21 percent higher than in 1966.

Airport users create an estimated 900 automobile trips per day. Ground transportation for these airport users is mainly by private car. The airport limousine service, however, carried 13,640 passengers in 1968, a slight decrease in use. Decreases have also been in evidence in car and rental service.

Proposals

1. The city should support the county's efforts to expand air service and facilities at the Tompkins County Airport.

99

( I

CONCLUSION

The General Plan for Ithaca as presented here has established a broad policy to assist in guiding the community toward predetermined objectives. The fundamental objective of the plan is to make Ithaca a place of and for man.

An essential part of preparing the General Plan was the two months of public hearings, comments, and criticisms of the plan. Suggestions from these meetings were carefully weighed and incorporated into the final document. Community participation is essential so that the objectives of the plan reflect the desires and values of the residents for the future priorities in the community.

A second important facet of the plan is flexibility. The best plans must be responsive to changes in the community. Our plan is general. However, it was made at a single point in time. Ithaca is dynamic. The proposals listed in the plan must be reviewed periodically to keep the plan contemporary with the current situation in the community. The community objectives of the General Plan, however, should be retained so long as they are valid expressions of the community's desires and values.

A third important facet of the plan is its cost. Traditionally, matters of community growth and decisions affecting the physical environment are determined on the basis of economic expediency. It is not difficult to see that improving a community is an expensive procedure. Improvement requires sizable sums of money over long periods of time. By planning, the short-term profit is often traded off for the greater long-term saving. Several examples of how planning can save money for everyone in the community are as follows:

1. Planning protects the value of property by specifically designating the use to which a property, and adjacent properties, can best be put.

2. Planning provides for the most efficient long-range use of that part of the city's land which presently suffers from abuse.

3. Planning establishes objectives, arrived at by the whole community, on which to guide decisions and to allocate tax dollars.

4. Planning enables the community to base priorities for public improvements on accepted and desired community objectives.

5. Planning reduces unnecessary expenditures which do little to improve the city's physical environment.

6. Planning avoids the great expense of providing public services before an area is ready to develop.

7. Planning helps to attract and retain people, increasing the production and consumption of the community which are vital to a growing economy.

8. Planning offers residents the opportunity to do something about many urban problems which everyone dislikes such as heavy traffic and lack of parking.

9. Planning protects future generations from the costly job which faces Ithaca now: correcting our past mistakes.

This question of cost is a serious one. But before asking it, one might consider how much the lack of planning has cost the community in the past, how much it is presently costing the community to correct mistakes which could have been avoided, and how much it will cost the community in the future if the city does not begin long-range planning now. Can we really afford not to plan for Ithaca's future?

103

EPILOGUE

The fact that Ithaca does not exist in isolation from the surrounding area, and that it is subject to abstract influences of regional and national scope, has been alluded to in the body of this plan and is intellectually obvious . This local interdependence is presently institutionalized in such facilities as the city water and sewer systems. Thus, while the General Plan is limited directly by the governmental boundaries of the city, the plan must also estimate the impact of trends of growth and development in the area external to the city and vice versa.

Ithaca, in this regional role, is obligated to plan for the future in such a way that it will benefit other parts of the region as well as itself. The mutual benefit will result primarily from the adoption of a policy of positive intergovernmental coordination, coupled with active efforts on the part of each level of city government to provide effective programs for improved living and working conditions for the entire community. Such a commitment to intergovernmental organization would be in the best interests of the city and the adjacent towns since it would mandate the most effective and efficient use of common financial, human, and physical resources.

The city's primary role is as a center for, and stimulus to, development in Tompkins County. By planning and providing responsibly for future growth in the city, the quality of life for all residents of the county will be enhanced. The city must plan to maintain and improve its ability to furnish the requisite urban services and urban amenities necessary for a total county population which may increase 40 percent by 1980 and 90 percent by the end of the century.

Another major role of the city is as a locus of the two major educational institutions, Ithaca College and Cornell University. The combined budgets of these institutions, which are considered industries, currently approximates $150,000,000. These budgets are four to five times bigger than the gross expenditure of the next largest local industry. The economic importance of these institutions is supplemented by the money spent by the 17,500 students and their dependents resident in the area for the better part of each year. As pointed out in the education section of this plan, growth of these institutions is expected to continue for at least the next few decades. Therefore, if the city plans and provides services and facilities needed by the institutions, their employees, and students, then the city will grow and this growth will help to provide the funds necessary for programs to benefit all city residents. If the public and private sectors of the city decide not to respond to the increasing markets gen-

erated by the educational institutions the economic advantage will accrue to the merchants and residents of the surrounding towns.

The growth of these educational institutions, as well as of other major industries and businesses in or adjacent to Ithaca, has h.elped make the city the commercial and service center for an area roughly corresponding to the county. Coordinated public and private development programs aimed at further strengthening the position of the city will have a greater total effect than the business gained by each individual establishment locating in the city because shoppers will tend to patronize es tablishments adjacent to those which are the primary object of their trip. If the convenience of access, the variety of opportunity, and the amenity of the city's central and subsidiary business districts are not maintained and improved, more and more decisions on business location and shopping trips will be made in favor of more scattered, but comparatively more attractive sites in areas outside the city. As a result, such scattered sites would have the effect of weakening the city's economic position, as well as fostering marginally-attractive and marginally-profitable shopping centers in the surrounding area.

Ithaca is the employment center for a region larger than the county. The 1960 Census indicates that three and a half times as many persons commuted into Tompkins County for work than traveled out of the county for work. Moreover, by virtue of its concentration of commercial and educational activity, most of this commutation comes to the city. This in-commutation rate will be sustained or increased by the expected growth of present major employers and the possible addition of other enterprises in and near the city.

Business and employment opportunities are closely linked to residential opportunities. The tight housing market in Ithaca and the county, documented in the section on housing, is one of the reasons why so many people commute to the jobs available in the city. This plan proposes that a major effort be made to stimulate increased construction of housing for all income levels within the city. Such building activity would have the effects of supporting the construction trades and retaining more of the local payroll within an expanded and easily accessible consumer market. If the increased demand for housing, indicated by population projections and commuter trends, is not met by the city with a policy of encouragement and provision of resources available within the city, such as land and municipal services, then a solution will be found outside the city. D evelopment of housing outside the

105

city may have adverse long run effects, i.e. high costs of providing utilities and unnecessary duplication of services.

Another part of the city's role in regional development is as a governmental center. Because it is accessible and the seat of two governments, the city and the county, many other public, semi-public, and private agencies also have their headquarters in the city. i\!Iovements currently underway to combine similarly oriented social service groups promise more efficient and effective community action. Similarly, problems dealing with physical development, such as waste disposal and water supply, would probably benefit from increased intergovernmental coordination. The question of primary responsibility for the solution of waste disposal and water supply will require that consideration be given to consolidation of governmental agencies on a county-wide basis. Such a county agency would then coordinate the efforts of all governmental agencies within the area.

The City of Ithaca has historically played a central role in the operation and development of its surrounding county. Today, difficult policy and development decisions are confronting the city. Resolution of these problems will affect positively or negatively the conditions in the areas beyond the city. Recognizing its position of leadership, the city must consider its continual interaction with the surrounding area and acknowledge that the best future rests in maximum development of the potential of both the city and the community which surrounds it.

Among community problems which must be dealt with on an integrated basis are water resource development, housing, sewage and refuse disposal, pollution control, highway access into and through both the city and county, adequacy and location of commercial activity, land use and zoning, and expanding the community's economic base. The solutions to these community problems will bear directly on the shape of future development: whether it is to be scattered, diffuse and haphazard, or orderly and composed of a clearly defined and dominant center with well planned subordinate nodes or areas of development.

Some of the methods available to resolve these common community problems are conservation, control, and development. Conservation pertains to maintaining and restoring the community's existing resources, through public and private action. At the public level the normal maintenance activity of operating agencies is effective in taking care of governmental structures and developed facilities such as roads and sewers. Further public involvement is required in action programs and other conservation efforts concerning the undeveloped environment, in-

106

eluding major natural features and public lands of all types: trees, parks, streams and lakes, gorges, and undevelopable land which should be protected and preserved. Private conservation action should be encouraged to develop similar care for, and pride in, individual properties. Such action can be channeled through group action in areas of special interest such as civic groups, neighborhood associations, nature and environmental action groups. These organizations sponsor clean-up campaigns in neighborhoods, business areas , and recreation lands; restore areas and buildings of historic and scenic interest; and support historic preservation efforts, architectural review standards and boards, and otherwise influence conservation efforts of the larger community.

Control concerns the establishment and implimentation of measures for maintenance and growth of the community. These controls may be direct or indirect. Direct controls usually take the form of codes, ordinances, and regulations such as those for building, zoning, and subdivision. However, these measures may also include policies for overall development such as the proposals in this plan and policies and procedures for intergovernmental cooperation in solving matters of common concern. Other methods of control are indirect. These controls include civic and special interest group involvement and general public opinion. These can be either positive or negative forces supporting or resisting existing and proposed controls, or initiating and lobbying for needed changes.

Development is a method of solving problems and effecting change largely by working toward the future within the existing framework of control. Although development is primarily concerned with questions of land use and circulation, the effect of this physical development on the economic and social development of the community must also be considered. Development decisions must be made on the basis of research into the community's needs and desires. Planning and development done in the absence of this knowledge is invariably damaging to someone, and often has negative repercussions on the original planning body. Only by considering these external effects can the city meet the needs of its own residents and businessmen and provide efficiently for its own service area. By considering the impact of development on the city, the city will consolidate and reinforce its own position in the commercial service market area. By conserving and concentrating physical and financial resources the city will benefit the entire area.

The major means of resolving these community problems and expanding the community's economic base lie in: ( 1) developing increased intergovernmental cooperation; ( 2) increasing citizen and private

I'

I I

I )

[ I

['

I .

('

[ I

I .

[

r ,

[ '

[ '

[ '

! \

enterprise's interest and involvement; and ( 3) increasing commitment to planning and programming organized action by public and private agencies at all levels.

In sum, Ithaca will serve both its own interests and those of its regional community by recognizing and understanding its greater responsibility. By looking at and acting on its own and on its community's development problems, the city will reinforce the cycle of economic growth by attracting business and industry. Continuing responsive and responsible action on the part of the city will result not only in increased community spirit and pride; it will also encourage needed public support for government. Increased civic involvement and participation in physical, social, and economic development programs that make a growing

city attractive in both the economic and physical sense will result from public support for their government. This concerned, informed, and progressive community action is instrumental in achieving a satisfying and enduring environment for living and working; a healthy city, physically and economically; a city which provides outstanding facilities for learning and leisure; a city which attracts new businesses and residents while serving the present ones better. Ithaca is most likely to achieve its full potential as a center for and a stimulus to regional community life, employment, and services by assuming leadership in the effort to resolve regional community problems, and by working to achieve maximum beneficial growth both internally and externally.

107

city of ithaca, new york: a general plan

Documents