HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-13-15 Planning and Development Board Special Meeting Agenda
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — 3rd Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
JOANN CORNISH, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
PHYLLISA A. DeSARNO, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Telephone: Planning Division – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6559
Email: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org Email: iura@cityofithaca.org
Fax: 607-274-6558 Fax: 607-274-6558
If you have a disability & would like specific accommodation
to participate, please contact the City Clerk at 274‐6570 by
12:00 p.m., the day before the meeting.
NOTICE OF MEETING
A Special Meeting of the PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD will be held at 6:00 p.m. on JANUARY 13, 2015 in COMMON
COUNCIL CHAMBERS, City Hall, 108 E. Green Street, Ithaca, NY.
AGENDA ITEM Start Time
1. Agenda Review 6:00
2. 620 S. Aurora St. ― Chain Works District: Consideration of Approval of Scoping Document 6:05
A. Review Comments Response Summary
B. Review Revised Draft Scope
C. Lead Agency Discussion & Comments
D. Approval of Scoping Document
3. Adjournment 9:30
ACCESSING ONLINE MEETING MATERIALS
Site Plan Review & Subdivision Applications (and Related Documents)
Site Plan Review application documents are accessible electronically via the “Document Center” on the City web site
(www.cityofithaca.org/DocumentCenter), under “Planning & Development” > “Site Plan Review Project Applications,” and in the
relevant year/month folder. Subdivision application materials can be similarly located, but in the “Subdivision Applications” folder.
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
RE
S
P
O
N
S
I
V
E
N
E
S
S
SU
M
M
A
R
Y
:
Sc
o
p
i
n
g
Do
c
u
m
e
n
t
‐― Ch
a
i
n
Wo
r
k
s
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
Jo
h
n
Gr
a
v
e
s
,
So
u
t
h
Hi
l
l
Ci
v
i
c
As
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
Ef
f
e
c
t
s
of
th
e
Pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
on
Us
e
an
d
Co
n
s
e
r
v
a
t
i
o
n
of
En
e
r
g
y
2.
5
Su
s
t
a
i
n
a
b
l
e
De
s
i
g
n
Fi
r
s
t
,
I wo
u
l
d
li
k
e
to
su
b
m
i
t
th
i
s
ra
t
h
e
r
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
(1
0
1
pa
g
e
)
Fe
a
s
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
St
u
d
y
of
Re
n
e
w
a
b
l
e
En
e
r
g
y
Sources at the Emerson Plant in Ithaca,
NY
, pr
e
p
a
r
e
d
in
20
1
1
by
a te
a
m
of
10
gr
a
d
u
a
t
e
‐le
v
e
l
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
st
u
d
e
n
t
s
an
d
th
e
i
r
adviser Dr. Francis Vanek in the School
of
Ci
v
i
l
& En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
i
n
g
at
Co
r
n
e
l
l
Un
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y
.
Se
c
o
n
d
,
I wo
u
l
d
li
k
e
to
su
b
m
i
t
co
p
i
e
s
of
th
i
s
mu
c
h
sh
o
r
t
e
r
an
d
le
s
s
te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
Gu
e
s
t
Vi
e
w
p
o
i
n
t
th
a
t
ran in The Ithaca Journal in 2012,
wr
i
t
t
e
n
by
Dr
.
Fr
a
n
c
i
s
Va
n
e
k
an
d
co
‐si
g
n
e
d
by
Br
u
c
e
Ab
b
o
t
t
an
d
my
s
e
l
f
,
ca
l
l
e
d
“V
i
s
i
o
n
fo
r
Em
e
r
s
o
n
site: Business space, green power.”
“R
e
n
e
w
a
b
l
e
en
e
r
g
y
op
t
i
o
n
s
ar
e
an
o
t
h
e
r
pa
r
t
of
Re
p
u
r
p
o
s
i
n
g
Em
e
r
s
o
n
.
Bi
o
m
a
s
s
ca
n
be
co
‐fi
r
e
d
with natural gas to reduce the carbon
fo
o
t
p
r
i
n
t
.
Al
s
o
,
th
e
la
r
g
e
an
d
fl
a
t
ro
o
f
of
th
e
pl
a
n
t
,
un
o
b
s
t
r
u
c
t
e
d
by
tr
e
e
s
an
d
ot
h
e
r
sh
a
d
i
n
g
pr
o
v
i
d
e
s
an excellent opportunity for solar
ph
o
t
o
v
o
l
t
a
i
c
(P
V
)
sy
s
t
e
m
s
.
As
mu
c
h
as
4 me
g
a
w
a
t
t
s
of
so
l
a
r
pa
n
e
l
s
co
u
l
d
be
in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
if
th
e
sp
a
c
e
were fully used, equivalent to more
th
a
n
1,
0
0
0
ho
m
e
‐si
z
e
d
so
l
a
r
PV
sy
s
t
e
m
s
.
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
l
y
,
a mi
x
t
u
r
e
of
so
l
a
r
PV
an
d
so
l
a
r
ho
t
wa
t
e
r
could be installed.”
“F
u
r
t
h
e
r
in
th
e
fu
t
u
r
e
,
th
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
y
mi
g
h
t
of
f
e
r
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
he
a
t
i
n
g
an
d
lo
c
a
l
l
y
ge
n
e
r
a
t
e
d
el
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
to
surrounding demand centers, such as
It
h
a
c
a
Co
l
l
e
g
e
,
th
e
It
h
a
c
a
ce
n
t
r
a
l
bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
di
s
t
r
i
c
t
an
d
th
e
So
u
t
h
Hi
l
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
.
Re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
units might be added uphill from the plant
an
d
th
e
s
e
un
i
t
s
co
u
l
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
to
th
e
sy
s
t
e
m
as
we
l
l
.
Th
e
ce
n
t
e
r
mi
g
h
t
al
s
o
ha
r
n
e
s
s
el
e
c
t
r
i
c
a
l
st
o
r
a
g
e
systems to improve reliability. There
is
a gr
o
w
i
n
g
ma
r
k
e
t
fo
r
de
v
i
c
e
s
su
c
h
as
la
r
g
e
‐sc
a
l
e
st
a
t
i
o
n
a
r
y
ba
t
t
e
r
i
e
s
or
fl
y
w
h
e
e
l
sy
s
t
e
m
s
.
Pa
r
t
of the building could be set aside for an
en
e
r
g
y
st
o
r
a
g
e
ce
n
t
e
r
,
so
th
a
t
in
th
e
ev
e
n
t
of
a re
g
i
o
n
‐wi
d
e
bl
a
c
k
o
u
t
,
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
"m
i
c
o
g
r
i
d
'
'
co
u
l
d
isolate from the grid and function
re
l
i
a
b
l
y
on
it
s
ow
n
ge
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
st
o
r
e
d
po
w
e
r
.
”
I of
f
e
r
th
i
s
re
l
e
v
a
n
t
en
e
r
g
y
in
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
re
p
u
r
p
o
s
i
n
g
th
e
fo
r
m
e
r
Em
e
r
s
o
n
pl
a
n
t
,
no
t
to
cr
e
a
t
e
another level of complication for
Un
c
h
a
i
n
e
d
Pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
,
bu
t
to
po
i
n
t
ou
t
th
a
t
gr
e
a
t
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
ex
i
s
t
fo
r
wh
a
t
th
e
Co
r
n
e
l
l
Green Consulting Group proposed in
20
1
1
.
Th
e
s
e
gr
e
a
t
op
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
i
e
s
ex
i
s
t
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
e
U.
S
.
De
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
of
En
e
r
g
y
,
th
e
Ne
w
Yo
r
k
St
a
t
e
Energy Research and Development
Au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
,
th
e
So
u
t
h
e
r
n
Ti
e
r
Ec
o
n
o
m
i
c
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Co
u
n
c
i
l
,
an
d
pr
i
v
a
t
e
fu
n
d
s
th
a
t
su
p
p
o
r
t
re
s
i
l
i
e
n
t
power projects and smart‐grid
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
lt
'
s
wo
r
t
h
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
g
.
Include discussion of alternative energy in 2.5 and/ or Ch 10
Cy
n
t
h
i
a
Br
o
c
k
,
Co
m
m
o
n
Co
u
n
c
i
l
SE
Q
R
Re
v
i
e
w
Ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
Ad
d
th
e
Ci
t
y
of
It
h
a
c
a
Bo
a
r
d
of
Pu
b
l
i
c
Wo
r
k
s
as
an
In
v
o
l
v
e
d
Ag
e
n
c
y
.
Th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
wi
l
l
im
p
a
c
t
th
e
City's infrastructure in terms of traffic,
wa
t
e
r
,
se
w
e
r
,
an
d
bi
c
y
c
l
e
/
p
e
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
ne
e
d
s
.
Th
e
BP
W
is
ch
a
r
g
e
d
wi
t
h
ov
e
r
s
e
e
i
n
g
pr
e
s
e
n
t
an
d
future conditions and demands on our
in
f
r
a
s
t
r
u
c
t
u
r
e
,
an
d
sh
o
u
l
d
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
as
an
in
v
o
l
v
e
d
ag
e
n
c
y
wi
t
h
in
p
u
t
in
t
o
th
e
DG
E
I
S
.
Added to Scope
SE
Q
R
Re
v
i
e
w
Ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
Ad
d
th
e
It
h
a
c
a
Ci
t
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
Di
s
t
r
i
c
t
as
an
In
t
e
r
e
s
t
e
d
Ag
e
n
c
y
.
As
th
i
s
is
a re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
pr
o
j
e
c
t
of
si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
size, it may have direct and indirect
im
p
a
c
t
s
on
po
p
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
de
m
o
g
r
a
p
h
i
c
s
fo
r
pr
i
m
a
r
y
sc
h
o
o
l
ag
e
d
ch
i
l
d
r
e
n
,
an
d
th
u
s
IC
S
D
sh
o
u
l
d
be
listed as an interested agency. Added to Scope
Op
e
n
Sp
a
c
e
an
d
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
Ad
d
de
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
of
Ga
t
e
w
a
y
Tr
a
i
l
an
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
to
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
an
d
fu
t
u
r
e
tr
a
i
l
ne
t
w
o
r
k
Added to Scope
Op
e
n
Sp
a
c
e
an
d
Re
c
r
e
a
t
i
o
n
In
c
l
u
d
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
th
e
tr
a
i
l
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
e
T1
(n
a
t
u
r
a
l
zo
n
e
)
.
It
is
of
t
e
n
me
n
t
i
o
n
e
d
th
a
t
this area would contain walking trails,
an
d
it
is
lo
g
i
c
a
l
th
a
t
in
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
s
wo
u
l
d
de
s
i
r
e
to
co
n
n
e
c
t
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
T4
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
(p
g
18
)
and the Gateway trail to get to area south
su
c
h
as
St
o
n
e
Qu
a
r
r
y
an
d
Bu
t
t
e
r
m
i
l
k
Fa
l
l
s
.
Added to Scope
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
An
a
l
y
z
e
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
du
r
i
n
g
pe
a
k
ho
u
r
an
d
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
:
Ad
d
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
in
t
o
th
i
s
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
(p
g
.
26
)
:
St
o
n
e
Qu
a
r
r
y
/
S
p
e
n
c
e
r
Ro
a
d
S.
Me
a
d
o
w
St
.
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
/
S
p
e
n
c
e
r
Ro
a
d
S.
Me
a
d
o
w
St
.
Ex
t
e
n
s
i
o
n
/
E
l
m
i
r
a
Ro
a
d
/
M
e
a
d
o
w
St
.
Added to Scope 1
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
Cr
i
s
Mc
C
o
n
k
e
y
Pu
b
l
i
c
He
a
l
t
h
I am
mo
s
t
co
n
c
e
r
n
e
d
wi
t
h
in
d
o
o
r
ai
r
qu
a
l
i
t
y
an
d
sa
f
e
t
y
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
i
a
l
us
e
,
an
d
qu
e
s
t
i
o
n
i
n
g
th
e
sufficiency of LEEDS point system in
ad
d
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
in
d
o
o
r
ai
r
po
l
l
u
t
i
o
n
on
th
e
fo
r
m
e
r
in
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
si
t
e
wh
e
r
e
I wo
r
k
e
d
fo
r
ei
g
h
t
ye
a
r
s
.
I am
concerned with the trade‐off between
en
e
r
g
y
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
an
d
ai
r
qu
a
l
i
t
y
,
an
d
wo
u
l
d
li
k
e
to
se
e
th
i
s
so
m
e
h
o
w
in
c
o
r
p
o
r
a
t
e
d
in
th
e
fi
n
a
l
sc
o
p
i
n
g
document. Noted‐ covered under building code
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Ca
n
yo
u
te
l
l
me
if
th
e
Ci
t
y
or
To
w
n
of
It
h
a
c
a
ha
s
an
ad
a
p
t
i
v
e
re
‐us
e
or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
?
Noted
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Ha
v
i
n
g
wo
r
k
e
d
at
Mo
r
s
e
Ch
a
i
n
fo
r
ei
g
h
t
ye
a
r
s
,
I ca
n
at
t
e
s
t
to
th
e
st
u
n
n
i
n
g
vi
e
w
s
of
th
e
la
k
e
th
r
o
u
g
h
dirty panes. Tending machines didn't
gi
v
e
a lo
t
of
ti
m
e
to
ga
z
e
,
bu
t
th
e
r
e
we
r
e
al
w
a
y
s
sl
o
w
ti
m
e
s
on
be
n
c
h
wo
r
k
,
or
st
r
e
s
s
i
n
g
gi
a
n
t
le
a
f
chain on the hydraulic chain puller
wh
o
s
e
fr
a
m
e
wa
s
sa
l
v
a
g
e
d
fr
o
m
th
e
Mo
r
s
e
fa
c
t
o
r
y
in
Tr
u
m
a
n
s
b
u
r
g
af
t
e
r
th
e
fi
r
e
.
On
e
ni
g
h
t
,
my
heart sank as I saw the flames on west
hi
l
l
.
My
fr
i
e
n
d
s
at
La
Ca
b
r
e
r
a
lo
s
t
th
e
i
r
ba
r
n
an
d
al
l
th
e
i
r
go
a
t
s
.
Noted
Pu
b
l
i
c
He
a
l
t
h
Ho
w
od
d
it
is
to
th
i
n
k
th
a
t
wh
e
r
e
I st
o
o
d
mi
g
h
t
no
w
be
pa
r
t
i
t
i
o
n
e
d
in
t
o
ap
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
s
.
Ho
w
mu
c
h
air exchange will there be? There is a
tr
a
d
e
‐of
f
be
t
w
e
e
n
he
a
t
i
n
g
/
c
o
o
l
i
n
g
ef
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
y
an
d
ai
r
ex
c
h
a
n
g
e
,
an
d
he
a
l
t
h
.
Th
i
s
ne
e
d
s
to
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in the final scoping document.
Pe
r
s
o
n
a
l
l
y
,
I'
d
ne
e
d
a lo
t
of
co
n
v
i
n
c
i
n
g
be
f
o
r
e
de
c
i
d
i
n
g
to
li
v
e
th
e
r
e
.
Th
e
co
n
c
r
e
t
e
fl
o
o
r
s
ar
e
sa
t
u
r
a
t
e
d
with oil. I read about Barium. Has
an
y
o
n
e
te
s
t
e
d
fo
r
Mo
l
y
b
e
n
u
m
?
We
us
e
d
to
us
e
a lo
t
of
mo
l
y
k
o
t
e
as
a dr
y
lu
b
r
i
c
a
n
t
in
th
e
in
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
chain department Noted
Er
r
a
t
a
BT
W
,
wr
i
t
e
r
s
sh
o
u
l
d
no
t
ke
e
p
re
f
e
r
r
i
n
g
to
po
w
e
r
tr
a
n
s
m
i
s
s
i
o
n
pr
o
d
u
c
t
s
.
In
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
ch
a
i
n
wa
s
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
e
d
largely for conveyance, and
th
e
au
t
o
m
o
t
i
v
e
de
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
mo
v
e
d
ou
t
be
f
o
r
e
th
e
sa
l
e
of
th
e
ol
d
pl
a
n
t
to
Em
e
r
s
o
n
.
Noted
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Th
e
r
e
wa
s
mu
c
h
oi
l
an
d
di
r
t
ca
k
e
d
on
th
e
co
n
c
r
e
t
e
fl
o
o
r
s
th
a
t
we
tr
i
e
d
to
re
m
o
v
e
wi
t
h
so
m
e
re
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
r
before one of many tour trying to
se
l
l
th
e
pl
a
n
t
.
Ou
r
fo
r
e
m
a
n
se
t
us
ou
t
wi
t
h
a ro
t
a
r
y
st
o
n
e
co
n
c
r
e
t
e
gr
i
n
d
e
r
th
a
t
di
d
n
'
t
wo
r
k
at
al
l
.
The stones just became plugged up with
oi
l
y
di
r
t
an
d
di
d
no
t
h
i
n
g
bu
t
sp
i
n
.
In
s
t
e
a
d
,
we
gr
o
u
n
d
it
cl
a
y
ab
s
o
r
b
e
n
t
wi
t
h
ro
t
a
r
y
wi
r
e
br
u
s
h
fl
o
o
r
scrubbers. This put a thin layer of light
co
l
o
r
e
d
cl
a
y
on
to
p
of
th
e
di
r
t
th
a
t
lo
o
k
e
d
li
k
e
cl
e
a
n
ba
r
e
co
n
c
r
e
t
e
.
Ou
r
fo
r
e
m
a
n
th
e
n
cl
o
s
e
d
th
e
walkways so prepared from fork lift
tr
a
f
f
i
c
so
th
e
il
l
u
s
i
o
n
wo
u
l
d
no
t
be
ru
i
n
e
d
by
ti
r
e
ma
r
k
s
.
Noted
Ti
m
Lo
g
u
e
Ci
t
y
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
En
g
i
n
e
e
r
Si
t
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Co
u
l
d
th
e
la
s
t
it
e
m
,
"i
n
t
e
r
m
o
d
a
l
ac
c
e
s
s
(i
.
e
.
ma
s
s
tr
a
n
s
i
t
,
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
s
an
d
bi
c
y
c
l
e
s
)
"
be
ch
a
n
g
e
d
to "multi‐modal facilities (e.g., pedestrian,
bi
c
y
c
l
e
,
tr
a
n
s
i
t
,
an
d
he
a
v
y
ve
h
i
c
l
e
s
)
"
?
Added to Scope
Si
t
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
I wo
u
l
d
su
g
g
e
s
t
ei
t
h
e
r
ad
d
i
n
g
it
e
m
s
to
th
i
s
su
b
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
or
cr
e
a
t
i
n
g
a ne
w
su
b
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
ab
o
u
t
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
multi‐modal connectivity. I think it will
be
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
du
r
i
n
g
th
e
im
p
a
c
t
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
to
ha
v
e
a go
o
d
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
of
ho
w
we
l
l
or
po
o
r
l
y
th
e
site is actually connected with a few key
ar
e
a
s
,
pa
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
l
y
wi
t
h
an
ey
e
to
w
a
r
d
cl
a
i
m
s
th
a
t
th
e
si
t
e
is
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
,
bi
c
y
c
l
e
or
tr
a
n
s
i
t
fr
i
e
n
d
l
y
and therefore will generate fewer motor
ve
h
i
c
l
e
tr
i
p
s
th
a
n
a ty
p
i
c
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
(o
r
fe
w
e
r
th
a
n
a so
u
r
c
e
su
c
h
as
th
e
IT
E
Tr
i
p
Ge
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
Manual would suggest). I would suggest
th
a
t
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
to
do
w
n
t
o
w
n
,
It
h
a
c
a
Co
l
l
e
g
e
,
an
d
th
e
So
u
t
h
Hi
l
l
El
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
(w
h
i
c
h
se
r
v
e
s
trips to/from school, but also the South
Hi
l
l
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
mo
r
e
ge
n
e
r
a
l
l
y
)
wo
u
l
d
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a go
o
d
co
n
t
e
x
t
fo
r
un
d
e
r
s
t
a
n
d
i
n
g
th
e
tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
setting of the project. To this end, I
su
g
g
e
s
t
:
Added to scope of Transportation Study
Si
t
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Th
e
st
u
d
y
sh
o
u
l
d
ca
t
a
l
o
g
u
e
or
ma
p
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
bi
c
y
c
l
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
:
1)
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
si
t
e
an
d
th
e
Co
m
m
o
n
s
;
2)
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
si
t
e
an
d
th
e
So
u
t
h
Hi
l
l
El
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y
Sc
h
o
o
l
;
an
d
3)
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
si
t
e
an
d
It
h
a
c
a
Co
l
l
e
g
e
.
If
th
e
r
e
is
mo
r
e
th
a
n
on
e
ro
u
t
e
be
t
w
e
e
n
th
e
s
e
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
wi
t
h
i
n
on
e
‐ha
l
f
of
a mi
l
e
,
th
e
st
u
d
y
sh
o
u
l
d
include up to two reasonable
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
(e
.
g
.
,
if
th
e
r
e
ar
e
tw
o
pa
r
a
l
l
e
l
st
r
e
e
t
s
,
bo
t
h
sh
o
u
l
d
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
;
ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
if
th
e
r
e
ar
e
8 parallel streets, only two need be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
.
)
.
Bi
c
y
c
l
e
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
,
bu
t
no
t
be
li
m
i
t
e
d
to
:
bi
c
y
c
l
e
la
n
e
s
,
ma
r
k
e
d
sh
a
r
e
d
la
n
e
s
,
bicycle boulevards, multi‐use trails,
an
y
ot
h
e
r
pa
t
h
w
a
y
s
op
e
n
to
th
e
pu
b
l
i
c
,
tr
a
f
f
i
c
si
g
n
a
l
s
,
an
d
ot
h
e
r
bi
c
y
c
l
e
re
l
a
t
e
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
co
n
t
r
o
l
.
The study should note where there are
ga
p
s
or
de
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
al
o
n
g
th
e
s
e
ro
u
t
e
s
.
Added to scope of Transportation Study
Si
t
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Th
e
st
u
d
y
sh
o
u
l
d
ca
t
a
l
o
g
u
e
or
ma
p
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
tr
a
n
s
i
t
fa
c
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
on
th
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
si
t
e
an
d
wi
t
h
i
n
½ mile. Transit facilities should include:
si
g
n
e
d
bu
s
st
o
p
s
,
bu
s
sh
e
l
t
e
r
s
,
bu
s
pu
l
l
‐of
f
s
(i
n
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
an
ad
e
q
u
a
t
e
wi
d
t
h
sh
o
u
l
d
e
r
or
bu
s
la
n
e
)
.
Using the pedestrian data gathered above
fo
r
th
e
pe
d
e
s
t
r
i
a
n
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
th
e
st
u
d
y
sh
o
u
l
d
no
t
e
wh
e
r
e
th
e
r
e
ar
e
ga
p
s
or
de
f
i
c
i
e
n
c
i
e
s
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
n
g
the site to bus facilities. Added to scope of Transportation Study 2
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
Si
t
e
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Pa
r
k
i
n
g
Th
e
st
u
d
y
sh
o
u
l
d
cl
a
r
i
f
y
th
e
po
i
n
t
s
of
ac
c
e
s
s
fo
r
th
e
si
t
e
by
mo
d
e
.
Fo
r
ex
a
m
p
l
e
,
in
th
e
dr
a
w
i
n
g
set submitted to begin the site plan review
pr
o
c
e
s
s
,
Ca
y
u
g
a
St
r
e
e
t
is
sh
o
w
n
as
a po
i
n
t
of
ac
c
e
s
s
.
It
is
no
t
cl
e
a
r
if
th
e
in
t
e
n
t
is
to
pr
o
v
i
d
e
a walkway up Cayuga Street or vehicular
ac
c
e
s
s
.
Si
m
i
l
a
r
l
y
,
th
e
ol
d
as
p
h
a
l
t
pa
t
h
th
a
t
co
n
n
e
c
t
s
to
Au
r
o
r
a
St
r
e
e
t
,
ne
a
r
Hi
l
l
v
i
e
w
Pl
a
c
e
,
is
no
t
shown as a pedestrian access point of
en
t
r
y
,
bu
t
pr
e
s
u
m
a
b
l
y
co
u
l
d
be
.
Added to scope of Transportation Study
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Ad
d
tr
u
c
k
s
to
th
e
li
s
t
in
th
e
fi
r
s
t
it
e
m
ab
o
u
t
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
in
t
e
r
n
a
l
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
ne
t
w
o
r
k
.
Added to scope of Transportation Study
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Ad
d
"T
r
i
p
Ge
n
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Tr
i
p
As
s
i
g
n
m
e
n
t
"
ju
s
t
to
be
cl
e
a
r
th
i
s
is
a ke
y
st
e
p
in
a tr
a
f
f
i
c
im
p
a
c
t
analysis and needs to be documented. Added to scope of Transportation Study
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Fo
r
Le
v
e
l
of
Se
r
v
i
c
e
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
,
th
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
sh
o
u
l
d
co
m
p
a
r
e
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
co
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
to
a fu
t
u
r
e
ye
a
r
"No Build" scenario (assuming a modest
ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
gr
o
w
t
h
in
tr
a
f
f
i
c
)
,
to
th
e
"F
u
l
l
Bu
i
l
d
Ou
t
"
sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
.
If
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
is
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
to
be
ph
a
s
e
d
,
various phases of the project
(p
a
r
t
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
)
ca
n
be
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
as
se
p
a
r
a
t
e
sc
e
n
a
r
i
o
s
.
Added to scope of Transportation Study
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
I wo
u
l
d
su
g
g
e
s
t
th
a
t
th
e
st
u
d
y
in
c
l
u
d
e
LO
S
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
fo
r
bo
t
h
th
e
AM
an
d
PM
pe
a
k
pe
r
i
o
d
s
.
Added to scope of Transportation Study
To
w
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Bo
a
r
d
an
d
St
a
f
f
5.
1
.
2
Co
m
p
a
t
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
wi
t
h
Su
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
La
n
d
Us
e
s
Id
e
n
t
i
f
y
su
r
r
o
u
n
d
i
n
g
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
by
na
m
e
Complete
6.
3
Wa
t
e
r
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Mo
r
e
de
t
a
i
l
.
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
st
u
d
i
e
s
th
a
t
wi
l
l
be
do
n
e
an
d
th
e
i
r
sc
o
p
e
s
Complete
6.
5
Pu
b
l
i
c
He
a
l
t
h
an
d
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
Ad
d
:
id
e
n
t
i
f
y
me
t
h
o
d
s
of
st
o
r
a
g
e
, us
e
an
d
di
s
p
o
s
a
l
of
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
ha
z
a
r
d
o
u
s
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
th
a
t
co
u
l
d
be used in light manufacturing operation Not Added‐
6.
6
Hi
s
t
o
r
i
c
an
d
Ar
c
h
a
e
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
St
a
t
e
th
a
t
a Ph
a
s
e
1A
Cu
l
t
u
r
a
l
re
s
o
u
r
c
e
su
r
v
e
y
wi
l
l
be
do
n
e
St
a
t
e
ho
w
wi
l
l
in
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
hi
s
t
o
r
y
be
in
v
e
s
t
i
g
a
t
e
d
an
d
pr
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
?
Added to Scope
6.
7
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
– in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
sa
f
e
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
ro
u
t
i
n
g
fr
o
m
96
B
,
ma
t
e
r
i
a
l
s
st
a
g
i
n
g
,
de
l
i
v
e
r
i
e
s
and contactor parking. Safe
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
ro
u
t
i
n
g
sh
o
u
l
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
me
t
h
o
d
s
fo
r
pr
e
v
e
n
t
i
n
g
he
a
v
y
tr
u
c
k
s
fr
o
m
de
s
c
e
n
d
i
n
g
96
B
into downtown. Added to Scope
Tr
u
c
k
i
n
g
as
pa
r
t
of
fu
t
u
r
e
in
d
u
s
t
r
i
a
l
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Not Added
Co
m
m
u
t
e
r
ro
u
t
e
to
Co
r
n
e
l
l
(C
o
d
i
n
g
t
o
n
to
Bu
r
n
s
Ro
a
d
)
– tr
a
f
f
i
c
vo
l
u
m
e
,
im
p
a
c
t
s
an
d
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
Added to Scope
Ad
d
co
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
to
So
u
t
h
Hi
l
l
Bu
s
i
n
e
s
s
Pa
r
k
Sp
e
c
i
f
y
am
/
p
m
ti
m
e
s
Added to Scope
In
c
l
u
d
e
LO
S
fo
r
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
by
ph
a
s
e
Addressed in thresholds
In
c
l
u
d
e
ot
h
e
r
pl
a
n
n
e
d
or
an
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
s
in
ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
vo
l
u
m
e
s
For Discussion Background growth may be sufficient t address this issues. A list of projects will be distributed at the meeting.
6.
8
Ut
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
In
c
l
u
d
e
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
en
e
r
g
y
(d
i
s
t
r
i
c
t
he
a
t
i
n
g
,
so
l
a
r
,
et
c
)
Added to Scope
Co
n
s
u
l
t
wi
t
h
To
w
n
Pu
b
l
i
c
Wo
r
k
s
fo
r
ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
An
a
l
y
s
i
s
Added to Scope 3
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
In
c
l
u
d
e
na
t
u
r
a
l
ga
s
an
d
el
e
c
t
r
i
c
i
t
y
in
ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
an
a
l
y
s
i
s
Added to Scope
To
w
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Bo
a
r
d
(c
o
n
t
)
6.
9
Ai
r
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
Ho
w
wi
l
l
ai
r
qu
a
l
i
t
y
be
as
s
e
s
s
e
d
fo
r
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
fu
t
u
r
e
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
Added to Scope
6.
1
0
Vi
s
u
a
l
an
d
Ae
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
Co
n
s
u
l
t
To
w
n
Sc
e
n
i
c
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
Su
r
v
e
y
(P
g
29
)
an
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
re
l
e
v
a
n
t
vi
e
w
s
,
in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
Up
p
e
r
Bo
s
t
w
i
c
k
Road, east Shore Park, Sheffield Road,
We
s
t
Ha
v
e
n
Pa
r
k
an
d
Tu
p
e
l
o
Pa
r
k
.
Added to Scope
St
a
t
e
ho
w
vi
s
u
a
l
im
p
a
c
t
wi
l
l
be
an
a
l
y
z
e
d
(e
.
g
.
be
f
o
r
e
/
a
f
t
e
r
vi
s
u
a
l
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
wi
l
l
be
do
n
e
fo
r
th
e
fo
l
l
o
w
i
n
g
points) Name (and map) receptor
po
i
n
t
s
Added to Scope
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
To
w
n
’
s
da
r
k
sk
y
or
d
i
n
a
n
c
e
Covered in Design Standards
6.
1
1
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
se
r
v
i
c
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
be
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
e
d
in
d
i
v
i
d
u
a
l
l
y
(c
o
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
5.
1
1
)
6.
1
2
Co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
ac
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
St
a
t
e
ho
u
r
s
of
no
i
s
e
‐pr
o
d
u
c
i
n
g
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
‐
7a
m
to
7p
m
M‐S Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
–
Hours of construction added to scope – specific hours not noted
St
a
t
e
th
a
t
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
pa
r
k
i
n
g
wi
l
l
be
on
si
t
e
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
9
Di
s
c
u
s
s
an
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
ho
u
s
i
n
g
nu
m
b
e
r
an
d
ty
p
e
s
in
fi
n
a
l
bu
i
l
d
‐ou
t
– in
c
l
u
d
i
n
g
an
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
ma
r
k
e
t
.
Mention gentrification Housing number and type added. Gentrification not mentioned.
Di
s
c
u
s
s
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
de
m
a
n
d
an
d
ne
e
d
.
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
ca
n
be
us
e
d
as
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
if
ti
e
d
to demand and need. Housing demand added to scope
Li
g
h
t
ma
n
u
f
a
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
ca
n
al
s
o
be
a mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Noted
Di
s
c
u
s
s
de
s
i
g
n
co
n
c
e
p
t
– e.
g
.
wi
l
l
it
be
ur
b
a
n
or
su
b
u
r
b
a
n
– in
t
e
r
n
a
l
ro
a
d
s
sh
o
u
l
d
ha
v
e
si
d
e
w
a
l
k
.
Covered in design guidelines
Di
s
c
u
s
s
in
t
e
r
n
a
l
ci
r
c
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
ne
t
w
o
r
k
Covered in design guidelines
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
10
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
Im
p
a
c
t
s
Sp
e
c
i
f
y
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
– at
a mi
n
i
m
u
m
‐
St
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
,
No
i
s
e
,
Li
g
h
t
,
tr
a
f
f
i
c
,
in
c
r
e
a
s
e
d
need for community services
Wh
a
t
is
th
e
ba
s
e
l
i
n
e
an
d
wh
y
?
In
c
l
u
d
e
re
l
e
v
a
n
t
ap
p
r
o
v
e
d
or
an
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
d
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
an
d
gr
o
w
t
h
ar
e
a
s
in the Town Comp Plan and City draft
pl
a
n
Added to Scope Discussion Item
Ge
n
e
r
a
l
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
Se
e
m
s
to
be
a co
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
DG
E
I
S
an
d
Sc
o
p
i
n
g
Noted
Ne
e
d
to
sa
y
WH
A
T
ex
a
c
t
l
y
wi
l
l
be
in
DG
E
I
S
Noted
Or
g
a
n
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
is
s
u
e
s
‐
re
v
i
s
e
2.
7
.
2
Noted
Ta
k
e
ou
t
al
l
‘w
h
e
r
e
ap
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
’
‘w
h
e
r
e
ap
p
r
o
p
r
i
a
t
e
’
et
c
Completed
Cl
a
r
i
f
y
su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
(s
t
a
f
f
to
do
th
i
s
)
Completed
Sh
o
u
l
d
ha
v
e
an
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
th
a
t
co
u
l
d
ac
t
u
a
l
l
y
be
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
– su
c
h
as
a sm
a
l
l
e
r
sc
a
l
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
Project Sponsor elected not to do this
Li
s
t
na
m
e
of
Ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
fr
o
m
ea
c
h
in
v
o
l
v
e
d
ag
e
n
c
y
Wh
y
is
AC
O
E
no
t
an
in
v
o
l
v
e
d
ag
e
n
c
y
?
To be Completed for Final Scope
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
St
a
f
f
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
Pr
o
j
e
c
t
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
Ne
e
d
di
a
g
r
a
m
to
ac
c
o
m
p
a
n
y
ta
b
l
e
on
pa
g
e
11
Completed
Ne
e
d
si
t
e
co
n
t
e
x
t
fo
r
Ph
a
s
e
1 (a
l
l
si
t
e
pl
a
n
s
on
th
e
sa
m
e
pa
g
e
)
Completed
5.
2
.
2
Ge
o
t
e
c
h
c
a
l
Su
r
v
e
y
/s
i
t
e
ch
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n
re
p
o
r
t
/
In
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
of
su
r
f
a
c
e
ge
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
This has been clarified
5.
2
.
2
To
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
No
t
cl
e
a
r
th
a
t
th
e
to
p
o
g
r
a
p
h
y
is
ba
s
e
d
on
a su
r
v
e
y
by
a li
c
e
n
s
e
d
pr
o
f
e
s
s
i
o
n
a
l
This has been clarified 4
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
5.
3
Re
m
o
v
e
re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
to
wa
t
e
r
co
n
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
.
5.
3
.
3
St
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
Ad
d
ma
p
an
d
di
a
g
r
a
m
to
de
s
c
r
i
b
e
cu
r
r
e
n
t
ov
e
r
l
a
n
d
fl
o
w
pr
o
b
l
e
m
s
fo
r
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
pr
o
p
e
r
t
i
e
s
Not Added ‐For Discussion
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
St
a
f
f
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
(c
o
n
t
)
5.
4
Ve
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Fa
u
n
a
Tr
e
e
in
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
of
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
ar
e
a
s
– at
le
a
s
t
fo
r
Ph
a
s
e
I.
Fi
e
l
d
su
r
v
e
y
to
be
3 se
a
s
o
n
s
.
Identify the name and scope of ‘in‐depth
st
u
d
y
’
Two Season Inventory proposed by Project Sponsor
5.
5
Ti
t
l
e
is
no
t
co
n
s
i
s
t
e
n
t
wi
t
h
6.
5
Corrected
6.
7
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Ad
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
an
d
pa
r
k
i
n
g
lo
t
de
s
i
g
n
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
as
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Complete
5.
8
Mo
r
e
de
t
a
i
l
ab
o
u
t
th
e
sc
o
p
e
Ut
i
l
i
t
y
Ca
p
a
c
i
t
y
An
a
l
y
s
i
s
Complete
6.
2
La
n
d
Ad
d
im
p
a
c
t
to
na
t
u
r
a
l
fe
a
t
u
r
e
s
(e
x
p
o
s
e
d
be
d
r
o
c
k
,
wa
t
e
r
f
a
l
l
s
et
c
)
Added to Scope
6.
4
3
Tr
e
e
in
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
of
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
de
v
e
l
o
p
e
d
ar
e
a
s
– at
le
a
s
t
fo
r
Ph
a
s
e
I
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
sh
o
u
l
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
method quantify and replace
re
m
o
v
e
d
tr
e
e
s
Added to Scope
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6
Ne
e
d
mo
r
e
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
id
e
n
t
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
na
m
e
s
of
st
u
d
y
an
d
sc
o
p
e
of
st
u
d
y
th
a
t
wi
l
l
be
us
e
d
to
ev
a
l
u
a
t
e
impact Complete
Ne
e
d
mo
r
e
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
im
p
a
c
t
s
de
f
i
n
e
d
Complete
Ne
e
d
mo
r
e
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
pr
e
l
i
m
i
n
a
r
y
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
s
de
f
i
n
e
d
Complete
Co
m
m
e
n
t
s
on
Re
v
i
s
e
d
Sc
o
p
e
da
t
e
d
12
‐22
‐14
( NO
T
E
:
Bo
a
r
d
co
m
m
e
n
t
s
of
12
‐9‐1‐
ar
e
on
a se
p
a
r
a
t
e
sh
e
e
t
,
St
a
f
f
,
an
d
Ph
i
l
l
i
p
s
Ly
t
l
e
Comments are tracked in the document dated Jan 13, 2015)
To
w
n
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
Bo
a
r
d
p.
13
:
I ex
p
e
c
t
e
d
to
se
e
a bu
l
l
e
t
ex
p
l
a
i
n
i
n
g
th
e
CW
4
su
b
a
r
e
a
Added to Scope
p.
15
,
21
(
t
w
i
c
e
)
,
an
d
pe
r
h
a
p
s
ot
h
e
r
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
:
Th
e
ag
e
n
c
y
sh
o
u
l
d
be
th
e
“T
o
w
n
of
It
h
a
c
a
To
w
n
Board”—you omitted the second “Town.”
Th
e
To
w
n
ha
s
nu
m
e
r
o
u
s
bo
a
r
d
s
,
so
“T
o
w
n
Bo
a
r
d
”
(a
n
a
l
o
g
o
u
s
to
yo
u
r
Co
m
m
o
n
Co
u
n
c
i
l
)
mu
s
t
be
specified. Added to Scope /Corrections made
p.
15
:
I ex
p
e
c
t
e
d
an
ex
p
l
a
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
th
e
tr
a
n
s
i
t
i
o
n
fr
o
m
“M
o
r
s
e
Ch
a
i
n
”
to
“B
o
r
g
W
a
r
n
e
r
” in
na
m
e
and/or ownership, if this history is to
re
m
a
i
n
.
Noted
p.
17
,
li
n
e
fo
r
bu
i
l
d
i
n
g
na
m
e
4: Yo
u
ar
e
mi
s
s
i
n
g
9,
2
0
0
GF
A
. Ei
t
h
e
r
th
a
t
is
th
e
ar
e
a
to
be
re
m
o
v
e
d
and was omitted, or one or both areas to
be
re
n
o
v
a
t
e
d
ar
e
in
er
r
o
r
.
Completed
*p
.
18
:
Pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
ho
u
s
i
n
g
th
a
t
is
af
f
o
r
d
a
b
l
e
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
of
To
m
p
k
i
n
s
Co
u
n
t
y
(T
C
)
wi
t
h
me
d
i
a
n
incomes (e.g., 80% to 120% of median TC
in
c
o
m
e
s
)
an
d
fo
r
re
s
i
d
e
n
t
s
wi
t
h
in
c
o
m
e
s
be
l
o
w
TC
me
d
i
a
n
ar
e
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
be
n
e
f
i
t
s
th
a
t
mi
g
h
t
of
f
s
e
t
“harms” from the project. I am
di
s
a
p
p
o
i
n
t
e
d
to
se
e
th
e
im
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
th
a
t
re
s
i
d
e
n
c
e
s
wi
l
l
be
at
ma
r
k
e
t
ra
t
e
s
;
th
i
s
im
p
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
ex
i
s
t
s
because the document fails to say
an
y
t
h
i
n
g
ab
o
u
t
pr
o
v
i
d
i
n
g
me
d
i
a
n
‐
an
d
lo
w
e
r
‐in
c
o
m
e
ho
u
s
i
n
g
—
o
n
l
y
“m
a
r
k
e
t
de
m
a
n
d
.
”
Noted
p.
39
:
I re
s
p
e
c
t
f
u
l
l
y
re
q
u
e
s
t
th
e
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
of
on
e
mo
r
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
:
NY
S
79
(S
t
a
t
e
St
r
e
e
t
)
an
d
Pi
n
e
Tree Road. If indeed traffic from the
pr
o
j
e
c
t
us
e
s
Bu
r
n
s
Ro
a
d
to
ge
t
to
Co
r
n
e
l
l
,
th
e
n
th
a
t
tr
a
f
f
i
c
wi
l
l
tr
a
v
e
l
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
e
Pi
n
e
Tr
e
e
Ro
a
d
neighborhood predominantly through
th
i
s
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
.
Ho
w
e
v
e
r
,
tr
a
f
f
i
c
mi
g
h
t
us
e
Bu
r
n
s
Rd
.
to
tu
r
n
ea
s
t
on
NY
S
79
to
w
a
r
d
s
Sl
a
t
e
r
v
i
l
l
e
Springs (and e.g., Interstate 81).
Th
e
Pi
n
e
Tr
e
e
Ro
a
d
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
as
s
o
c
i
a
t
i
o
n
(F
r
i
e
n
d
s
of
Pi
n
e
Tr
e
e
Ro
a
d
)
ha
s
al
r
e
a
d
y
ex
p
r
e
s
s
e
d
serious concerns to the County about
tr
a
f
f
i
c
tr
a
v
e
l
i
n
g
be
t
w
e
e
n
NY
S
79
an
d
Co
r
n
e
l
l
Un
i
v
.
th
r
o
u
g
h
th
i
s
ne
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
.
Th
i
s
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
and near‐by locations also carry a history
of
ac
c
i
d
e
n
t
s
(s
e
e
th
e
To
w
n
’
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
Re
p
o
r
t
)
.
Al
t
h
o
u
g
h
a fl
a
s
h
i
n
g
li
g
h
t
ha
s
be
e
n
in
s
t
a
l
l
e
d
,
it is only a flashing yellow warning for Added to Scope Noted 5
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
tr
a
f
f
i
c
on
NY
S
79
.
In
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
,
th
e
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
cu
r
r
e
n
t
l
y
sp
e
c
i
f
i
e
d
as
“Co
d
d
i
n
g
t
o
n
/
B
u
r
n
s
”
sh
o
u
l
d
be
ex
p
a
n
d
e
d
to
“Coddington/Burns/E. King”; the issue is
th
e
si
g
h
t
di
s
t
a
n
c
e
fo
r
so
m
e
tu
r
n
s
in
th
i
s
co
m
b
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
of
es
s
e
n
t
i
a
l
l
y
ad
j
a
c
e
n
t
bu
t
of
f
s
e
t
in
t
e
r
s
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
.
Added to Scope
*p
.
56
,
su
b
‐se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
9
.
3
:
“T
h
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
”
ac
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
to
wh
a
t
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
?
Noted
p.
60
,
la
s
t
bu
l
l
e
t
:
“H
i
g
h
e
s
t
st
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
”
ac
c
o
r
d
i
n
g
to
wh
a
t
au
t
h
o
r
i
t
y
?
Noted
p.
64
,
la
s
t
bu
l
l
e
t
:
Wh
a
t
ab
o
u
t
ef
f
e
c
t
s
on
so
c
i
a
l
eq
u
i
t
y
? Wh
a
t
if
mi
n
o
r
i
t
i
e
s
or
lo
w
‐in
c
o
m
e
fo
l
k
ar
e
shut out of living in and/or working in this
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
d
pr
o
j
e
c
t
?
Th
a
t
mi
g
h
t
no
t
cr
e
a
t
e
en
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
a
l
or
hu
m
a
n
‐he
a
l
t
h
ha
r
m
s
pe
r
se
, bu
t
I would still consider it to be unacceptable Noted
Su
s
a
n
Br
o
c
k
To
w
n
Of
It
h
a
c
a
Pa
g
e
52
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
7
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
:
Th
e
sc
o
p
e
of
th
e
Tr
a
f
f
i
c
Im
p
a
c
t
St
u
d
y
re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
d
in
th
i
s
se
c
t
i
o
n
should be attached to the scoping
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
.
Ot
h
e
r
w
i
s
e
,
th
e
sc
o
p
i
n
g
do
c
u
m
e
n
t
fa
i
l
s
to
na
i
l
do
w
n
im
p
o
r
t
a
n
t
de
t
a
i
l
s
ab
o
u
t
th
e
tr
a
f
f
i
c
study (which roads will be analyzed,
wh
a
t
ti
m
e
s
ar
e
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
pe
a
k
ho
u
r
s
,
wh
a
t
ba
c
k
g
r
o
u
n
d
tr
a
f
f
i
c
gr
o
w
t
h
as
s
u
m
p
t
i
o
n
s
wi
l
l
be
us
e
d
,
etc.) For Discussion Not required but may be requested
Pa
g
e
69
,
Is
s
u
e
s
No
t
Co
n
s
i
d
e
r
e
d
Si
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
Du
r
i
n
g
th
e
Sc
o
p
i
n
g
Pr
o
c
e
s
s
:
Wh
i
l
e
th
e
GE
I
S
ma
y
no
t
be able to evaluate specific noise and odor
im
p
a
c
t
s
be
c
a
u
s
e
th
e
ex
a
c
t
us
e
s
ar
e
no
t
kn
o
w
n
,
th
e
st
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
in
th
i
s
se
c
t
i
o
n
go
to
o
fa
r
,
at
le
a
s
t
for industrial/manufacturing uses. How
do
we
kn
o
w
Ph
a
s
e
1 wi
l
l
no
t
ha
v
e
an
y
op
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
no
i
s
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
af
t
e
r
co
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
is
co
m
p
l
e
t
e
?
How can it be said the Project will not
cr
e
a
t
e
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
od
o
r
im
p
a
c
t
s
be
y
o
n
d
ex
i
s
t
i
n
g
am
b
i
e
n
t
le
v
e
l
s
?
Th
i
s
se
c
t
i
o
n
in
s
t
e
a
d
sh
o
u
l
d
sa
y
these issues will be further evaluated when
si
t
e
pl
a
n
s
ar
e
pr
o
p
o
s
e
d
fo
r
sp
e
c
i
f
i
c
us
e
s
,
an
d
ad
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
SE
Q
R
an
a
l
y
s
e
s
wi
l
l
be
pe
r
f
o
r
m
e
d
wh
e
r
e
required. This is addressed on pg 73 Chapter 11:Thresholds.
Pa
g
e
8,
DG
E
I
S
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
Su
m
m
a
r
y
:
Ad
d
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
an
d
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
to
th
e
bu
l
l
e
t
e
d
li
s
t
of items to be covered in the dGEIS. Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
s
14
‐15
,
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
2 Pr
o
j
e
c
t
De
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
:
My
co
m
m
e
n
t
s
fr
o
m
th
e
12
/
0
2
/
1
4
jo
i
n
t
me
e
t
i
n
g
ab
o
u
t
the subdivision negative declaration
we
r
e
no
t
ad
d
r
e
s
s
e
d
.
Th
e
po
s
i
t
i
v
e
de
c
l
a
r
a
t
i
o
n
fo
r
th
e
Ch
a
i
n
Wo
r
k
s
pr
o
j
e
c
t
sa
y
s
th
e
su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
is
part of the project, and it is certainly
ne
c
e
s
s
a
r
y
fo
r
th
e
pr
o
j
e
c
t
to
mo
v
e
fo
r
w
a
r
d
.
Th
e
Ci
t
y
Pl
a
n
n
i
n
g
an
d
De
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
Bo
a
r
d
ma
y
ne
e
d
to rescind the negative declaration so it
ca
n
fo
l
d
th
e
su
b
d
i
v
i
s
i
o
n
in
t
o
th
e
GE
I
S
pr
o
c
e
s
s
.
For Discussion The discussion of the subdivision in the scope is sufficient to clarifies this issue. It SEQR does not require that the previous decision be rescinded.
Pa
g
e
s
20
‐21
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
s
2.
7
.
2
GE
I
S
an
d
2.
8
Re
q
u
i
r
e
d
Ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
:
Th
e
li
s
t
of
In
v
o
l
v
e
d
Ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
be the same as the
li
s
t
of
ag
e
n
c
i
e
s
th
a
t
wi
l
l
be
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
i
n
g
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
s
.
To be Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
s
23
‐24
,
Re
a
s
o
n
a
b
l
e
Al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
s
:
Th
e
Ci
t
y
sh
o
u
l
d
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
re
q
u
i
r
i
n
g
an
al
t
e
r
n
a
t
i
v
e
th
a
t
sc
a
l
e
s
down the project
in
te
r
m
s
of
ma
x
i
m
u
m
sq
u
a
r
e
fe
e
t
.
For Discussion It is acceptable to not require this alternative
Pa
g
e
29
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
5.
3
.
1
Su
r
f
a
c
e
Wa
t
e
r
:
Re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
th
e
To
w
n
’
s
st
r
e
a
m
se
t
b
a
c
k
la
w
(T
o
w
n
Co
d
e
Se
c
t
i
o
n
270‐219.5). Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
30
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
5.
4
Ve
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Fa
u
n
a
:
Tr
e
e
s
wi
t
h
8 in
c
h
db
h
ar
e
pr
e
t
t
y
la
r
g
e
—
s
h
o
u
l
d
th
e
number be decreased so that trees with 6
or
4 in
c
h
db
h
ar
e
in
c
l
u
d
e
d
in
th
e
su
r
v
e
y
?
For Discussion
Pa
g
e
42
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
5.
1
0
Vi
s
u
a
l
an
d
Ae
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
Cl
a
r
i
f
y
th
e
la
n
g
u
a
g
e
—
I
ca
n
n
o
t
te
l
l
th
e
di
f
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
between #3 and #4. Also, both
in
c
l
u
d
e
th
e
wo
r
d
s
“u
n
d
e
r
co
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
”
—
t
h
o
s
e
sh
o
u
l
d
be
el
i
m
i
n
a
t
e
d
an
d
th
e
li
s
t
s
of
si
t
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
be specified. #4 refers specifically to the Tompkins Co. Scenic Resources Inventory “under consideration” has been removed
Pa
g
e
45
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
1
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(L
a
n
d
Us
e
an
d
Zo
n
i
n
g
)
:
Th
i
s
sa
y
s
th
e
Ch
a
i
n
Wo
r
k
s
De
s
i
g
n
Standards developed during the
PU
D
/
P
D
Z
ap
p
r
o
v
a
l
pr
o
c
e
s
s
wi
l
l
be
re
f
e
r
e
n
c
e
d
as
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
.
Bu
t
th
e
De
s
i
g
n
St
a
n
d
a
r
d
s
wi
l
l
be
sh
a
p
e
d
by the GEIS and Findings Statements,
so
th
e
GE
I
S
ne
e
d
s
to
re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
wh
a
t
th
e
y
sh
o
u
l
d
be
.
For Discussion
Pa
g
e
46
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
2
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(L
a
n
d
)
:
Ad
d
re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
aw
a
y
fr
o
m
areas of unstable soils as a mitigation
me
a
s
u
r
e
.
Added to Scope 6
Re
v
i
s
i
o
n
Da
t
e
:
01
‐08
‐15
Co
m
m
e
n
t
e
r
Re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Se
c
t
i
o
n
Co
m
m
e
n
t
Su
m
m
a
r
y
Response/Action (Draft)
Pa
g
e
s
46
‐48
,
Wa
t
e
r
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
re
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
of
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
or scaled down development. Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
s
49
‐50
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
4
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(V
e
g
e
t
a
t
i
o
n
an
d
Fa
u
n
a
)
:
La
n
d
s
c
a
p
i
n
g
an
d
tr
e
e
preservation standards should be included
in
th
e
li
s
t
of
mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
.
Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
s
50
‐51
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
5
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(P
u
b
l
i
c
He
a
l
t
h
an
d
En
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
)
:
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
should include relocation of
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
or
sc
a
l
e
d
do
w
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
54
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
7
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
)
:
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
me
a
s
u
r
e
s
sh
o
u
l
d
in
c
l
u
d
e
relocation of development or scaled
do
w
n
de
v
e
l
o
p
m
e
n
t
.
Added to Scope
Pa
g
e
56
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
9
Ai
r
Qu
a
l
i
t
y
:
De
l
e
t
e
th
e
se
n
t
e
n
c
e
“P
h
a
s
e
1 do
e
s
no
t
an
t
i
c
i
p
a
t
e
an
y
po
t
e
n
t
i
a
l
air quality impacts For Discussion This phrasing is acceptable because it accurately describes the proposed project. Any unanticipated future noise impacts would be subject to SEQR review
Pa
g
e
57
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
1
0
Vi
s
u
a
l
an
d
Ae
s
t
h
e
t
i
c
Re
s
o
u
r
c
e
s
:
Cl
a
r
i
f
y
wh
e
t
h
e
r
“e
a
c
h
cr
i
t
i
c
a
l
re
c
e
p
t
o
r
po
i
n
t
”
in the 1st bullet on the page are the
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
li
s
t
e
d
in
th
e
pr
e
c
e
d
i
n
g
bu
l
l
e
t
.
Cl
a
r
i
f
y
wh
i
c
h
lo
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
ar
e
th
e
“c
r
i
t
i
c
a
l
va
n
t
a
g
e
po
i
n
t
s
”
mentioned in the 2nd bullet on the page. For Discussion‐ this is addressed in Ch 5.
Pa
g
e
58
,
Se
c
t
i
o
n
6.
1
0
.
3
Mi
t
i
g
a
t
i
o
n
Me
a
s
u
r
e
s
(V
i
s
u
a
l
)
:
Sa
m
e
as
co
m
m
e
n
t
#1
0
ab
o
v
e
.
For Discussion
Pa
g
e
67
,
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
11
Th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
fo
r
Fu
t
u
r
e
Ac
t
i
o
n
s
:
De
l
e
t
e
th
e
wo
r
d
“s
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
”
in
th
e
3r
d
se
n
t
e
n
c
e
.
In the 4th sentence, add “and
re
l
e
v
a
n
t
Fi
n
d
i
n
g
s
St
a
t
e
m
e
n
t
s
”
af
t
e
r
th
e
ph
r
a
s
e
“c
o
n
d
i
t
i
o
n
s
an
d
th
r
e
s
h
o
l
d
s
es
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
in
th
e
GE
I
S
”
.
Added to Scope
Ch
a
p
t
e
r
12
Cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
Im
p
a
c
t
s
:
Li
s
t
th
e
in
d
e
p
e
n
d
e
n
t
pr
o
j
e
c
t
s
th
a
t
wi
l
l
be
pa
r
t
of
th
e
cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
impact analysis. List the types of
cu
m
u
l
a
t
i
v
e
im
p
a
c
t
s
th
a
t
wi
l
l
be
ex
a
m
i
n
e
d
su
c
h
as
tr
a
f
f
i
c
,
no
i
s
e
,
li
g
h
t
an
d
st
o
r
m
w
a
t
e
r
ru
n
o
f
f
.
For Discussion Background growth may be sufficient t address this issues. A list of projects will be distributed at the meeting.
7
Planning Board Comments On Draft Scope 12-9-14
Resolution of Comments in Red as of 1-8-15
1
Land Use and Zoning All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
Generic categories for Design Guidelines should all be listed in the scope:
• approach to renovation of existing buildings (e.g. approach to window replacement)
• building materials,
• development patterns (urban vs suburban)
• Street and parking layouts (including sidewalks and bike amenities)
• Plazas and other common spaces
Need to clarify what is included in the scope and the EIS, not everything will be in the scope itself. It is generic
EIS. Sponsor will create box and define what is happening the box and anything inside the box will have been
through an EIS. Anything outside would require additional eco review. Sponsor gets to decide where the line is.
You generally build the box as big as you can without spending inordinate amount in mitigation. No Action
required
Scope should layout when certain pieces of env. review, like tree survey, would take place. Added to Scope
Important to have clear roadmap for future project stages in the Findings Statement. Noted
Land All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Scope should document testing of basic development areas to discuss their suitability. (Applicant to
include all geotech done to date)
• Scope should list individual grading plans for all phases to establish a benchmark of what we would see
in the future, e.g., cut and fill analysis, erosion and slope analysis, etc
• The challenge for the team will be how to evaluate adverse impacts. If there are, PB would have to require
supplemental EIS possibly down the road, if impacts are not identified early on
• The difficulty lies in the amorphous long term project, so it will be important to define early.
• State that a generic SWPPP for whole site to be prepared. Will include approach to stream crossing
disturb plans
• South Hill is full of perched water tables, and since it is such a large site. State whether or not these
were identified in the Flora & Fauna study Project Sponsor clarified that this will be part of the
inventory – if found.
• Show physical extent of Flora and Fauna Survey Project Sponsor clarified that a map would be included
in the Report
• Generic SWPPP should address flooding/ overland flow onto adjacent properties downhill ‐that has been
brought up at other meeting‐ establish a protocol for how to address it. Overland flow onto the
adjacent property is not specifically identified – does the Generic SWPPP address this?
• Scope should identify and what models are being used Complete
Flora and FaunaAll the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope
• Quality of wooded areas, in terms of native vs. invasive, etc. There should be descriptive analysis
(characterizations) of the quality of the growth in all areas.
• Scope should state that applicant will do tree surveys for each site plan.
• Long term conservation plan if there are any special natural areas.
• Design guidelines for plantings should be provided, tree islands, etc.
• Close the loop on the natural heritage area,
• Identify large swaths of clearing vegetation, for first phase and state that this will be done at each phase
• Include fauna/flora removal in restoration plan for each individual phase.
Planning Board Comments On Draft Scope 12-9-14
Resolution of Comments in Red as of 1-8-15
2
Public Health All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Include universal design and usability component to make sure that people of diff abilities have easy
access to the site. Debate about what section this should appear in – possibly design guidelines
• There has to be a lot of discussion in this section, so we can say there is a plan, process. Noted
• Include env. documents in the scope that will tell you what has already been identified.
• Your plan involves selective demolitions and you can make discoveries. Should there not be a protocol
for how to approach that ‐ pull that out by itself, since public will have concerns.
• The more specific you can be in the scoping, the better, since the Board would have fewer questions.
Noted
• This is both short term and long term impact Noted
• Town raised concept of protocols for light industrial use, what things would be handled. So that is an
issue for them. Reference NYS ambient air as baseline and than any project that has within 50% of those
thresholds would be discussed as part of the process. If you had air facility registration, that would
trigger that, or a Title 5, it would be handled as part of the SPR env. process.
Historic All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Phase 1A will be done and coordinated with SHPO.
• Regardless of what Phase 1A shows, essential vision of project is to respect industrial heritage of site, so
there should be something in design guidelines that includes window treatments, preservation of
resources, etc. and general approach that respects industrial heritage of site
Transportation and Circulation All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless
otherwise noted
• Logue had issue re: bike facilities between site and commons, site and South Hill elementary and site
and IC, which all make sense Noted
• Scope should address on‐site circulation is big concern.
• In places that merge into urbanized area, there should be design standards that address those as
individual conditions. Scope should state that those places will be ID’d and schematics of the various
conditions will be provide in the EIS
• Very important for there to be seamless connection to city, e.g., Turner Pl., Cayuga St. Noted
• If you have any gated areas, you would want to examine this issue as well. Project sponsor does not
anticipate gated areas
• Include any traffic calming in Design Guidelines
• Scope should state that you will determine and illustrate the final ROW for the GW trail on entire site
• Clarify the relationship between this SPR and the SD for which env. review is complete.
• Instead of having one bullet for ped and traffic, would prefer having comprehensive internal circulation
plan for all modes, and then have subheadings under that.
• Scope should include basic parking approaches, e.g., internal vs. external, etc
• Have deep reservations about any ITE trip generation report. Just make sure you address proximity to
transit, affect on parking, walk score, etc. Would like to see the error on the side of fewer spots. Would
be mistake to kick the decision down to each individual SPR. Noted
• I would like to see everything laid out in terms of why we chose x and y. Noted
• The fewer parking spaces the more attractive it would be. Noted
• By addressing all modes of transportation, you may be able to reduce your parking needs. Noted
• TCAT should be mentioned specifically, in terms of bus stops on the site. Make that a subheading.
• Dealing with the parking demands would also help figure out what the housing stock would be. Noted
• Weight parking demands by mode shares
Planning Board Comments On Draft Scope 12-9-14
Resolution of Comments in Red as of 1-8-15
• Deliveries during const and daily operations.
3
• External circulation‐ Five exits from the site. ID and analyze all the exit points. Also include any you will
be eliminating
• JC Is Steve also looking at going up and down from the site. JG They have started discussing all those
types of items (Steve). e.g., nighthawk, which goes out after a certain time.
• Regular intersections force people to drive more safely. Desirable to have more of a block section. Noted
• There should be sidewalks on 96B. Noted
• State current use and impact (none) of Emerson for construction staging for the Commons and other
projects.
• Include S. Meadow and Elmira intersection (or at least discuss rationale for not including it)
Utilities All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Advanced modeling on water system.
• State how sewer capacity will be determined and what study will be done if needed
• Do modeling for natural gas is serve request from NYSEG determines there are there are issues,
• Investigate alternative energy, cogeneration, wind, solar and conservation.
Air Quality All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Do GHG. .
• State thresholds
• Baseline for emissions is a dormant Noted
• Use NY ambient air quality report as baseline.
Visual All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Use Town list of visual resources to id viewpoint
• Scope should include a map with arrows on it, points of view from which we want to look. Min views
necessary to evaluate eco impacts.
• Give enough of a lighting plan to identify adverse impacts. Then it is disclosed in the EIS.
• Could be good to marry those up to the zones you are proposing, looking at site boundaries, etc. JG We
started doing that with the design guidelines.
• Should be some sort of schematic of visual sense and feel of new plazas. Certain views from the internal
portion of the site, also. Places where you may want visual simulations.
Community Services
• There was lots of feedback from the Town. Noted
• ICSD added as interested agency. Noted
• Very broad topic, so narrow it down. Noted
Open Space and Recreation All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise
noted
• Include any short term impacts, e.g., encroachment into existing trails. What to do when/if you have to
shut down the trail.
• Identify any trails, greenspaces, etc.
• Generic plan for treatment and preservation of natural area (trails?)
Noise, Odor, & Vibration All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise
noted
• Residents would care a lot about noise and odor, given the industry component. Noted
• Two buckets, you are developing inactive factory with dense and less dense impact... And then noise,
odors, vibrations for your own internal system, how are you going to deal with that. You can do some
Planning Board Comments On Draft Scope 12-9-14
Resolution of Comments in Red as of 1-8-15
4
noise baseline readings in each section and then as programming is developing then you would want
define that.
• One avenue is, does compliance with noise ordinance satisfactorily address the issue.
• Topo plays role in it as well in noise
• For odor and vibrations, you should also address some of those thresholds whenever possible.
• Address blasting
Community Character All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless otherwise noted
• Town raised gentrification issue. Need to develop basline information, talk about scale of devt., tax
revenues, etc.
• Emphasize property tax, jobs creation, etc. resulting in a lot of economic activity.
• You get credit in EIS process vs. negative impacts. Noted
• Could tie into transportation, since you could achieve some goals by having diversity in the
socioeconomics of the people on the site. Noted
• Should talk about AMI categories that you are planning on targeting...
• Diversity of prices of housing would be desirable. Noted
• Basic development pattern(s) layout
• Structure of many of your buildings lend themselves to a lot of shared space, so that could dovetail with
the affordable housing goal. Noted
• State rough percents of housing types ‐ town houses, duplexes, etc.
Use and Conservation of Energy All the items below have been added to or clarified in the scope‐ unless
otherwise noted
• Discuss water conservation.
• Flat roofs, for cisterns and water re‐use.
• Explore some areas for green roofs.
• District Energy
Construction staging (and demolition), delivery sites, etc.
• Construction Impacts section needs to be robust. Noted
• City staff will provide projects and –if nay‐ traffic studies‐ and SRF can figure out how to incorporate
them. For Discussion
• Pick an alternative that has a lower density (applicant wants it to still meet the threshold for LEED ND
Project Sponsor did not elect to do this
• If you are already at the lower threshold for LEED ND then you would want to state that. Noted
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
State Environmental Quality Review
FINAL
SCOPING DOCUMENT
for the
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
DRAFT GENERIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
Project Location
620 South Aurora Street
NYS Route 96B
City and Town of Ithaca, New York
Project Sponsor / Applicant
Unchained Properties, LLC
225 Colonial Drive
Horseheads, New York 14845
Lead Consultant
Fagan Engineers & Land Surveyors, PC
113 East Chemung Place
Elmira, New York 14904
Lead Agency
City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
108 East Green Street - 3rd Floor
Ithaca, New York 14850
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
1
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Lead Agency Established: October 28, 2014
Positive Declaration Issued: October 28, 2014
Scoping Session Date: Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 6-9 PM
Comments Accepted Through: December 10, 2014
Final Scope Issued: January 13, 2014 (Tentative)
Lead Agency Contact: Lisa Nicholas, Senior Planner
lnicholas@cityofithaca.org
Dept. of Planning, Building & Economic Development
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
2
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Table of Contents
Executive Summary...............................................................................................................................8[pl1]
Chapter 1. Introduction.....................................................................................................................10
Chapter 2. Project Description..........................................................................................................11
2.1.....................................................................................................................................................I
ntroduction, Background, and History............................................................................15
2.2.....................................................................................................................................................P
roject Purpose, Need, and Benefit..................................................................................16
2.3.....................................................................................................................................................L
ocation.............................................................................................................................16
2.4.....................................................................................................................................................S
ite Program and Layout..................................................................................................16
2.4.1...........................................................................................................................R
esidential..................................................................................................18
2.4.2...........................................................................................................................C
ommercial................................................................................................19
2.4.3...........................................................................................................................I
ndustrial...................................................................................................19
2.4.4...........................................................................................................................C
ommon Areas and Other Facilities and Services.....................................19
2.4.5...........................................................................................................................R
ecreation...................................................................................................19
2.4.6...........................................................................................................................P
arking........................................................................................................19
2.5.....................................................................................................................................................S
ustainable Design/LEED ND...........................................................................................19
2.6.....................................................................................................................................................P
roject Phasing.................................................................................................................20
2.7.....................................................................................................................................................S
EQR/CEQR Process.......................................................................................................20
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
3
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
2.7.1...........................................................................................................................O
verview.....................................................................................................20
2.7.2...........................................................................................................................G
eneric Impact Statement..........................................................................20
2.8.....................................................................................................................................................R
equired Approvals...........................................................................................................21
Chapter 3. Reasonable Alternatives.................................................................................................23
3.1.....................................................................................................................................................N
o Action...........................................................................................................................23
3.2.....................................................................................................................................................D
evelopment in Accordance with Existing Zoning............................................................23
3.3.....................................................................................................................................................M
aximum Development Scenario......................................................................................24
Chapter 4. Public Participation..........................................................................................................25
4.1.....................................................................................................................................................I
ntroduction......................................................................................................................25
4.2.....................................................................................................................................................P
roject Vision.....................................................................................................................25
4.3.....................................................................................................................................................P
roject Website.................................................................................................................25
4.4.....................................................................................................................................................P
ublic Involvement and Outreach.....................................................................................25
4.5.....................................................................................................................................................P
ublic Scoping Process.....................................................................................................25
4.6.....................................................................................................................................................P
ost-Scoping Public Outreach..........................................................................................26
4.7.....................................................................................................................................................D
GEIS Public Comment Period.........................................................................................26
Chapter 5. Environmental Setting.....................................................................................................27
5.1.....................................................................................................................................................L
and Use and Zoning ........................................................................................................27
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
4
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.1.1...........................................................................................................................E
xisting Land Use and Zoning....................................................................27
5.1.2...........................................................................................................................C
omprehensive Plan and Zoning...............................................................28
5.2.....................................................................................................................................................L
and..................................................................................................................................28
5.2.1...........................................................................................................................S
oils ............................................................................................................28
5.2.2...........................................................................................................................S
urface Geology.........................................................................................28
5.2.3...........................................................................................................................T
opography................................................................................................29
5.2.4...........................................................................................................................E
rosion Potential........................................................................................29
5.3.....................................................................................................................................................W
ater Resources................................................................................................................29
5.3.1...........................................................................................................................S
urface Water and Hydrogeological Setting..............................................29
5.3.2...........................................................................................................................G
roundwater...............................................................................................30
5.3.3...........................................................................................................................S
tormwater.................................................................................................30
5.4.....................................................................................................................................................V
egetation and Fauna .......................................................................................................30
5.5.....................................................................................................................................................P
ublic Health and Environment.........................................................................................32
5.5.1...........................................................................................................................S
ite History.................................................................................................32
5.5.2...........................................................................................................................I
nvestigations............................................................................................33
5.5.3...........................................................................................................................I
dentification of Areas of Concern.............................................................34
5.5.4...........................................................................................................................A
dditional Investigation/Remediation.........................................................37
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
5
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.6.....................................................................................................................................................H
istoric and Archaeological Resources.............................................................................37
5.7.....................................................................................................................................................T
ransportation and Circulation..........................................................................................38
5.7.1...........................................................................................................................E
xisting Daily Corridor Traffic Conditions...................................................38
5.7.2...........................................................................................................................D
escription of Roadway Network...............................................................39
5.7.3...........................................................................................................................P
edestrian and Bicycle Facilities................................................................39
5.7.4...........................................................................................................................T
ransit........................................................................................................39
5.7.5...........................................................................................................................P
arking........................................................................................................39
5.7.6...........................................................................................................................E
mergency Access ....................................................................................40
5.7.7...........................................................................................................................A
DA Access................................................................................................40
5.8.....................................................................................................................................................U
tilities...............................................................................................................................40
5.8.1...........................................................................................................................W
ater Supply...............................................................................................40
5.8.2...........................................................................................................................S
anitary Sewers.........................................................................................40
5.8.3...........................................................................................................................S
tormwater Infrastructure...........................................................................41
5.8.4...........................................................................................................................N
atural Gas................................................................................................41
5.8.5...........................................................................................................................E
lectric, Telephone, Cable TV, and High Speed Internet...........................41
5.8.6...........................................................................................................................L
ighting.......................................................................................................41
5.9.....................................................................................................................................................A
ir Quality..........................................................................................................................41
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
6
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.10...................................................................................................................................................V
isual and Aesthetic Resources........................................................................................41
5.11...................................................................................................................................................C
ommunity Services..........................................................................................................42
5.12...................................................................................................................................................O
pen Space and Recreation.............................................................................................42
Chapter 6. Potential Impacts and Mitigation.....................................................................................44
6.1.....................................................................................................................................................L
and Use and Zoning ........................................................................................................44
6.1.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................45
6.1.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives ........................................................................................45
6.1.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................45
6.2.....................................................................................................................................................L
and..................................................................................................................................45
6.2.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................45
6.2.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives ........................................................................................46
6.2.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................46
6.3.....................................................................................................................................................W
ater Resources................................................................................................................46
6.3.1...........................................................................................................................S
urface Water and Hydrogeological Setting..............................................46
6.3.2...........................................................................................................................G
roundwater...............................................................................................47
6.3.3...........................................................................................................................S
tormwater.................................................................................................47
6.3.4...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................48
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
7
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.3.5...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives ........................................................................................48
6.3.6...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................48
6.4.....................................................................................................................................................V
egetation and Fauna.......................................................................................................49
6.4.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................49
6.4.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives ........................................................................................49
6.4.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................49
6.5.....................................................................................................................................................P
ublic Health and Environment.........................................................................................50
6.5.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................50
6.5.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives ........................................................................................50
6.5.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................50
6.6.....................................................................................................................................................H
istoric and Archaeological Resources.............................................................................51
6.6.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................51
6.6.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................51
6.6.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................51
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
8
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.7.....................................................................................................................................................T
ransportation and Circulation..........................................................................................52
6.7.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................53
6.7.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................54
6.7.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................54
6.8.....................................................................................................................................................U
tilities...............................................................................................................................54
6.8.1...........................................................................................................................W
ater Supply...............................................................................................54
6.8.2...........................................................................................................................S
anitary Sewers.........................................................................................54
6.8.3...........................................................................................................................S
tormwater Infrastructure...........................................................................55
6.8.4...........................................................................................................................N
atural Gas................................................................................................55
6.8.5...........................................................................................................................E
lectric, Telephone, Cable TV, and High Speed Internet...........................55
6.8.6...........................................................................................................................L
ighting.......................................................................................................55
6.8.7...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................55
6.8.8...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................55
6.8.9...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................55
6.9.....................................................................................................................................................A
ir Quality..........................................................................................................................56
6.9.1...........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................56
6.9.2...........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................56
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
9
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.9.3...........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................56
6.10...................................................................................................................................................V
isual and Aesthetic Resources........................................................................................56
6.10.1.........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................57
6.10.2.........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................57
6.10.3.........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................58
6.11...................................................................................................................................................C
ommunity Services..........................................................................................................58
6.11.1.........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................58
6.11.2.........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................58
6.11.3.........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................58
6.12...................................................................................................................................................O
pen Space and RecreationConstruction Activities ..........................................................59
6.12.1.........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative................................................................................5960
6.12.2.........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives....................................................................................5960
6.12.3.........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures................................................................................5960
6.13...................................................................................................................................................C
onstruction Activities.......................................................................................................59
6.13.1.........................................................................................................................N
o Build Alternative....................................................................................60
6.13.2.........................................................................................................................B
uild Alternatives........................................................................................60
6.13.3.........................................................................................................................M
itigation Measures....................................................................................60
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
10
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Chapter 7. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources...............................................62
Chapter 8. Unavoidable Adverse Effects .........................................................................................63
8.1.....................................................................................................................................................S
hort-Term Unavoidable Impacts......................................................................................63
8.2.....................................................................................................................................................L
ong-Term Unavoidable Impacts......................................................................................63
Chapter 9. Growth Inducing Aspects and Character of Community.................................................64
Chapter 10. Effect of Proposed Project on the Use and Conservation of Energy..............................66
Chapter 11. Thresholds for Future Actions .......................................................................................67
Chapter 12. Cumulative Impacts ........................................................................................................68
Issues not considered Significant during the Scoping Process................................................................69
References................................................................................................................................................69
Appendices...............................................................................................................................................69
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
11
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
List of Tables
Table 2-1 Development Phase Summary.......................................................................................10
Table 2-2 Redevelopment Building Summary.................................................................................15
Table 2-3 New Development Building Summary ............................................................................16
Table 2-4 Potential Permits, Reviews and Approvals.....................................................................21
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 Phase Boundary Plan.....................................................................................................10
Figure 2-2 Concept Master Plan.......................................................................................................11
Figure 2-3 PUD/PDZ Sub Area Boundary Map................................................................................11
Figure 2-4 Redevelopment Diagram................................................................................................15
Figure 5-1 Compilation of City & Town Zoning Districts...................................................................26
Figure 5-2 Public Health Areas of Concern......................................................................................31
List of Appendices
Appendix A: List of Public Notices
Appendix B: Public Meeting Materials
Appendix C: Written Public Comments
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
12
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Unchained Properties, LLC (Project Sponsor) seeks to redevelop and rehabilitate the existing
821,200 square foot (sf) former Morse Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility (Project or
Proposed Action), located on a 95-acre parcel (Site) traversing the municipal boundary of the
City of Ithaca (City) and the Town of Ithaca (Town). The Site is currently zoned as an Industrial
Zone District (City) and as Industrial (Town). The Project Sponsor has applied for a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) for the portions of the Site in the City and a Planned Development
Zone (PDZ) for the portions of the Site in the Town for development of a new, mixed-use district
(including residential, commercial, office, and industrial uses) to be known as the Chain Works
District. The Project has received a positive declaration from the City Planning and
Development Board, acting as lead agency (Lead Agency). Accordingly, the Project will require
the preparation of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS).
This Scoping document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR) and the City Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance (CEQR). This Scope is intended to focus the DGEIS on potentially significant
adverse impacts and to eliminate consideration of those impacts that are irrelevant or non-
significant. In addition to meeting the requirements of a Scoping document pursuant to SEQR
and CEQR, this document provides an outline of the entire DGEIS along with a summary of
information to be included in each section of the DGEIS.
DGEIS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The beginning of the DGEIS will include an executive summary, which will provide a brief
overview of the proposed Proposed actionAction, a summary of reasonable alternatives, a
summary of all potential environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures, and any
issues of controversy. This will be formatted as follows:
• Introduction
• Project Objectives
• Brief Description of Proposed Action
• Permits and Approvals
• Summary of Potential Significant Impacts
Impact on Land Use and Zoning
Impact on Land
Impact on Water Resources
Impact on Vegetation and Fauna
Impact on Public Health and Environment
Impact on Historic and Archaeological Resources
Impact on Transportation and Circulation
Impact on Utilities
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
13
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Impact on Air Quality
Impact on Visual and Aesthetic Resources
Impact on Community Services
Impact on Growth and Character of Community
Impacts to Open Space and Recreation
Impacts from Construction Activities
• Mitigation Measures
• Reasonable Alternatives to the Proposed Project
• Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources
• Unavoidable Adverse Effects
• Growth Inducing Aspects and Character of Community
• Effect of Proposed Project on the Use and Conservation of Energy
• Thresholds for Future Actions
• Cumulative Impacts
• Copy of Final Scope
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
14
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
This first section of the DGEIS will introduce the Chain Works District (Chain Works DistrictHAIN
WORKS DISTRICT) Redevelopment Project by describing the Project objectives, the Project
itself, its phasing and segmentation, a listing of federal, state, and local permits and approvals
which will be required, a list of involved agencies and their authority, a list of interested
agencies, a summary of potential significant environmental impacts, and the purpose of the
DGEIS.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
15
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 2: PROJECT DESCRIPTION
This section of the DGEIS will include a detailed description of the proposed Chain Works
District (CWD) in relationship to the Site’s background and industrial history. It will also describe
the Project’s purpose, the public need and benefits of the Project, and the objectives of the
Chain Works Project Sponsor. A detailed description of the existing propertySite, its use, and
rezoning as a Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Planned Development Zone (PDZ) will be
outlined. This includes descriptions of the renovation of the existing structures and proposed
buildings, their locations, layouts, sizes, heights, dimensions, and configurations on the Project
Site, and architectural and landscape themes of the renovated existing structures and proposed
buildings as currently envisioned. The description will also include a detailed analysis of the
programmatic breakdown of the development utilizing Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design (LEED) for Neighborhood Development (LEED ND) as a guideline, including the
justification for the number/type of dwelling units proposed in the Project, office, commercial,
and industrial spaces, an analysis of the target market for the proposed PUD/PDZ, and how the
development relates to the housing, office, commercial, and industrial needs of the Ithaca area,
including needs for affordable housing. It will also describe the Site’s recreational assets,
including a connection to the greater Black Diamond Trail network and views out to Cayuga
Lake. The proposed parking configuration and road details will also be included. Art
opportunities and elements of sustainable design being implemented in the renovation of the
existing architecture, the proposed architecture, and in the landscape will also be included in
this section. Finally, a description of the Project in relationship to the planning efforts of the City
and Town of Ithaca will be included.
For purposes of this Scoping document, a brief description of the Proposed Action is as follows:
The Project Sponsor seeks to redevelop and rehabilitate the existing 821,200 sf former Morse
Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility, located on a 95-acre parcel traversing the City and
Town of Ithaca’s municipal boundary. The Site is located along the 96B corridor, South Aurora
Street / Danby Road, and where Turner Street and South Cayuga Street meet the northern
edge of South Hill. The Site is currently zoned as an Industrial Zone District (City) and as
Industrial (Town). The Project Sponsor has applied for a PUD in the City of Ithaca and a PDZ in
the Town of Ithaca for development of a mixed-use district. This PUD/PDZ will be called the
Chain Works District, which includes residential, commercial, office, and industrial uses. The
Project will be completed in four (4) primary phases over a seven to ten year period as follows
and as explained further in Figure 2-1:
1. The redevelopment of four existing buildings (21, 24, 33 and 34);
2. The repurposing of the remaining existing Emerson Power Transmission/Morse Chain
Factory on South Hill;
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
16
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
3. Future new development within areas of the remainder of Site adjacent to the existing
buildings/parking areas; and
4. Future new development with areas of the remainder of the Site.
Figure 2-1: Phase Boundary Plan (Fagan)
The following Table 2-1 summarizes the estimated development under each primary phase:
Phase Approximate
Acreage
Existing Building
Redevelopment
Existing
Building
Removed
New Building
Development
Total
Development
Development
Year
Phase 1 16.35 Acres 324,990 sf 0 sf 18,520 sf 343,510 sf 1
Phase 2 10.04 Acres 403,860 sf 92,350 sf1 68,080 sf 471,940 sf 2 – 5
Phase 3 20.31 Acres
Phase 4 16.20 Acres N/A N/A 890,700 sf2 890,700 sf 5+ 3
Natural
Areas
32.13 Acres N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total 95.03 Acres 728,850 sf 92,350 sf 977,300 sf 1,706,150 sf
1 – Square Footage in Building Removal not included in the Total Development estimate.
2 – Phase 3 and 4 New Building Development estimates combined.
3 – Phase 3 and 4 New Building Development is estimated to start in Year 5 and may last two to five years.
Related infrastructure work will include removing selected buildings to create courtyards and a
network of open spaces, create pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular connections through the Site
from South Hill to Downtown Ithaca, reinforcing the existing roads/drives within the Site while
creating new access points into and within the Site, mitigation of existing environmental
challenges, fostering the development of a link to the Black Diamond Trail network, stormwater
management facilities, lighting, utilities and plantings.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
17
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Figure 2-2: Concept Master Plan (CJS)
Development guidelines for the Chain Works District will utilize LEED ND as a framework. The
Site will be divided into sub areas defined as:
• Natural Sub Area (CW1)
• Neighborhood General Sub Area (CW2)
• Neighborhood Center Sub Area (CW3)
• Industrial Sub Area (CW4)
Fig. 2-3: Sub Area Boundary Map (CJS and STREAM)
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
18
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Each Sub Area will have a set of design standards to focus the Project Sponsor’s vision for the
creation of the Chain Works District as a whole. The design standards will provide Site and
building standards including buffer areas, compact development, thoroughfare assemblies,
lighting, plantings, bulk density requirements, building heights, building disposition, allowable
usage, signage, approach to renovation of existing buildings, building materials, development
patterns, parking layouts, common areas, conservation plan(s) for natural areas, and other
typical development aspects. These design standards will be incorporated in the PUD/PDZ
regulations during the zoning process.
The initial Project application to the City and Town include the following:
• PUD Zoning Amendment for the City portion of the parcel.
• PDZ Zoning Amendment for the Town portion of the parcel.
• Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Master Plan for the full Chain Works
District.
• Site Plan Approval for Phase 1 including Buildings 21 and 24 in the City and Buildings
33 and 34 in the Town.
The Phase 1 Site Plan includes the following:
• Building 21: Office Use - 43,340 sf (Redevelopment)
• Building 24: Residential/Office Use - 111,050 sf (Redevelopment) with 18,520 sf (New
Development) for 129,570 sf (Total)
• Building 33: Industrial Use - 22,000 sf (Redevelopment)
• Building 34: Industrial Use - 148,600 sf (Redevelopment)
All subsequent Phases will require Site Plan Approvals in the corresponding jurisdiction in
accordance with the local zoning process and the threshold review in accordance with the GEIS
process outlined in Chapter 11.
The Site is part of a larger 95.93 acre parcel (Property) which has been operated as a
manufacturing facility since the early 20th century. The Property is listed on the New York State
Inactive Hazardous Waste Site Registry as a “class 2 Site” which indicates the Property as one
at which contamination constitutes a significant threat to public health or the environment (Site #
755010). The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“DEC”) issued a
Record of Decision (“ROD”) for the Site Property in 1994 and amended the ROD in 2009. The
2009 ROD Amendment divides the Site Property into two Operable Units (“OU”) with OU-1
constituting an area known as the firewater reservoir and OU-2 constituting the remainder of the
Property. The current property Property owner has already applied for subdivision of the
Property to largely coincide with the OU-1 and OU-2 designation in order to sell OU-2 to any
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
19
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
willing buyers and maintain ownership and control over OU-1 where active, long-term
groundwater treatment occurs. While the subdivision application is currently outstanding, the
City Planning and Development Board has issued a negative determination of environmental
significance for the subdivision application. Because the 2009 ROD Amendment sets forth froth
proposed remediation of the Site Property based on future industrial uses, DEC will need to
further amend the ROD to allow for the Project Sponsor’s proposed mixed-use redevelopment
of the Site. For the purposes of the GEIS, the Property consists of OU-1 and OU-2. and tThe
Site is only the portion that will be owned and developed byexcepts out the small area defined
as OU-1; Site is defined to mean only OU-2, the larger of the two operable units, which will be
developed and remain under the ownership of the Project Sponsor. consisting of OU-2. See
Figure 5-2 presented under Chapter 5.5.
2.1 Introduction, Background, and History
The proposed Project is a mixed-use development consisting of four primary phases: (1) the
redevelopment of four existing buildings (21, 24, 33, & 34); (2) the repurposing of the remaining
existing Emerson Power Transmission/Morse Chain Factory; (3) potential future development
within areas of the remainder of the Site adjacent to the existing buildings/parking areas; and (4)
future development within areas on the remainder of the Site. This redevelopment will create a
new district known as the Chain Works District consisting of residential, office, commercial,
industrial, and open space within the existing 95-acre Site. The DGEIS will evaluate the Project
Sponsor’s proposed build-out of the overall Project of approximately 1.7 million square feet. The
95-acre property Site is located along the New York State Rte. 96B corridor, South Aurora
Street/Danby Road, and where Turner Street and South Cayuga Street meet the northern edge
of South Hill. The Site is currently zoned as an Industrial Zoning District (City) and as Industrial
(Town). The Project Sponsor has applied for a Planned Unit Development (PUD), Site Plan
Review, and Subdivision Review with the City, and a Planned Development Zone (PDZ) with
the Town of Ithaca. The Project will involve approvals by the following agencies:
• City of Ithaca Common Council
• City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board
• City of Ithaca Board of Public Works
• Town of Ithaca Town Board
• Town of Ithaca Planning Board
• Tompkins County Department of Health (TC DOH)
• Tompkins County Planning Department
• New York State Department of Transportation (NYS DOT)
• New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC)
• New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH)
• New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Places (NYS OPRHP)
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
20
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This section of the DGEIS will include a discussion of history of the Site. An initial draft of this
Section is as follows: The 95-acre Site contains the former Morse Chain Company factory, the
largest industrial facility in Tompkins County, which operated for over 80 years at this location.
The Morse Chain Company was incorporated in Trumansburg in 1901, and it erected a new
80,000-square foot plant on the Site in 1906 for industrial automobile chains. Between 1914 and
1916, the Ithaca plant quadrupled in size and expanded its operations. The plant expanded
again in 1928. The facility continued to develop and expand in 1946, 1957-59, 1963-65, 1967-
69, and in the 1970s, reaching its current size of over 821,000 square feet.
In the early 1980s, portions of the business were moved to other locations, such as a new
facility on Warren Road near the Ithaca Tompkins Regional Airport. By 1983, BorgWarner sold
the property Property to Emerson Power Transmission, where it continued to develop new
products in the existing facility. Emerson continued to operate and employ many Ithacans
through the 1990s and 2000s. In 2007, it began to migrate operations to Cincinnati, Ohio and by
2011 it officially ended its operations in Ithaca and closed the factory.
2.2 Project Purpose, Need, and Benefit
This section of the DGEIS will describe the Project’s purpose, the need for the proposed
Project, and the benefits that the Project will have for the community.
2.3 Location
This section of the DGEIS will include a description of the location of the Site. An initial draft of
this section is as follows: The Site is located in New York State, South of Cayuga Lake in the
Finger Lakes Region, and straddles the City and Town of Ithaca border in Tompkins County.
The 95-acre Project Site is bounded as follows:
To the east, the Site follows South Aurora Street/NYS Route 96B, a major transportation
corridor that connects downtown Ithaca to South Hill, Ithaca College, and the residential
neighborhoods in the Town of Ithaca. It is a primary route for travelers from Binghamton and
points south.
To the north, the Site borders residential neighborhoods comprised primarily of single and
multi-family homes.
To the west, the Site slopes steeply to meet Spencer Street in the City of Ithaca, then traces
the back of the residential properties lining the east side of Spencer Road. In the Town of
Ithaca, the property line traces the alignment of the former Lehigh Valley Railroad and future
Gateway Trail, as well as a large parcel of undeveloped land.
To the south, the Site borders the South Hill Business Campus in the Town of Ithaca.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
21
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
2.4 Site Program and Layout
This section of the DGEIS will provide a general description of proposed structures, proposed
Site layout and potential uses. The development will be in accordance with the proposed PUD
regulations in the City of Ithaca and proposed PDZ regulations in the Town of Ithaca.
The full build-out of the Chain Works District is split into two main segments: redevelopment and
new construction. The redevelopment portions of the Site are delineated by the existing
building numbering system. The planned redevelopment areas are illustrated in Table 2-2 and
Figure 2-4 below:
Building NameArea/Floor (GSF)No.of FloorsTotal Area (GFA)Area to be Removed (GFA)Area to be Renovated (GFA)New Additional Area (GFA)Proposed Use
13,450517,25017,250Office
215,000460,00015,000Parking
45,00010,000Residential
316,000464,00016,000Parking
40,20013,000Residential
3A5,85015,8505,8505,850Road (Pavers)
419,400477,60019,400Parking
58,20013,600Residential
4A3,00013,0003,0003,000Road (Asphalt)
55,700528,5005,700Parking
22,800Residential
63,00026,0003,0003,000Parking
3,000Courtyard
6AVaries252,60033,50012,800Parking
6,300Manufacturing
33,500Courtyard
816,000232,00016,000Retail
16,00032,000Office
8A6,50016,5006,5006,500Road (Pavers)
915,700115,70015,70015,700Courtyard
1010,150110,15010,150Office
10A3,60013,6003,6003,600Courtyard
11A18,100118,10018,10018,100Courtyard
13A22,800122,80022,800Manufacturing
13B23,200123,20023,200Manufacturing
143,10013,1003,1003,100Courtyard
154,20014,2004,200Office
173,20013,2003,200Retail
187,20017,2007,200Restaurant
2110,850443,40043,400Office
2426,1004.5117,45039,150Office
78,30018,000Residential
33Varies222,00022,000Manufacturing
34Varies2148,600148,600Manufacturing
3525,200125,20025,200Manufacturing
Total Area ‐ Existing821,200
Total Area ‐ Removed92,350
Total Area ‐ Remaining (Enclosed)728,85086,600
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
22
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Fig. 2-4: Redevelopment Diagram (DIRT)
The new development areas, which will be added to the Site, will be concentrated primarily in
Phases 3 and 4. Table 2-3 presented below provides a listing of the conceptual development of
the new areas including building designations, floors, areas and potential uses:
Building NameArea/Floor (GSF)No.of FloorsTotal Area (GFA)New Area (GFA)Proposed Use
N12,78012,7802,780Retail
N23,58013,5803,580Retail
N312,600450,40012,600Parking
12,600Retail
25,200Office
N417,790235,58035,580Parking
N512,600450,40012,600Parking
12,600Retail
25,200Office
N614,400457,60014,400Parking
14,400Office
28,800Residential
N714,400457,60014,400Parking
14,400Office
28,800Residential
N814,400343,20014,400Parking
28,800Residential
N914,400457,60014,400Parking
14,400Office
28,800Residential
N1014,400457,60014,400Parking
14,400Office
28,800Residential
N1114,400343,20014,400Parking
28,800Residential
N1214,400343,20014,400Parking
28,800Residential
N1314,400343,20014,400Parking
28,800Residential
N1442,2654169,060169,060Manufacturing
N1510,805443,22010,805Parking
32,415Residential
N1610,805443,22010,805Parking
32,415Residential
N1722,315489,26022,315Parking
66,945Residential
Total Area ‐ New (Enclosed)890,700
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
23
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
The combination of the redevelopment area (Building 1-35) and the new development area (N1-
N17) will result in 1,706,150 sf of developed space. The proposed development is a mix-used
district. The following subsections further illustrate individual uses within the Chain Works
District.
2.4.1 Residential
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the residential development will be located,
within the Chain Works District, potential square-footage, dwelling unit numbers, and dwelling
unit types. The final configuration of the residential component of the Project will be based on
market demand for the various dwelling unit configurations. Subsidized loans and grants for
Low to Moderate Income (LMI) housing are not being sought for this Project.
2.4.2 Commercial
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the proposed commercial development will be
located within the Chain Works District, potential square-footage, and commercial types/uses.
2.4.3 Industrial
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the proposed industrial development will be
located within the Chain Works District, potential square-footage, and industrial types/uses.
2.4.4 Common Areas and Other Facilities and Services
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the common areas and other facilities and
services will be located within the Chain Works District, potential square-footage, and types of
facilities, services and activities.
2.4.5 Recreation
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the recreation areas will be located within the
Chain Works District, potential square-footage, and types of recreational amenities and
activities. It will also describe the recreational opportunities the development will facilitate for
the surrounding area. Specifically, the Project includes the ability to complete missing links
within the City and Town Trail Network (Black Diamond Trail). The program will also include a
draft master plan of trail opportunities within the full Site and the CW1 natural sub area.
2.4.6 Parking
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe where the proposed parking areas will be located
within the Chain Works District, potential square-footage, parking generation requirements and
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
24
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
number of spaces. This Section will also discuss efforts to reduce the total number of parking
spaces within the Chain Works District based on the Traffic Impact Study.
2.5 Sustainable Design / LEED ND
This section of the DGEIS will describe how LEED ND guidelines have informed the design of
the Project, and the potential for attaining LEED ND certification. It will also describe sustainable
design principles and technologies being used in the overall approach to the Site’s
redevelopment.
2.6 Project Phasing
This section of the DGEIS will describe how the Project will develop over the course of four
phases, what will be developed during each phase, and how long each phase will last. Figure 2-
1 details the boundary for each phase. A brief description of the four phases is as follows: (1)
redevelopment of four existing buildings (21, 24, 33, & 34); (2) repurposing many of the
remaining existing Emerson Power Transmission/Morse Chain Factory buildings with demolition
of several other buildings to create open space, common areas, and/or improve Site circulation;
(3) potential future development within areas of the Site adjacent to the existing
buildings/parking areas; and (4) future development within areas of the remainder of the Site
designated for development.
2.7 SEQR/CEQR Process
This section of the DGEIS will provide a general description of the SEQR and CEQR processes.
It will describe the project classification and Lead Agency designation, describe the process and
the documents and meetings involved and required, and the review and involvement of the
interested and involved agencies included in the Project review.
2.7.1 Overview
This subsection of the DGEIS will outline the approval process. In accordance with SEQR and
CEQR implementing regulations, the Lead Agency has classified the Project as a Type 1 Action
for the purposes of environmental review. The classification was based on the physical
alteration of greater than 10 acres and the construction of a facility greater than 100,000 sf of
gross floor area. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board was established as the
Lead Agency for the purpose of carrying out the obligations of SEQR and CEQR on October 28,
2014. The Lead Agency issued a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance on October
28, 2014.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
25
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
2.7.2 Generic Environmental Impact Statement
This subsection of the DGEIS will outline the structure of the Generic EIS (GEIS). The format
and content of the GEIS for this Project will be prepared in accordance with the provisions of 6
NYCRR 617.9(b) and Section 176-9 of the Code of the City of Ithaca (“Code”). The GEIS will be
clearly and concisely written in English that can be understood by the general public.
Narrative descriptions will incorporate graphic illustrations and representations such as tables,
charts, and maps to describe the Project, its location, the affected environment, potential
impacts, and mitigation measures. Qualitative descriptions will be supplemented with
quantitative data, where appropriate, to thoroughly identify, describe, and evaluate potential
environmental impacts. Full-scale Site and PUD/PDZ plans will accompany the GEIS as an
Appendix, with pertinent and appropriate drawings and figures reduced and incorporated into
the body of the GEIS.
The GEIS process will involve the following sequential stages: Scoping; Draft GEIS;
Public/Agency Comment Period; SEQR Public Hearing; Final GEIS; and Findings Statement.
The review agencies are:
Identified Involved Agencies:
City of Ithaca Common Council
City of Ithaca Board of Public Works
Town of Ithaca Town Board
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Tompkins CountytcTC DOH
Tompkins County Planning Department
NYSNew York State DOT
NYSNew York State DEC
NYSNew York State DOH
NYSNew York State OPRHP
Identified Interested Agencies:
Tompkins County Area Development
Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit
Town/City Committees
City of Ithaca Community Advisory Group
Ithaca City School District
2.8 Required Approvals
This section of the DGEIS will outline and describe the approvals and respective agencies
required for the development of the Project to occur. The Project will involve approvals by the
following agencies:
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
26
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
• City of Ithaca Common Council
• City of Ithaca Planning & Development Board (Planning Board)
• Town of Ithaca Town Board
• Town of Ithaca Planning Board
• Tompkins County Department of Health (TC DOH)
• New York State Department of Transportation (NYS DOT)
• New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYS DEC)
• New York State Department of Health (NYS DOH)
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
27
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
PermitActivityAgencyCommentsSEQRA Involved Agency Contact
1Section 401 of the
Clean Water Act (401
Water Quality
Certification)
(Joint Application)
Certification is used to ensure that federal
agencies issuing permits or carrying out
direct actions, which may result in a
discharge to waters of the United States do
not violate New York State’s water quality
standards or impair designated uses.
NYSDEC • Potential use of NYSDEC’s “Blanket” Water Quality
Certification of the USACE’s NWP Program.
• http://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/permits_ej_operation
s_pdf/wqcnationwide.pdf
Mr. David Bimber
Regional Permit Administrator
NYSDEC Region 7
615 Erie Blvd. West
Syracuse, NY 13204
2
SPDES General Permit
for Storm Water
Discharges from
Construction Activity
(GP‐0‐10‐001)
Storm water discharges from construction
phase activities disturbing one‐acre or
greater. Includes preparation and
implementation of SWPPP.
NYSDEC
City of Ithaca
Stormwater Officer
• NOI submitted at least 5‐days before construction
start‐up. NOT submitted after site restoration
completed.
• Up to 60‐day review of SWPPP by NYSDEC if SWPPP
not in conformance with General Permit.
• Review of SWPPP by City of Ithaca/Town of Ithaca as
a Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4).
Mr. Scott Gibson
Stormwater Management Officer
City of Ithaca
3Highway Work Permit Work within highway rights ‐of‐way (highway
and utility improvements).
NYSDOT
City of Ithaca Board of
Public Works
• NYSDOT – Road improvements or utility extensions
within right‐of‐way of SR 96B
• City of Ithaca – Road improvements or utility
extensions within rights ‐of‐way of Turner Place and
South Cayuga Street
Mr. Stan Birchenough
NYSDOT Region 3 ‐ Tompkins Residency
Mr. Tom West
City of Ithaca ‐ Director of Engineering
4SEQRA
(Article 8 of the ECL; 6
NYCRR Part 617)
Environmental impact assessment of
project components.
City of Ithaca
Planning &
Development Board
Involved Agencies
• Preparation of Generic Environmental Impact
Statement (GEIS).
• Lead Agency issues Final GEIS with written findings
approving or disapproving the Project.
City of Ithaca Planning & Development
Board
5Federal & State
Preservation Laws (36
CFR 800; 9 NYCRR
Part 428; Sections
3.09 and 14.09 of the
NYS Parks, Recreation
and Historic
Preservation Law)
Completion of Project Review Form (project
description and location, photographs, and
documentation of prior disturbance) and/or
cultural resource investigation. Goal is to
obtain “No Effect” letter from SHPO.
NYSOPRHP –
Field Services Bureau
(SHPO)
• Consultation with SHPO regarding sites/facilities
listed or eligible for listing on the State and National
Registers of Historic Places.
• Potential impacts on areas deemed by SHPO as
sensitive for the presence of archaeological resources.
Ms. Ruth Pierpont Deputy Commissioner
New York State Division for Historic
Preservation
New York State Office of Parks, Recreation &
Historic Preservation Peebles Island State
Park
P.O. Box 189
Waterford, NY 12188‐0189
6RezoningRezone of project parcel to Planned Unit
Development (PUD) and Planned
Development Zone (PDZ)
City of Ithaca Common
Council
Town of Ithaca Town
Board
City of Ithaca Common Council
Town of Ithaca Town Board
7Site Plan ApprovalApproval of future site modifications by
Project Sponsor
City of Ithaca
Planning &
Development Board
Town of Ithaca
Planning Board
• Will be triggered by future parcel‐specific
development.
City of Ithaca Planning & Development
Board
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
8General Municipal Law
(GML) § 239‐m
County Planning review of activities located
within 500‐feet of State or County highway,
municipal boundary or park.
Tompkins County
Planning Department
• Will be triggered by future parcel‐specific
development.
Tompkins County Planning Department
9Water and Wastewater
System Improvements
Approval of Plans
Approval of water and wastewater
infrastructure improvements and
connections.
City of Ithaca Board of
Public Works
Tompkins County
Department of Health
NYS Department of
Health
City of Ithaca – Water connections.
City of Ithaca – Sewer connections.
TC DOH ‐ Water/Sewer System Improvements.
NYS DOH ‐ Water/Sewer System Improvements.
Mr. Erik Whitney
Asst. Supt. Of DPW ‐ Water & Sewer
510 1st St.
Ithaca, NY 14850
10Building & Demolition
Permits
Building code compliance.City of Ithaca Code
Enforcement
Town of Ithaca Code
Enforcement
Mr. Mike Niechwiadowicz
City of Ithaca ‐ Code Enforcement
108 E. Green St., 4th Floor, Ithaca, NY 14850
Mr. Bruce Bates
Town of Ithaca ‐ Code Enforcement
215 North Tioga St, Ithaca, NY 14850
11Certificate of
Occupancy
Approval to occupy building.City of Ithaca Code
Enforcement
Town of Ithaca Code
Enforcement
Mr. Mike Niechwiadowicz
City of Ithaca ‐ Code Enforcement
108 E. Green St., 4th Floor, Ithaca, NY 14850
Mr. Bruce Bates
Town of Ithaca ‐ Code Enforcement
215 North Tioga St, Ithaca, NY 14850
12Record of DecisionAmend the ROD for mixed‐use
development.
NYSDEC Mr. David Bimber
Regional Permit Administrator
NYSDEC Region 7
615 Erie Blvd. West
Syracuse, NY 13204
Table 2‐4 Potential Permits, Approvals & Reviews
Source: Fagan Engineers & Land Surveyors, P.C.
Table 2-4 below includes a list of potential permits, reviews and approvals.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
28
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
29
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 3: REASONABLE ALTERNATIVES
This chapter of the DGEIS will identify, evaluate, and compare reasonable alternatives to the
proposed development. SEQR and CEQR require that the DGEIS contain a description and
evaluation of the range of reasonable e alternatives to the Project that are feasible, considering
the objectives and capabilities of the Project Sponsor. Reasonable alternatives are limited to
parcels owned by, or under option to, the Project Sponsor, as the Project Sponsor cannot
commit to the control of Sites which it does not otherwise have under control. The level of detail
will be conceptual in nature but sufficient to provide an adequate comparison of potential
impacts to enable the Lead Agency to evaluate the positive and negative effects of each as
opposed to the Project. The DGEIS will also evaluate each alternative’s consistency with the
objectives and philosophy of the City and the Town as expressed in approved comprehensive
plans. A comparative assessment of costs, benefits, and environmental impacts will be
examined for each alternative.
The DGEIS will include the following reasonable alternatives to be considered:
3.1 No Action
This section of the DGEIS will include an evaluation of the potential adverse and beneficial
impacts that would result in the reasonable, foreseeable future if the Project is not undertaken,
as a No-Action Alternative is required under 6 NYCRR 617.9(b)(5) and Section 176-9(B)(5)(e) of
the Code.
3.2 Development in Accordance with Existing Zoning
This section of the DGEIS will include an evaluation of the potential adverse and beneficial
impacts that would result from the full development of the Site in accordance with the existing
zoning under City and Town local ordinances as an “As-of-Right” alternative. The municipal
boundary between the City and Town of Ithaca divides the Site into two sections.
The City portion of the Site is zoned as I-1, or Industrial. According to the City’s District
Regulations Chart, uses permitted in this zone include business, commercial, warehousing,
storage and other industrial uses. The I-1 zone prohibits dwelling units of any type. The main
density requirements for the I-1 zone include:
• Minimum lot size is 5,000 square feet.
• Minimum width at the street line is 50 feet.
• Maximum building height is 4 stories, or 40 feet.
• Maximum percentage of lot coverage by buildings is 50%.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
30
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
• Minimum front yard dimension is 20 feet.
• One side yard must be at least 12 feet and the other at least 6 feet.
• Rear yard must be 15% of the lot depth or 20 feet, but no less than 10 feet.
The Town portion of the Site is similarly zoned Industrial (I) and also does not permit dwelling
units. According to the Town’s Zoning regulations, the main density requirements for the I Zone
include:
• Minimum lot size for an industrial zone is 10 acres.
• No building shall be higher than 38 feet from the lowest interior grade or 36 feet high
from the lowest exterior grade. No structure other than a building shall exceed 36 feet in
height.
• Minimum front yard is 150 feet.
• Minimum rear yard is 60 feet.
• Minimum side yard is 60 feet.
• Maximum building area shall not exceed 30% of the lot area
• Minimum usable open space shall be no less than 30% of the lot area.
A conceptual development plan for the Site will be created utilizing the list of permitted uses and
the above-referenced density requirements for both the City and Town portions of the Site. This
“as of right” alternative will then be compared to the Project in terms of costs, benefits and
environmental impacts.
3.3 Maximum Development Scenario
This section of the DGEIS will include an evaluation of the potential adverse and beneficial
impacts that would result from a higher density development than the Proposed Action.
Specifically, this section will include a conceptual development plan for the Site utilizing the
maximum build-out scenario (most intensive use) that would still comply with LEED ND
Guidelines. For the purposes of this analysis, the Project Sponsor will utilize a Floor Area Ratio
(FAR) of 1.5 for the buildable area in the CW2, CW3 and CW4 sub areas. Utilizing the FAR
definition from LEED ND, that equates to approximately 2.65 million square feet of
development. The mix of uses will be similar to that of the Project as currently proposed. This
“Maximum Development” alternative will then be compared to the Project in terms of costs,
benefits and environmental impacts.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
31
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 4: PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
4.1 Introduction
This section of the DGEIS will introduce and summarize Project public participation. It will
outline the project vision, various public meetings held by the Project Sponsor, the Project
Sponsor’s
4.2 Project Vision
This section of the DGEIS will describe the Project Sponsor’s overall vision of the Project to be
a dynamic, mixed-use neighborhood district following in the Project’s motto “Live, Work, Play”.
4.3 Project Website
This section of the DGEIS will describe the website of the Project (www.chainworksdistrict.com)
and how it is a repository of all Project documents and presentations for the public to access
and comment on. The Project Sponsor’s website will comply with the SEQR/CEQR
requirements for public access to the full DGEIS and FGEIS documents.
A Facebook page is also being maintained for the Project, which expands its interface with the
public.
4.4 Public Involvement and Outreach
This section of the DGEIS will describe the Project Sponsor’s efforts to provide transparency
and various methods of outreach, including Unchained Properties sponsored public meetings
held at a local venue, Cinemapolis. The contents of the presentations are posted to the website.
4.5 Public Scoping Process
This section of the DGEIS will outline the public Scoping Process in accordance with SEQR and
CEQR regulations. The City of Ithaca, as Lead Agency, held a public scoping meeting on
Tuesday, November 18, 2014, 6-9 PM to seek public input on concerns and issues that should
be addressed in the DGEIS. The Project Sponsor submitted a Draft Scoping Document by letter
dated October 16, 2014 which was made available to the public via the City website and the
Project website. At the public scoping meeting, one (1) comment was received requesting the
Project Sponsor to consider renewable energy. All public comments received at the meeting
and during the comment period are provided as an Appendix to this document. The transcript of
the meeting is also provided.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
32
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
4.6 Post-Scoping Public Outreach
This section of the DGEIS will describe the Project Sponsor’s efforts to continue public
involvement in the Project’s SEQR and approval process.
4.7 DGEIS Public Comment Period
After the Lead Agency determines that the DGEIS is adequate for public review, a Notice of
Completion for the DGEIS will be distributed by the Lead Agency in accordance with
requirements of SEQR and CEQR and published in the Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB).
Copies of the DGEIS will be made available pursuant to 6 NYCRR 617.12(b) and Section 176-
12(A)(2)(c) of the Code and placed on the internet and the Project Sponsor’s website. A Public
Hearing will be held to solicit comments on the DGEIS and the proposed Project and a minimum
30-day long public comment period will be initiated to receive written comments. Following the
close of the comment period, all comments received will be reviewed and responded to in the
Final GEIS. This document will also include all necessary revisions, additions and clarifications
to the DGEIS.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
33
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 5: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
This chapter of the DGEIS will be structured to describe each existing component of the
environment.
5.1 Land Use and Zoning
This section of the DGEIS will summarize the existing land use and zoning of the Site. It will
also summarize existing Comprehensive Plans in the City and the Town as those plans relate to
the redevelopment of the Site.
5.1.1 Existing Land Use and Zoning
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe the location and dimensions of all existing buildings,
structures, and other infrastructure. It will also discuss the City and Town of Ithaca’s
requirements under the existing zoning at a level of detail sufficient to understand the basis for
the “As of Right” alternative.
Figure 5-1 – Compilation of City and Town Zoning Districts (STREAM)
Adjacent Zone Key
City of Ithaca Zoning Districts
I-1 Industrial
P-1 Park
R-1 Single Family Residential
R-2 Two Family Residential
R-3 Multi-Family Residential
Town of Ithaca Zoning Districts
I Industrial
LDR Low Density Residential
MDR Medium Density Residential
HDR High Density Residential
NC Neighborhood Commercial
P Planned Development Zone (PDZ)
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
34
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.1.2 Comprehensive Plans and Zoning
This subsection of the DGEIS will summarize the Comprehensive Plans of the City and Town of
Ithaca in regards to the development vision for the Site. With respect to physical planning,
comparisons will be made between the needs and objectives of the Project and the strategies
envisioned by the City and Town’s Comprehensive Plans. The Project will also be compared to
the long-range community development policies and land use objectives outlined in their
Comprehensive Plans.
5.2 Land
This subsection of the DGEIS will inventory the land features of the Site. Natural features of the
Site include exposed bedrock along the steeper slopes and a heavily wooded area in the
southern portion of the Site. The Project will result in a physical change to the land within the
Project Site. In order to properly address concerns associated with changes to the land, this
section will include a discussion of the soils, surface geology, and topography as well as the
erosion potential and cut/fill implications for the existing site.
5.2.1 Soils
This subsection of the DGEIS will inventory the existing on-site soil data. Soils on the Project
Site will be identified and mapped based upon soils data and mapping from the United States
Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service (USDA NRCS) Soil Survey
for Tompkins County, NY. It will also describe the suitability, in general, of the on-site soils to
support the construction of roads, buildings, earthworks, and stormwater management facilities.
Information from previous geologic studies completed by Emerson including soil and bedrock
classifications, soil depths, depth to groundwater and other characteristics will also be
summarized. These reports will be included in the DGEIS Appendices.
5.2.2 Surface Geology
This subsection of the DGEIS will include documentation of the existing surface geology.
Surface geology on the Site will be identified and mapped based upon geological data and
mapping from Tompkins County, NY. It will also describe the suitability, in general, of on-site
geology to support the construction of roads, buildings, earthworks, and stormwater
management facilities. Information from previous geologic studies completed by Emerson and
presented in its prior remedial investigation reports include soil and bedrock classifications, rock
qualities and known fracture and joint networks summaries. These reports will be provided in
the DGEIS Appendices.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
35
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.2.3 Topography
This subsection of the DGEIS will inventory the existing Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR)
mapping available for the Site. The topography of the Site will be described based upon the
available LiDAR utilized in the Project base mapping. Mapping will be prepared to illustrate
slopes in the following percent ranges: 0 to 10%, 10-15%, 15%-20% and slopes greater than
20%.
In general, the property Site slopes steeply east-to-west with the highest elevation, of
approximately 800’, at the top of South Aurora Street and the lowest, of approximately 440’,
where the property Site meets Spencer Street. The drawing titled “Conceptual Site Plan
Diagram and Slope Analysis,” illustrates that 53.3 acres of the Site have slopes over 15% and
42 acres have slopes of less than 15%. Portions of the Site that are currently developed are
primarily located in areas in which the slopes are less than 20% grade.
5.2.4 Erosion Potential
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe the potential for short and long term erosion impacts.
According to the USDA NRCS Soil Survey, the Site mainly contains mostly Lordstown series
soils. The Lordstown series consists of moderately deep, well drained soils formed in glacial till
dominated by sandstone. These soils are bedrock controlled landforms and are 20 to 40 inches
deep over bedrock. They are nearly level to very steep soils on hillsides and hilltops in glaciated
bedrock controlled uplands. Lordstown soils have a moderate K value, between 0.25 to 0.4,
because they are moderately susceptible to detachment/erosion and they produce moderate
runoff.
5.3 Water Resources
This section of the DGEIS will describe the existing conditions of water resources in relationship
to the Site. This section will include a discussion of existing surface water, the Site’s
hydrogeologic setting, and stormwater.
5.3.1 Surface Water and Hydrogeological Setting
This subsection of the DGEIS will inventory the existing water features within and adjacent to
the siteSite. There are two unnamed tributaries that converge and run east-to-west within the
Project Site to Six Mile Creek. No other surface water or ephemeral water features are known to
exist. A consultation will be held with NYSDEC and US Army Corps of Engineers concerning
regulatory status of all streams that may be affected by the proposed development. This section
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
36
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
will describe pre-development conditions including on-site and off-Site watershed mapping,
hydrologic characteristics of the watershed, and drainage patterns..
This subsection of the DGEIS will also identify and describe streams, and associated
watersheds on and in the vicinity of the Site including stream name and regulatory classification
in accordance with federal, state, and local laws, and identify those laws pertaining to the
regulation of surface water, including the Town’s stream setback law (Town Code Section
270‐219.5).. It will also analyze the pre-development drainage patterns.
5.3.2 Groundwater
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe pre-development conditions for groundwater
beneath the Site as described in numerous prior environmental studies. The impacts to
groundwater from historic uses will be presented under Section 5.5, Public Health and
Environment.
5.3.3 Stormwater
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe pre-development conditions including on-site and
off-Site location, size, and capacity of existing stormwater drainage facilities. Some on-site
stormwater infrastructure is in place due to previous development, all of which predate current
State, Local, and Federal stormwater regulations. There are numerous catch basins to collect
stormwater runoff, but the extent, connections, and outfalls of the system are currently
unknown. Base mapping of the storm sewer system will be developed. The existing (pre-
development) stormwater condition will be modeled modelled in accordance with the NYS
Stormwater Management Design Manual to develop a baseline condition. The analysis will take
a watershed approach, including upstream tributary areas, to the point of discharge at the
property boundary,
5.4 Vegetation and Fauna
This section of the DGEIS will describe the existing vegetation and fauna on-site. Specific
information to be included is as follows: seventy-seven acres, or approximately 80% of the Site,
are currently forested (34 acres/35%) or vegetated state (43.7 acres/45.5%), while 17.3 acres,
or 20%, comprise buildings, roads, and other impervious surfaces.
This section of the DGEIS will also include a tree survey within the Project limits for the Phase 1
Site Plans to identify trees greater than eight (8) inch diameter at breast height (dbh).
Subsequent tree surveys will be performed under each individual Site plan.
The New York State NY Natural Heritage Program (NYSNHP) has provided a summary of
rarities found in the vicinity of the Site which is summarized below. This will inform the Site
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
37
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
study. The DGEIS will include a discussion of the results of a field study of the Project Site to
be performed by a qualified biologist who will inventory existing wildlife flora and fauna, giving
special attention to the presence of important habitat for local wildlife and of important or locally
scarce plant species as listed in the NYSNHP correspondence. The biologist will also perform
museum, literature and herbarium research to more thoroughly investigate if finding other
rarities should be anticipated.
The first part of the field work was performed in September 2014 with no findings of species of
concern. The second part of the field work will be done in mid-to-late May of 2015. This will
allow a greater likelihood of finding any rarities that might be missed by searching only in the
early fall. The study will consist of the following: 1) aA complete vascular plant inventory of the
Site; 2) aA brief characterization of the vegetation and ecological community types found at the
Site; and, 3) Aa field search for any rare, threatened, or endangered plant or animal species.
This section of the DGEIS will also address information provided by the New York State Natural
Heritage Program (NYSNHP), which was consulted regarding the Site. In a response from
NYSNHP, dated May 29, 2014, two potential species of rare plants have been identified in the
vicinity of the Site:
Glaucous Sedge (Carex glaucodea) – Listed as Threatened. South Hill Ithaca, 2000-
06-15: 2000: The plants occur in many different habitat types including forested,
nonforested and recently disturbed soils. Soils are mostly moist to seasonally wet. 1999:
A seasonally flooded forest dominated by oaks in a shallow depression on a broad, flat
bench. Soils are relatively shallow (15-40 cm) over a bedrock with an impervious clay
layer. This results in snow and heavy rain runoff collecting in the perched basin, flooding
the ephemeral swamp. The understory is fairly open with scattered heath shrubs. The
swamp grades into a mixed forest with pitch pine, scarlet oak, red oak, white oak, white
pine, red maple, etc. A large gas pipeline right-of-way transects the swamp area.
Specimen labels: 1938: in dry depressions near Prunus pumila var. susquenanae
Reflexed Sedge (Carex retroflexa) – Listed as Threatened. South Hill Ithaca, 2000-06-
14: The area where the plants are found as large and varied. It is mostly forested with
either Appalachian oak-hickory forest or successional northern hardwoods. There are a
few places where the species is growing on recently disturbed soil.
This section of the DGEIS will also document that additional species of rare plants and animals
have been documented in the vicinity of the Project Site at one time, but have not been
documented there since 1979, and/or there is uncertainty regarding their continued presence.
There is no recent information on these plants and animals in the vicinity of the Project Site and
their current status there is unknown. The species include Southern Grizzled Skipper (Pyrgus
Wyandot), Tiger Spiketail (Cordulegaster erronea), Gray Petaltail (Tachopteryx thoreyi), Rapids
Clubtail (Gomphus quadricolor), Drummond's Rock-cress (Boechera stricta), Spreading Chervil
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
38
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
(Chaerophyllum procumbens), and Hooker's Orchid (Platanthera hookeri). The project Site is
outside of any area identified in the Tompkins County Environmental Management Council’s
Unique Natural Area Inventory.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
39
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.5 Public Health and Environment
This section of the DGEIS will introduce and summarize the extent to which the Site has been
impacted by its historical uses. This will consist of describing the Site’s history, the past,
present, and future investigations that have or will occur, and a descriptive identification of the
Areas of Concern based on the findings of the investigation. Figure 5-2 depicts the locations of
the Areas of Concern described below.
Fig. 5-2 Areas of Concern (LaBella)
5.5.1 Site History
This subsection of the DGEIS will provide a detailed discussion of Site history and how historic
uses have resulted in environmental contamination. An initial summary of this information is as
follows: BorgWarner, Inc. owned the property Property from approximately 1928 to 1983 and
manufactured automotive components and power transmission equipment. Trichloroethene
(TCE), or trichloroethylene, was utilized by BorgWarner, Inc. for degreasing metal parts up until
the late 1970s. Emerson Power Transmission (EPT) currently owns the SiteProperty.
Investigations in 1987 revealed groundwater contamination at the Site Property that reportedly
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
40
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
emanated from a fire-water reservoir located on the western portion of the propertyProperty.
Due to this contamination, the Site Property was added to the New York State Inactive
Hazardous Waste Disposal Site (IHWDS) Program registry in July 1987 as a Class 2 Site
(“Significant threat to the public health or environment--action required.”) and is currently
undergoing remediation.
There is a NYSDEC Record of Decision (ROD) for the Site Property from 1994 and a ROD
Amendment from 2009. The original ROD in 1994 was predominantly based on a Remedial
Investigation (RI) completed in 1991, along with additional studies. The 2009 ROD Amendment
was predominantly based on a Supplemental RI completed in 2008, along with additional
studies. The previous RIs were completed while the Site Property was an active industrial
facility and the remedial objective at the time was for re-use as an industrial facility. The
Unchained Properties intends to redevelop the Site for mixed uses that include residential,
commercial, and industrial uses. As such, Unchained Properties initiated an Environmental Due
Diligence investigation which consisted of Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site
Assessments (ESA) which identified and investigated additional areas of concern from prior Site
use and anticipated future uses of the Site. These are further discussed below in 5.5.2.
The Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments ESA will be included in the DGEIS as
appendices. Additional information included in the Phase I/II as appendices include the following
documents:
• Remedial Investigation Stages 1 and 2, Emerson Power Transmission (EPT), Ithaca,
New York prepared by Radian Corporation, dated February 1990
• Record of Decision, Morse Industrial Corporation, prepared by NYSDEC, dated
December 1994
• On-site Assessment of Former Borg-Warner – Morse Chain Facility prepared by
Environmental Strategies Consulting, Inc., dated December 2005
• Supplemental Remedial Investigation Report, Emerson Power Transmission Facility,
620 South Aurora Street, Ithaca, New York, Site No. 7-55-010, Final prepared by WSP
Environmental Strategies, dated April 4, 2008
• Record of Decision Amendment, Morse Industrial Corporation, prepared by NYSDEC,
dated June 2009
5.5.2 Investigation
This subsection of the DGEIS will include a summary of the environmental investigations for the
Site. LaBella Associates, P.C. conducted Phase I and Phase II Environmental Site
Assessments (ESA) of the Site. Excluded from the definition of the “Site” is an area of the
property designated as “OU-1” in the Emerson Power Transmission Company application for
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
41
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Minor Subdivision to the City of Ithaca, Tax Parcel #106-1-8. Full copies of the Phase I and II
ESAs are available online: http://tinyurl.com/Emerson-ESA.
5.5.3 Identification of Areas of Concern
This subsection of the DGEIS will summarize the results of the Site analyses and summarize
the results. The Phase II ESA was completed to determine whether suspected impacts
associated with the Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs) identified in the Phase I ESA
existed, and to begin the process of evaluating the extent of those impacts. A brief summary of
the results of the Phase II ESA, highlighting the most significant findings, is presented below.
(For all references, see http://tinyurl.com/Emerson-ESA.) Areas of Concern locations are
depicted on attached Figure 5-2.
TCE in Groundwater & Soil — Building 24
A facility drawing identified former plating operations within Building 24 in an area where
elevated VOC concentrations in sub-slab soil vapors were previously detected. The Phase II
work identified TCE impacts beneath Building 24 in shallow soil and overburden groundwater in
proximity to SB- 401 and in the uppermost weathered bedrock layer in proximity to LBA-MW-
40S. Impacts were not identified in bedrock groundwater beneath the weathered layer (i.e., top
3-ft.) in wells installed in Building 24. However, TCE was identified in an apparent groundwater
discharge emanating from beneath the former transformer pad on the west side of Building 24
and discharging to the drainage feature in this area.
Building 14/15 Salt Pots/Cyanide Area and Barium/Cyanide in Groundwater
Building 14 has a history of being utilized for salt baths and Building 15 was known to store
cyanide. In addition, a former Building 16 located in the northern portion of current Building 35
appears to have utilized cyanide. As recently as 1981, barium chloride, sodium cyanide and
copper cyanide were used at the Site. Based on these operations, several borings and
monitoring wells were advanced in/around Buildings 14 and 15.
Elevated concentrations of barium were identified in several locations including residual
crystalline materials on top of the concrete in Building 14, within the concrete floor slabs in the
areas of the salt pots and within underlying bedrock beneath the salt pots. In addition, a sample
of the bedrock in the area of the salt baths detected barium at a concentration of 4,720 parts per
million (ppm) which is almost 12 times the NYSDEC Part 375-6 Restricted Residential Soil
Cleanup Objective (SCO) of 400 ppm and almost 6 times the NYSDEC Part 375-6 Protection of
Groundwater SCO. Barium also exceeded the NYSDEC Part 375-6 Restricted Residential and
Protection of Groundwater SCOs in several soil samples down gradient of this area that were
collected/analyzed as part of the 2008 Supplemental RI.
As part of the Phase II ESA, barium was detected in 48 groundwater samples with 11 of those
samples exceeding the Part 703 Groundwater Standard at a number of locations throughout the
property with a range of 1.3 to 10.8 times the Groundwater Standard. Cyanide was detected in
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
42
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
33 groundwater samples with 18 of those samples exceeding the Part 703 Groundwater
Standard at a number of locations throughout the property with a range of 1.65 to 44 times the
Groundwater Standard.
Free Petroleum Product
Historically, operations at the Site involved significant amounts of oils (cutting oil, quench oil,
etc.) Areas with potential petroleum sources were evaluated. A former quench oil pit in Building
9 where previous testing noted petroleum odors was identified as one of several potential areas
of concern for releases of oil. The petroleum product impacts discovered to date appear to be
the result of at least two different sources, specifically, two subsurface quench pits located in
Building 9 and 14, with the impacts found generally around and directly downgradient of those
areas. Furthermore, the 2009 ROD identified other areas of petroleum impacts.
VOCs in Groundwater in MW-29
Monitoring well LBA-MW-29 (located between Buildings 2 and 17) was installed during the initial
stage of the Phase II ESA for several purposes which included: 1) evaluating a proposed
‘Degreaser Tank’ in Building 17; 2) groundwater down gradient of Building 2; and, 3) the
sanitary sewer within the alleyway between Buildings 2 and 17. A groundwater sample from this
monitoring well identified chlorinated VOCs (CVOCs) with a total concentration of approximately
1.45 ppm. The worst case impacts are present between approximately 27-ft. and 39-ft. below
ground surface (bgs).
As part of the second stage of Phase II testing additional wells were placed in the vicinity of
LBAMW-29 to delineate the extent of impacts found in LBA-MW-29. Concentrations of
chlorinated VOCs similar to those observed in LBA-MW-29 were not observed in the
supplemental wells. Based on the supplemental results, it does not appear that a large scale
source is present in this area.
Southwestern Portion of Site - Building 30/Rice Paddy/Driveway Area
Based on disturbances seen on historical aerials and prior testing which identified elevated
concentrations of metals, PCBs and SVOCs in the southwestern portion of the Site, LaBella
advanced test borings and test pits in the southern portions of the Site in the area of Building
30, the ‘Rice Paddy’ area and in the area of the service road that extends south to the surface
water tributary to Six Mile Creek. This testing identified metals (arsenic, barium, cadmium,
chromium, copper, and lead) in several samples of soil/fill materials at concentrations above the
NYSDEC Part 375-6 Restricted Residential and/or Protection of Groundwater SCOs. Pesticides
were detected in one sample within the Rice Paddy area at concentrations above the NYSDEC
Part 375-6 Restricted Residential SCOs and the same sample also detected PCBs above the
Protection of Groundwater SCO. Samples from this area analyzed for Full Toxicity
Characteristic Leachate Procedure (TCLP) did not identify any concentrations above the
characteristic hazardous waste criteria. TCE and PCE were also detected in a soil sample just
north of Building 30 but only the TCE concentration exceeded the Restricted Residential SCO.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
43
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Sediments & Seeps
Based on surface contours and drainage ways at the Site, sediment samples were collected to
evaluate potential areas of accumulated contaminants. Drainage areas are located down
gradient of the main plant building and samples of sediment from two drainage areas identified
concentrations of SVOCs, metals, pesticides and PCBs at concentrations that exceed the
criteria identified in NYSDEC Technical Guidance for Screening Contaminated Sediments
(1999). These sediment areas are located down gradient (northwest) of Buildings 17/18 and
Building 34. Based on the impacts above the NYSDEC sediment criteria, these two sediment
areas appear to warrant further evaluation.
Four seep samples were also analyzed. One seep sample was collected from below the former
transformer pad on the western side of Building 24. This seep flows into a drainage feature that
runs parallel to Building 24 and flows to the north. This sample was analyzed for PCBs and
VOCs; although PCBs were not identified above laboratory method detection limits, TCE was
detected at a concentration over 6 times the Groundwater Standard in this sample. Also, one of
two seep samples collected from the basement of Building 18 (numerous pipes with running
water were observed entering the basement) identified concentrations of cis-1,2-DCE and vinyl
chloride above the Part 703 Groundwater Standard. A resampling of that seep performed by
Emerson was non-detect for all of the constituents mentioned. A sample of another seep
emanating from a retaining wall at the top of Cayuga Street (directly downgradient of the Former
Degreaser Area) detected TCE slightly above Groundwater Standards.
Residual Materials in Sanitary/Wastewater Conveyance Piping, Manholes & Pits
After observing sludge in a number of manholes and pits, LaBella collected samples from
several of these structures. The results of this testing identified elevated concentrations of
metals in numerous sludge samples, and elevated cyanide in two samples (one interior pit and
one in an apparent former oil/water separator in the former scrap loading dock area at the top of
South Cayuga Street). Three of the four samples analyzed for reactivity detected reactive
sulfides.
PCB Impacts
Two of the 17 samples of concrete beneath/in proximity to former and current pad mounted and
pole mounted transformers identified PCBs above 1 ppm. These 2 concrete samples were
collected from the concrete pad northwest of Building 24. In addition, one surface soil sample
with PCBs greater than 1 ppm was collected beneath the asphalt pavement in proximity to this
same pad, indicating a release of PCBs to the environment requiring remediation.
CVOCs in Soil in SB-223
A soil sample collected from SB-223 located approximately 50 feet east of Building 14 at a
depth of 1-ft. bgs detected PCE above Restricted Residential and Protection of Groundwater
SCOs.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
44
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Soil Vapor Intrusion
The Phase II ESA testing included select building for SVI evaluation that were not previously
tested or that were tested to confirm previous results. The Phase II ESA testing indicated the
following additional requirements for buildings at the Site:
• Mitigation of Buildings 5, 6 and 18
• Monitoring of Buildings 2 (basement portion), 9, 13A, and 17
It should also be noted that the other buildings evaluated for SVI as part of the Phase II ESA
also detected some level of VOCs in the sub-slab and indoor air. SVI testing for free cyanide in
Buildings 8, 14, 15 and 35 did not identify concentrations of cyanide above laboratory MDLs in
the sub-slab soil gas or indoor air.
5.5.4 Additional Investigation/Remediation
The Phase I and Phase II ESA are investigation steps towards changing the use allowed by
NYSDEC and along with the prior environmental investigation data generated by Emerson
provide sufficient data to analyze potential impacts from the identified areas of concern from
redevelopment of the Site and an analysis of mitigation measures. The findings of the Phase I
and Phase II have been provided to NYSDEC and NYSDEC will determine what is necessary to
comply with the requirements of the Inactive Hazardous Waste Site Program. The NYSDEC will
need to issue a ROD Amendment that will identify the required remedial work to support mixed
use. The future remedial work required will be based on the results of additional investigation
and specific remedies cannot be determined at this point in time. Typical remedial approaches
include: excavation and off-Site disposal of impacted soils; placing a soil cover over impacted
soil and managing in-place; solidification/stabilization of impacted soils; in-situ chemical
treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater; extraction and treatment of impacted
groundwater and/or soil vapor; sub-slab depressurization systems, and/or positive
pressurization of buildings. Remediation of impacted media will be completed in accordance
with applicable NYSDEC regulations and guidance documents.
NOTE: The area of the fire-water reservoir, known as Operable Unit 1 (OU-1), was not
evaluated as part of this Phase II ESA. An application by the current property owner for
subdivision of OU-1 is currently pending. Information about the contamination history and
clean-up program for OU-1 will be presented under Chapter 5.1.4.
5.6 Historic and Archaeological Resources
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the historic and archeological resources at and around
the Site. It is noted that the Site is a place of industrial heritage for the City and Town of Ithaca.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
45
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Some buildings may be eligible for inclusion on the State and National Registers of Historic
Places. This section will document a consultation with NY State Office of Parks, Recreation and
Historic Places (NYS OPRHP) to determine the existing historic and archaeological resources.
A Phase 1A Cultural Resources Survey will be performed by a qualified cultural resources
specialist. A summary of the results of consultation with NYS OPRHP and the Phase 1A
Cultural Resources survey will also be provided. Finally a Phase 1B Report will be conducted if
necessary based on the results of the Phase 1A survey.
5.7 Transportation and Circulation
This section of the DGEIS will summarize existing traffic and transportation conditions on the
Site and at select intersections within the vicinity of the Site. A Traffic Impact Study (TIS) will be
prepared that will assemble and review available traffic data from NYSDOT, Tompkins County,
and the City and Town of Ithaca. It will also describe the existing roadway system serving the
Project Site including number of lanes, roadway conditions, traffic controls, and signal timing.
This section of the DGEIS will also include a discussion of existing multi-modal connectivity at
the Site, including existing pedestrian, transit, bicycle, emergency, and ADA access around and
to the Site.
5.7.1 Existing Daily Corridor Traffic Conditions
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe all intersections connecting the Site to the existing
street network. An inventory of existing roadway network, peak traffic volumes and associated
Level of Service (LOS) will be conducted, including the following intersections, which will be
analyzed during peak hours:
• NYS 96B/King
• NYS 96B/Ithaca College (Alumni)
• NYS 96B/Coddington
• NYS 96B/Grandview
• NYS 96B/Hillview
• NYS 96B/Columbia
• NYS 96B/Prospect
• NYS 79 (State Street) and Pine Tree Road.
• Aurora/State
• Aurora/Seneca
• Seneca/Cayuga
• Cayuga/Green
• Cayuga/Clinton
• Cayuga/Spencer
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
46
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
• Spencer/Albany/Elmira/Park (roundabout)
• Albany/Clinton
• Albany/Green
• Albany/Seneca
• Turner/Columbia
• Spencer/Clinton/Turner
• State/Green
• State/Tuning Fork
• State/Stewart
• State/Mitchell
• Columbia/Hudson
• Coddington/Hudson
• Coddington/Burns/E.King
• Stone Quarry/Spencer
• S. Meadow Ext./Spencer
• S. Meadow Ext./Elmira
5.7.2 Description of Roadway Network
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe the existing internal roadway circulation network and
its ownership within the Site as it relates to the larger existing context.
5.7.3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing off-Site pedestrian and bike network and
amenities in relationship to the proposed action. The existing routes from the Site to and the
Commons, Ithaca College and the South Hill Elementary School will be specifically analyzed
including any gaps in the routes. The existing routes will be inventoried to include pathways,
bicycle lanes, sidewalks, crosswalks, signalization, accessibility and other related traffic control.
Bicycle, pedestrian, and hiking trails will be discussed in the context of the Project as it exists,
specifically in terms of access and proximity to the Site, and the potentials to form greater
connections through the Site. This also includes an evaluation of the safety and operations of
existing conditions as it relates to pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
5.7.4 Transit
This subsection of the DGEIS will discuss existing transit service under TCAT, or the Tompkins
Consolidated Area Transit, around the Site. This evaluation consists of existing seasonal bus
routes, stops, and schedules that will reference the most up-to-date schedule and system map
of the transit system.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
47
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
5.7.5 Parking
This subsection of the DGEIS will discuss existing parking facilities within the Site. It will
describe current parking conditions and capacity on Site provided by the former Emerson /
Morse Chain facility. It will include a description of the existing capacity of the on-site parking
lots and identify other possible parking areas to expand the capacity of parking within the Site.
5.7.6 Emergency Access
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing fire, ambulance, and police access to the
area. It will also determine which municipality will service which areas of the Project (City versus
Town). Existing conditions to accommodate such services, such as accessibility and turning
radii, will be discussed.
5.7.7 ADA Access
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing on-site ADA access and amenities in
relationship to the existing Project Site.
5.8 Utilities
This section of the DGEIS will introduce and summarize the existing conditions of water supply,
sanitary sewers, storm sewers, gas, and electric, telephone, cable television and internet.
5.8.1 Water Supply
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing water infrastructure capacity and constraints
and quantify the existing water consumption associated with the Site. Initial consultation with the
City Public Works Department indicates that there is adequate capacity and pressure in the
water system. However, additional evaluation of the existing water supply and distribution
system will be performed. The existing on-site watermain and appurtenances will be mapped.
This section will identify and discuss the municipal water facilities that serve the Site and
discuss any off-Site constraints to the municipal water service. Existing hydraulic modeling
systems and studies will be referenced.
5.8.2 Sanitary Sewers
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing sewer infrastructure capacity and
constraints. A consultation with representatives of the municipal sewer district will occur, and
document capacity and constraints of the existing municipal sanitary sewer system. The
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
48
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
existing on-site sanitary sewer system will be mapped and modeled in conjunction with City
Staff
5.8.3 Stormwater Infrastructure
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing stormwater infrastructure capacity and
constraints within the Site and the adjacent off-site areas both upstream and downstream of the
Site. Existing and historic stormwater issues will be documented as a portion of the subsection.
The existing stormwater facilities on-site will be mapped.
5.8.4 Natural Gas
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing infrastructure for the conveyance of natural
gas to the Site. The existing natural gas utilities on-site will be mapped. New York State Electric
and Gas (NYSEG) will be consulted regarding system capacities and existing infrastructure
conditions.
5.8.5 Electric, Telephone, Cable TV, and High Speed Internet
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe existing electric, telephone, cable television, and
high-speed internet accessibility to the Site.
5.8.6 Lighting
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe and map existing on-site lighting and lighting on
parcels adjacent to the Site.
5.9 Air Quality
This section of the DGEIS will discuss air quality in relationship to pre-development conditions.
Specifically, this section will evaluate data from annual New York State Ambient Air Quality
Reports and compare regional air quality identified in those reports to US EPA National Ambient
Air Quality Standards for carbon monoxide, lead, nitrogen dioxide, ozone, particulates and sulfur
dioxide.
5.10 Visual and Aesthetic Resources
This section of the DGEIS will discuss visual and aesthetic resources on and around the Site. It
is noted that the Site sits high above the center of the City, and the existing buildings are a
prominent feature from points within the downtown area and the residential neighborhoods to
the north. The Site extends for approximately ¾ of a mile along South Aurora Street, along
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
49
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
which views of the existing buildings and parking areas are often screened by mature vegetation
and limited low density residential development. There is one prominent view into the Site from
South Aurora Street at the northernmost corner. There are various and expansive views to
Cayuga Lake and surrounding areas from within the Site. These views are documented in the
Town of Ithaca Scenic Resource Inventory & Analysis and the Tompkins County Scenic
Resources Inventory.
This section will discuss the existing conditions as it relates to Ithaca’s visual and aesthetic
resources, and will include the following:
1. A photographic documentation and narrative of the existing visual landscape.
2. A view shed map to illustrate areas from which the Site may be visible based upon
topography and line of sight analysis.
3. A discussion of line of sight and existing visual buffers that affect views of the Site from
various vantage points will also be provided. Specific points under consideration
includinge Meadow Street, Route 13 heading south mid-way down the hill, Stewart Park,
Allan H. Treman State Marine Park, and Cass Park in the City of Ithaca, South Cayuga
Street heading south, and Cornell University on east hill.
4. Identification of critical vantage points where the visual environment is considered an
important aspect of the Site. Some under consideration include including views along
96B Danby Road / S Aurora Street and the view across Cayuga Lake on South Hill.
Views listed in the Town of Ithaca Scenic Resource Inventory & Analysis and the
Tompkins County Scenic Resources Inventory will also be documented, including but
not limited to the following:
• Danby Road/Route 96B Cayuga Lake Overlook
• Taughannock Blvd. heading South as traffic enters the City,
• Trumansburg Road/Cliff Street,
• Hector Street,
• West Haven Park,
• Sheffield Road,
• Upper/Lower Bostwick Road,
• East Shore Park, and
• Tupelo Park.
The existing views outlined above will be photographically documented during leaf off
conditions, providing the starting point to prepare a visual impact analysis. Figure 5-3 includes
the potential study locations for the viewshed study.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
50
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Figure 5.3
5.11 Community Services
This section of the DGEIS will discuss existing community services for the Project area including
government facilities; educational facilities (e.g., school, etc.); cultural facilities (e.g., libraries,
etc.); religious facilities; hospitals, health and welfare facilities; and emergency services (police,
fire and EMS)
5.12 Open Space and Recreation
This section of the DGEIS will discuss existing open space and recreation areas within the Site
and adjacent to the Project including parks, trails and other resources.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
51
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 6: POTENTIAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION
This chapter of the DGEIS will be structured to describe each existing component of the
environment in relationship to potential impacts from the proposed action and identify
appropriate mitigation strategies. For purposes of scoping, this document includes initial
identification of mitigation measures. Each section will include an analysis of the Project as
proposed as well as the Alternatives listed under Chapter 3.
6.1 Land Use and Zoning
This section of the DGEIS will outline the potential impacts to land use and zoning and identify
mitigation strategies. This will describe the potential impacts of changing the property to a
mixed-use development and the zoning to a PUD/PDZ. Consistency with the City and Town of
Ithaca’s Comprehensive Plans will be analyzed. This section will also discuss how the Project
as the first PUD in the City will set the stage for future PUDs. The Design Standards referenced
in Chapter 2 will be discussed here and included in the DGEIS Appendices.
This section of the DGEIS will outline the existing land use and zoning with the surrounding
context. It will discuss how the proposed sub areas for the Project were informed by the
surrounding land uses. It will also describe the ways in which the Site’s historic land use of
industrial operations affected the neighboring area, including the remedial efforts currently
taking place in the South Hill neighborhood as a result of these former activities. The
Comprehensive Plans of the City and Town of Ithaca will be used to evaluate the proposed
development in relationship to the goals and objectives set forth by these documents. With
respect to physical planning and surrounding land uses, comparisons will be made between the
needs and objectives of the Project and the strategies envisioned by the City and Town’s
Comprehensive Plans. The Project will also be compared to the long-range community
development policies and land use objectives outlined in their Comprehensive Plans.
The proposed District sub areas and their densities are determined based on surrounding Land
Uses and a steep slopes analysis. The Project is uniquely situated between the City and Town
of Ithaca to form a bridge between the two, and between South Hill and Downtown. In this vein,
the land use sub areas proposed for the Chain Works District is seen as an opportunity to stitch
the urban fabric together from the top through the base and beyond South Hill using this inactive
void in the urban network. The Neighborhood General Sub Area (CW2) is strategically placed
along the 96B corridor to extend the surround land use of residential with a similar density along
the street. The Project becomes slightly denser within the District’s core, Neighborhood Center
Sub Area (CW3), extending the urbanity of downtown into the South Hill area. Natural Sub Area
(CW1) is used as a buffer and transition zone in areas where steep slopes are present.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
52
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
The proposed District sub areas will be discussed in relationship to the surrounding
neighborhoods, including South Hill, Southside, Titus Flats, Central Downtown, East Hill, and
West Hill.
6.1.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition of land use and zoning.
6.1.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe the impacts to land use and zoning under the
various build alternatives. The compatibility of the proposed Project uses with the surrounding
existing residential, commercial, and industrial land uses will also be evaluated.
6.1.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts. Initially, the Chain Works District Design Standards (Chapter 2) developed during the
PUD/PDZ approval process will be referenced as mitigation. Specific sections of the Design
Standards include site standards such as buffers, compact development, thoroughfare
assemblies, public lighting, plantings, tree islands, setbacks and building lot coverage rates.
Also include will be building standards such as building heights, dispositions, uses, Universal
design, signage and frontage build-out.
6.2 Land
This section of the DGEIS will outline the potential impacts to the land and identify mitigation
strategies. It will describe the potential impacts within the Site and around it from redeveloping
and developing the land including erosion potential and cut/fill implications for the existing sSite.
The LiDAR provided topographic data is sufficient for analysis under the DGEIS. Phase 1 and
subsequent Site plans will require an existing conditions survey performed by a NYS Licensed
Surveyor. Final grading plans with a cut and fill analysis will be developed for the Phase 1 Site
Plan. Grading plans for subsequent phases will be developed during the Site Plan approval
process.
6.2.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on the land.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
53
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.2.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives to the use of the land. This will
include a preliminary discussion of the cut and fill impacts for each alternative in a general
sense. Proposed construction in areas of moderate to steeply sloping terrain will be identified
and described. A grading plan will be prepared to show existing contours and proposed
earthwork and grading contours.
6.2.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts. Future development of new areas will be primarily located in areas with slopes less
than 20%. Mitigation will include conserving the Natural Sub Area – CW1, which contains areas
with slopes greater than 20% and relocation of development away from areas of unstable soils.
A grading plan will be prepared with the goal of balancing the amount of cut and fill to minimize
the import/export of materials to and from the Project. Side slope grades of all cut and fill areas
will be set to minimize the potential for future erosion.
In addition, this subsection of the DGEIS will discuss physical measures to avoid or minimize
stream impacts from erosion including proposed grading details, stream bank stabilization, and
erosion control measures such as seeding and mulching of disturbed areas along or within
drainage swales and stream banks. It will also describe any other measures that will be taken to
mitigate potential impacts such as turf reinforcement mats (TRMs) or other Best Management
Practices (BMPs) that are developed through the DGEIS process and Project development.
6.3 Water Resources
This section of the DGEIS will outline the potential impacts to water resources and identify
mitigation strategies. This section will discuss on the potential impacts of construction and
development on the streams and groundwater that traverse the Site. By examining streams,
non-protected bodies of water, surface and groundwater resources, drainage characteristics,
and surface water runoff, comparisons will be made between existing conditions, impacts of the
proposed action on the existing conditions, and mitigation of such impacts. In order to properly
address these concerns, this section will include a discussion of impacts to groundwater and
stormwater, other potential impacts, and describe proposed mitigation measures to reduce
impacts, including relocation of development or scaled down development if necessary. .
6.3.1 Surface Water and Hydrogeological Impacts
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
54
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This subsection will evaluate the potential impacts associated with construction activities and
creation of additional impervious surfaces as they relate to changes in surface water quality and
quantity, on and downstream of the Project Site, including any impacts to Cayuga Lake. It will
analyze downstream flooding as a potential impact of the Project. There are no protected
waterbodies depicted on the National Wetlands Inventory or NYSDEC mapping. NYSDEC and
USACE will be consulted to determine if any permitting is necessary for the potential crossing of
the unnamed, intermittent streams located on-site.
In relation to surface waters potentially impacted by existing contamination, this subsection will
evaluate existing data which consists of sediment samples, seep samples and groundwater
samples from the Site to assess potential impacts to stormwater or other surface waters leaving
the Site.
As previously indicated, the NYSDEC will need to issue a ROD Amendment that identifies the
required remedial work to support mixed use in compliance with the Inactive Hazardous Waste
Site Program regulations and guidance documents. Typical remedial approaches associated
with any impacts to surface waters include: excavation and off-Site disposal of source area
materials to reduce or eliminate contaminants from impacting surface waters; capture/treatment
of impacted water, surface or ground; solidification/stabilization of impacted soils to reduce or
eliminate leaching to water; in-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater. A
discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives as they relate to
Site redevelopment and their possible role in mitigation of surface water impacts will be
discussed along with their ability to meet NYSDEC regulations and guidance documents.
6.3.2 Groundwater
This subsection will evaluate how each alternative may impact groundwater quality and
influence the remediation of groundwater impacts from historic uses.
The previous work by others and the Phase II ESA identified impacts to groundwater. This
subsection will summarize existing data which consists of a significant data set from numerous
groundwater monitoring wells at varying depths across the Site.
As previously indicated, the NYSDEC will need to issue a ROD Amendment that identifies the
required remedial work to support mixed use in compliance with the Inactive Hazardous Waste
Site Program regulations and guidance documents. Typical remedial approaches associated
with any impacts to groundwater include: excavation and off-Site disposal of source area
materials to reduce or eliminate contaminants from impacting groundwater; capture/treatment of
impacted, groundwater; solidification/stabilization of impacted soils to reduce or eliminated
leaching to water; in situ chemical treatment of impacted solid and/or groundwater. A
discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives as they relate to
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
55
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
Site redevelopment and their possible role in mitigation of groundwater impacts will be
discussed along with their ability to meet NYSDEC regulations and guidance documents.
6.3.3 Stormwater
This subsection will calculate post-development stormwater rates and volumes for various
design year storms and compare to pre-development conditions, describe post-development
stormwater runoff quality and compare to pre-development conditions, and discuss compliance
with NYSDEC and the City and Town of Ithaca requirements concerning stormwater
management and the need to prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The
SWPPP will include proposed drainage structures, impacts to streams including number and
type of proposed stream crossings, proposed stream modifications, and amount of physical
disturbance to existing stream banks.
Stormwater discharges from construction activities for the Project are required to obtain
coverage through SPDES Permit. The design of the stormwater infrastructure shall follow the
NYSDEC SPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges from Construction Activity (GP-0-
10-001) requirements, as well as City and Town development guidelines. The NYS Stormwater
Management Design Manual will be followed in the development of the permanent stormwater
infrastructure and mitigation measures with an emphasis on green infrastructure.
As previously indicated, the NYSDEC will need to issue a ROD Amendment that identifies the
required remedial work to support mixed use in compliance with the Inactive Hazardous Waste
Site Program regulations and guidance documents. Typical remedial approaches associated
with any impacts to stormwater include: excavation and off-Site disposal of source area
materials to reduce or eliminate contaminants from impacting stormwater; capture/treatment of
impacted, surface or stormwater; solidification/stabilization of impacted soils to reduce or
eliminated leaching to water; in situ chemical treatment of impacted solid and/or stormwater. A
discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each of these alternatives as they relate to
Site redevelopment and their possible role in mitigation of stormwater impacts will be discussed
along with their ability to meet NYSDEC regulations and guidance documents.
6.3.4 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on water resources.
6.3.5 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to water resources.
6.3.6 Mitigation Measures
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
56
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This subsection of the DGEIS will identify potential mitigation measures for impacts to surface
water/hydrogeological resources, groundwater and stormwater. Mitigation measures for the
potential impacts may relate to all aspects of the water resources. Specific mitigation for
surface water/hydrogeological resources may include stabilization of the existing intermittent
streams or the addition of more diversion swales. Groundwater mitigation will be developed
separately as described in Section 6.5. The stormwater runoff will be mitigated through the
development of the SWPPP and will include green infrastructure and runoff reduction practices
which may include bioretention, rain gardens, detention ponds and other infiltration practices
depending on the suitability of the in-situ soils.
6.4 Vegetation and Fauna
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to plant and wildlife habitat
associated with the Site, particularly with regard to the removal of some planted and habitat
areas for the construction of the proposed new development. Conceptual plans anticipate an
increase of impervious surfaces of 11.2 acres (from 17.3 acres to 28.5 acres), or approximately
11%. Comparisons will be made between existing conditions, impacts of the proposed action on
the existing vegetation and fauna, and mitigation of such impacts. A general characterization of
the vegetation to be impacted by the individual phases will be developed for the DGEIS. Tree
surveys will be performed during the Site Plan approval phase for the individual Project and
avoidance/minimization measures through Site plan design will be incorporated as mitigation.
The amount of wildlife habitat subject to disturbance or removal as a result of the proposed
development will be quantified. This will include a pre-disturbance characterization of areas that
would be cleared on specific portions of the Site. If any potential impacts are found, a mitigation
plan to limit disturbance in the vicinity of the threatened species will be developed.
6.4.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on vegetation and fauna.
6.4.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to vegetation and
fauna.
6.4.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts to vegetation and fauna. Prior to issuance of the DGEIS for public review a
consultation will be held with NYSDEC and US Fish and Wildlife concerning any special
mitigation measures that may be required to address any significant impacts.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
57
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe those special measures as well as any other
measures identified as necessary or required by the NYSDEC, US ACE, or by the Town and
City of Ithaca such as minimizing disturbance in significant wildlife habitat areas, removal of
invasive species and the development of long term conservation plans in specified areas of the
Site, and landscape and tree preservation standards. Vegetation removal and restoration plans
will be developed as a part of the individual Site Plans.
6.5 Public Health and Environment
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to public health and environment
and outline mitigation measures. The proposed Project is a mixed-use development and will
have an industrial component. The range of industrial uses anticipated may include assembly,
food production, storage, incubators, fabricators, welding, printing, stamping, etching, or other
industrial activities of similar intensity that can co-exist on a Site with commercial and residential
uses.
In this section, comparisons will be made between existing conditions, impacts of the proposed
action on the existing impacts from historic uses, and mitigation of such impacts for the
protection of public health and environment.
6.5.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on the impacted areas from
historic uses.
6.5.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas from historic uses.
6.5.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts. Mitigation will include Unchained Properties causing an amendment to the ROD to
require remediation of the Project that protects public health and allows for the mixed-use
redevelopment. While the remedies to be selected and presented in an amended ROD are
under the jurisdiction of the DEC and subject to a separate regulatory process, this section will
discuss typical remedial approaches used to address the identified areas of concern and their
advantages and disadvantages as they relate to Site redevelopment and this possible role in
mitigating potential impacts to public health. Typical remedial approaches include: excavation
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
58
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
and off-Site disposal of impacted soils; placing a soil cover over impacted soil and managing in-
place; solidification/stabilization of impacted soils; in-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil
and/or groundwater; extraction and treatment of impacted groundwater and/or soil vapor; sub-
slab depressurization systems, and/or pressurization of buildings. Additional mitigation
measures may include institutional and engineering controls, such as monitoring and
maintenance requirements, restrictions in using groundwater, and sub-slab vapor intrusion
techniques will be discussed with the understanding that the ultimate jurisdiction for determining
the selected remedial actions lies with the NYSDEC. Mitigation will include relocation of
development or scaled down development, if necessary.
Heavier industrial uses, such as foundries, are not anticipated. Industrial uses that require the
use or storage of materials requiring Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC)
Plans and/or appropriate regulatory permitting will be addressed during the Site plan approval
process. If that is the case, the Project Sponsor/Tenants will apply to the appropriate
State/Federal agencies and, if necessary, the City or Town of Ithaca, for any needed approvals.
All City/Town/State/Federal regulations will be followed.
Mitigation will also include development of emergency action plans and Right to Know
requirements as part of the individual Site Plans.
6.6 Historic and Archaeological Resources
The majority of the 95-acre Site is in an undeveloped state. A Phase I Cultural Resources
Inventory will be completed to identify any potentially significant impacts to cultural resources
and the necessity for further investigation in areas where disturbance is anticipated. This section
will discuss impacts as a result of development within or adjacent to sensitive historic or
archaeological resources.
6.6.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on historic and archaeological
resources including the degradation/demolition of existing structures if the Site is not
redeveloped.
6.6.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of historic and archaeological resources.
6.6.3 Mitigation Measures
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
59
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This section will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential impacts. A plan to
implement mitigation measures needed or required by NYSORPHP and/or as recommended in
the Phase 1A Cultural Resource Survey and Phase 1B Report (if prepared) will be developed.
The Project Sponsor will investigate and pursue a variety of options to address the historical
character and significance of the Chain Works District as a whole, as well as the key individual
structures that are located within the project boundaries. Among consideration will be listing the
site Site (and/or particular buildings) with the National Register of Historic Places.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines would be used as a methodology to
identify, document and evaluate which existing structures and areas within the Site are
appropriate for preservation and rehabilitation. This process will provide the Project Sponsor
with information which will help determine which buildings can be removed, how best to
maintain / rehabilitate historically significant structures and how to integrate complementary
(adjacent and out-laying) new development. This effort would certainly involve the engagement
and participation of the New York State Historic Preservation Office (NYSHPO) NYS OPRHP
and perhaps local preservation partners to assess possible courses of action that could
potentially facilitate the application for tax incentives and grant monies.
6.7 Transportation and Circulation
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to transportation and outline
mitigation measures. The Project will significantly increase development density in an area
characterized by a heavy volume of commuter traffic to and from South Hill, including to Ithaca
College via South Aurora Street/NYS Route 96B. The development is in close proximity to
residential neighborhoods, which will be impacted by increased traffic volume. The
development’s proximity to the downtown core and Ithaca College makes it well-situated for
alternative modes of transportation (e.g., walking, biking, carpooling, and mass transit);
however, the potential impact on this area will need careful study to determine the magnitude of
the impacts and the most effective mitigations.
The City and Town staff were consulted in developing the scope for complete Traffic Impact
Study (TIS) for the proposed Project. The TIS will identify all potential impacts the Project will
have on the transportation system, trip generation, trip assignment, and incremental mitigation
measures. The TIS will include a description of the existing roadway network, peak traffic
volumes, trip generation (including heavy vehicles for deliveries) and associated Level of
Service (LOS). There will also be discussion of any potential post-development impacts on the
improvements, a discussion regarding traffic and mitigation, and a continuing discussion of the
mutually acceptable right-of-way for future alignment of the planned Gateway Trail through the
Site. The Gateway Trail will be developed by Others.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
60
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
A comparison of existing traffic conditions and estimates under the proposed development will
be provided. A capacity analysis of major roads leading to and around the Site under existing
and proposed conditions will also be included. Capacity analysis will consider average daily
a.m. and p.m. peak hour volumes under existing and proposed developed conditions, and will
factor traffic generated from Ithaca College and Cornell University when in full session. The
analysis will also include the total daily vehicle trips on Route 96B Danby Road / South Aurora
Street.
The TIS will also estimate the additional demand from the proposed development for transit
service and the potential need for additional bus stops or shelters, especially along Route 96B.
Through meetings with TCAT, the existing and projected future demands for transit in the South
Hill area will be outlined. The City and Town of Ithaca Transportation Plans will also be
referenced in the context of transit. Impacts of additional pedestrian and bicycle traffic that may
be generated from the proposed development and a description of provisions to accommodate
this traffic will also be described. An On-Site Traffic Circulation Plan with proposed curb cuts will
be undertaken. Additionally, a Pedestrian Circulation Plan for on-site and off-site access to
transit will be developed. This will include detailed locations and descriptions of sidewalks,
bicycle lanes, trails, and pedestrian connections to both Ithaca College and Downtown. A
discussion of the routes, frequency, and duration of construction vehicular traffic and impacts on
traffic operation will also be provided. Proposed measures for maintenance and protection of
traffic will be included. A discussion of external circulation in relation to exit points from the Site
will be included. The analysis will also provide a description of how the proposed development
relates to the recommendations of the City and Town of Ithaca Transportation Plans.
The mitigation will include all direct access points to the Project including existing and proposed
drives on NYS 96 as well as extensions of Turner Place and S. Cayuga Streets. The mitigation
may include access drive improvements such as signalization, turn lanes and geometric
improvements. Off-Site mitigation may consist of signalization optimization and other traffic
control measures. Additional mitigation may take the form of mass transit service to and
through the Site, vehicle sharing and improvements to pedestrian/bicycle facilities. Internal
traffic calming measures will be evaluated in a general sense for the DGEIS and incorporated
into design standards during the individual Site Plan approval process.
A discussion of parking requirements for the proposed development including residential,
commercial, and office programming will be provided. Parking and parking lot design standards
will be developed as further mitigation. The use of internal versus external parking lots will be
analyzed. The analysis will assess the estimated number of permanent users of parking areas
versus temporary or visiting users, and provide a general strategy for parking capacity in
relationship to the new population within the development to determine parking generation and
to estimate reductions based on the mixed-use nature of the District. ITE parking generation
data will be utilized as a baseline for the maximum parking area requirements in conjunction
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
61
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
with the reductions applicable for a mixed-use Site with access to quality transit, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
6.7.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on transportation and circulation
6.7.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of transportation and circulation including turning movements for heavy/emergency
vehicles.
6.7.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts. A description of proposed mitigation strategies to minimize traffic impacts, including the
need for additional turning lanes and traffic control devices at impacted intersections will be
evaluated, and relocation of development or scaled down development. Parking and parking lot
design standards will be developed as further mitigation. Measures to be implemented to
minimize the need for parking will also be identified.
6.8 Utilities
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to utilities that serve the Site and
outline mitigation measures. A Utility Capacity Analysis is needed to determine any impacts to
utilities. A preliminary meeting was held with the City of Ithaca Department of Public Works
(DPW) to discuss the existing public water and sanitary sewer services to the existing buildings.
Initial discussions indicate there is sufficient capacity within the public systems for the Project.
A Public Water Service Impact Analysis, a Sewer Service Impact Analysis and a Natural Gas
Service Impact Analysis will be conducted.
6.8.1 Water Supply
This subsection of the DGEIS will provide estimates of public water usage for the Project in
accordance with NYSDEC and NYSDOH guidelines, as well as a summary of coordination
withcoordinate with DPW to analyze the capacity for future development. Hydraulic modeling of
the public water system will be performed that includes domestic, industrial and fire flow
calculations for the Project. This section will include a discussion of wWater efficiency that will
be promoted at the Site including smarter use of water, inside and out, to reduce potable water
consumption.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
62
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.8.2 Sanitary Sewers
This subsection of the DGEIS will provide estimates of the sanitary sewer loadings for the
Project in accordance with NYSDEC and NYSDOH guidelines, as well as a summary of
coordination coordinate with DPW to analyze the capacity for future development. Hydraulic
modeling of the sanitary sewer system will be performed to insure capacity and proper sizing of
new infrastructure.
6.8.3 Stormwater Infrastructure
This subsection of the DGEIS will evaluate the public stormwater infrastructure and provide
runoff estimates from the Site. Hydraulic modeling of the storm sewer system will be performed
to insure capacity and proper sizing of new infrastructure. Green infrastructure practices such
as green roofs, cisterns and water re-use will be evaluated as a part of the SWPPP and LEED
ND evaluation.
6.8.4 Natural Gas
This subsection of the DGEIS will evaluate the natural gas infrastructure within and to the Site in
conjunction withand provide uusage estimates, which will be provided. NYSEG will be
contacted to determine the adequacy of the existing system with respect to the Project. To the
extent adequate supplies of natural gas are not available for the Project, this subsection of the
DGEIS will discuss the environmental impacts, if any, of alternative sources of energy.
6.8.5 Electric, Telephone, Cable TV and High Speed Internet
This subsection of the DGEIS will evaluate the public remaining public utilities that serve the
Site. Each separate utility will be contacted to determine adequacy of the existing systems.
6.8.6 Lighting
This subsection of the DGEIS will develop the appropriate on-site lighting for the Project.
General design guidelines for public site lighting will be developed. A photometric plan will be
part of each individual Site Plan application.
6.8.7 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on utilities.
6.8.8 Build Alternatives
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
63
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas on utilities.
6.8.9 Mitigation Measures
This section will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential impacts, including an
investigation of alternative and renewable energy options, and methods of water conservation
and reuse.
6.9 Air Quality
This section of the DGEIS will discuss air quality in relationship to pre-development conditions,
construction activity, and post-development. Comparisons will be made between existing
conditions, impacts of the proposed action on the existing conditions, and mitigation of such
impacts. A Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis will be conducted to determine if the EAF Part
2 thresholds for greenhouse gases will be reached based on the estimates for the proposed
development. Phase 1 does not anticipate any potential air quality impacts. Any tenant that
includes industrial uses that require air facility registrations or permits will be required to obtain
the appropriate local and State approvals. Indoor air quality is discussed under Section 6.5.
Traffic generated as a result of the Project could have an impact on air quality, depending on
the intensity of the proposed uses. Congestion and slow-moving traffic could elevate the amount
of exhaust emission in the area. Information from the TIS will be used to assess these impacts.
6.9.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on air quality.
6.9.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of air quality.
6.9.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts if thresholds are met including developing energy efficient buildings with advanced
heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) systems and the use of clean energy solutions.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
64
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.10 Visual and Aesthetic Resources
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the existing conditions and proposed conditions in
relationship to the impact upon area views. It will describe Project components that may result in
a change in the views from critical vantage points, including building colors, materials, height,
and roof pitch. To address visual impacts, field analysis will include a before/after comparison
using photography to collect near and distant views.
The visual impact analysis will be prepared and include the following:
• Photographs of existing views of the Project Site identified in Chapter 5 during leaf off
conditions.
• Photographic perspectives of the proposed development condition from each critical
receptor point, providing a before/after comparison.
• Provide view descriptions from critical vantage points of the proposed development
using photographs and graphic illustrations.
• Discuss compatibility of the proposed development with the surrounding visual context.
• Discuss the significance and character of the visual impact of the proposed action,
including lighting, on the surrounding neighborhood, South Hill, and the larger Ithaca
community.
The following will be also be considered:
• Design principles for architecture, landscaping, greenspace, site Site lighting, screening,
and other aesthetic considerations (potential Design Guidelines).
• Visual renderings and elevations will be provided.
• Visual simulations from adjacent areas that may be impacted.
• Visuals and sections that demonstrate how the existing grade elevation with the
development works with sight lines and viewsheds internal/external to the Site.
• Proposed signage.
• Project lighting, including streetlights and other residential or commercial lights, and the
possible impacts of lighting on the surrounding context. This discussion will reference
the Town’s Outdoor Lighting Law and Dark Sky Ordinance to minimize visual impact in
the evenings. A Conceptual Lighting Plan for the Chain Works District will be developed
and photometric plans will be prepared as part of the individual Site Plan applications.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
65
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.10.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on visual and aesthetic
resources.
6.10.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of visual and aesthetic resources.
6.10.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts. The discussion will include appropriate mitigation tactics to minimize any adverse
visual impacts. These strategies may include architectural applications and themes consistent
with the surrounding neighborhood, visual screening and planting, and/or modification or
relocation of components within the proposed development to reduce impacts. Landscaping,
including location and types of plantings and how they may reduce any adverse visual impacts
will also be discussed. The PUD/PDZ Design Standards will also be referenced in the
mitigation.
6.11 Community Services
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to the community services that
serve the Site and outline mitigation measures. It will describe the potential impacts within the
Site and around it on community services. A consultation with existing public service providers,
such as police, fire, and emergency service providers will occur to discuss the capacity of these
providers to serve the proposed development and identify any additional resources that may be
required. Impacts to other services such as government facilities; educational facilities (e.g.,
school, etc.); cultural facilities (e.g., libraries, etc.); religious facilities; hospitals, health and
welfare facilities will be evaluated.
6.11.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition on community services including
the reduction in tax base if the Site is not developed.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
66
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
6.11.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of community services. The potential impacts of the Project requiring additional
community services such as emergency services and increased enrollment in schools will be
analyzed.
6.11.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts that may include providing additional space within the development to facilitate
providing the community services identified. Other mitigation will be the evaluation of the
increase in the tax base due to the development versus the demand on the community services.
6.12 Open Space and Recreation
This section of the DGEIS will discuss the potential impacts to the open space and recreation
areas that may serve the Site and outline mitigation measures. It will describe the potential
impacts within the Site and around it. A consultation with City and Town staff as well as a
review of the Comprehensive Plans will be performed.
6.12.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition and any associated impacts on
recreational opportunities, including the loss of a partner to facilitate the trail interconnections.
6.12.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the impacted
areas of open space and recreation. The potential impacts of the Project requiring additional
recreational opportunities, such as trails and open space, will be analyzed.
6.12.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe measures that will be taken to mitigate potential
impacts, including the provision of that may include providing additional space within the
development to for recreational opportunities. Other mitigation includeswill be the facilitation of
the connecting connetionconnection of existing trails and the development of new trails within
the natural areas of the Site.
6.13 Construction Activities
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
67
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
This section of the DGEIS will describe the impacts construction will have on the surrounding
area and the Site, and what measures will be taken to mitigate such impacts. The existing
Emerson Site has recently been utilized as a construction staging area for the City sponsored
Commons infrastructure redevelopment project, and as such, . This includes heavy vehicle and
delivery traffic to and from the Emerson Site and the Commons already occurs.
This section includes a description of construction staging and activities, erosion and sediment
controls during construction, a hazardous materials removal and abatement plan, removable
removal of non-recyclable construction waste, blasting mitigation of construction air and noise
impacts, and mitigation of construction impacts on the surrounding environment.
This section of the DGEIS will also describe how the construction process is coordinated with
site Site remediation and implementation techniques to minimize the any potential exposure of
construction workers and the community from the disturbance of impacted soils and
groundwater.
6.13.1 No Build Alternative
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe a no build condition.
6.13.2 Build Alternatives
This subsection of the DGEIS will describe build alternatives in relationship to the construction
activities. The potential impacts of the Project during construction will include staging, erosion,
removal/disposal of construction waste, air and noise impacts. An analysis of internal
construction traffic, storage, staging, and parking, erosion, removal/disposal of construction
waste and any air and noise impacts will be performed for each alternative.
6.13.3 Mitigation Measures
This subsection of the DGEIS includes potential mitigation measures for all aspects of the
construction phase including:
• Establishment of hours of noise-producing construction activities.
• Development of a safe construction/delivery routing plan
• The development of a detailed construction staging plan for the Phase 1 Site Plan.
• A generic Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared for the full
development of the Site. A Full SWPPP will be developed for the Phase 1 Site Plans in
accordance with the NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual and the NYS
Erosion and Sediment Control Manual. Mitigation will include the coverage under a
SPDES General Construction Permit (GP-0-10-001), installation of proper E&S control
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
68
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
measures in accordance with the approved SWPPP, and weekly inspections by a
Qualified Professional.
• Site remediation BMPs will be employed and monitoring by a Qualified Professional
during demolition and construction phases. Such BMPs may include regular spraying of
the on-site roads to reduce airborne dust.
• Development of a construction disposal plan for non-recyclable construction waste
handling and removal in accordance with local regulations and following LEED
guidelines. Phase- specific disposal plans will be developed during the Site Plan
approval Approval process.
• The Project will be governed by the respective City and Town guidelines for construction
schedule and local noise ordinances.
• The SWPPP include mitigation measures such as E&S BMPs and reducing the limits of
disturbance (LOD) where possible.
• Clear delineation of LOD during construction to reduce encroachment into sensitive or
prohibited areas.
• Require all construction equipment to beis properly maintained to the highest standards
and that all equipment has appropriate muffler systems. Construction vehicles will be
shut down Shutting down construction vehicles whenever practicable and not permitting
the idling of such vehicles will not be permitted.
• If necessary, any permits and authorizations required prior to blasting shall be clearly
identified. Mitigation measures that address ways in which blasting will be controlled
and also address ways of reducing and avoiding the need for blasting will be discussed.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
69
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 7: IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENT OF RESOURCES
This chapter of the DGEIS will provide a discussion of environmental resources that will be lost,
converted, or made unavailable over the short and long term as a result of the proposed action.
It will evaluate both the construction phase and the operating phase.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
70
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 8: UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS
This chapter will identify and discuss any impacts that are likely to occur despite mitigation
measures, and will compare the beneficial and adverse implications of such unavoidable
impacts.
8.1 Short-Term Unavoidable Impacts
In order to evaluate the impacts of the foreseeable future, this section of the DGEIS will identify
and discuss any impacts that are likely to occur despite mitigation measures, and will compare
the beneficial and adverse implications of such unavoidable impacts.
8.2 Long-Term Unavoidable Impacts
In order to evaluate the impacts of the prolonged life of the Project, this section of the DGEIS
will identify and discuss any impacts that are likely to occur despite mitigation measures, and
will compare the beneficial and adverse implications of such unavoidable impacts.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
71
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 9: GROWTH INDUCING ASPECTS AND CHARACTER OF COMMUNITY
This chapter of the DGEIS will outline the Projects impact on the growth of the community. It
differs in concentration and intensity of land use and can be expected to have impacts on the
surrounding neighborhoods, and possibly other areas of the community. Impacts could include
those related to changes in the flow of traffic (e.g., pedestrian, vehicular, and bicycle),
concentration of need for public safety response, and utility capacity. The Project may also
impact visual character.
The Proposed Action will result in increased population and density, and will create additional
demand for public services, facilities, and infrastructure. This section will identify any growth-
inducing aspects of the proposed Project, including economic, population, and employment
growth. It will describe the impact of the area near residential neighborhoods and the economic
character of the community. Project impacts will be assessed based on the Comprehensive
Plans of the City and Town of Ithaca, and Tompkins County. This chapter of the DGEIS will:
• Discuss the impact of the proposed development upon the character of the surrounding
neighborhood.
• Draw upon findings of previous sections to describe how the Project will affect the existing
neighborhood character with respect to visual impacts, demand for public services, historic
structures, noise, traffic, drainage, and the environmental setting of the area.
• Explore how views from particular neighboring properties may be impacted by the proposed
development.
• Identify options for passive and active recreational opportunities for the residents of the
surrounding community and development.
• Identify amenities provided by the Project for the community including restaurants, cafes,
shops, open space network, circulation connections, and office spaces.
• Discuss the Project’s compatibility with City and Town of Ithaca’s Comprehensive Planning
Documents as it relates to the surrounding community.
• Discuss compatibility with and relationship to existing development and surrounding urban
fabric and context. Discuss the direct/indirect economic effects the Project will have. Direct
effects include jobs created by construction efforts, the earning of contractors hired to do the
work or supply materials, and the earnings of their employees. It also includes the increase
of tax base and revenue. Indirect effects, or multiplier effects, would include construction
workers, managers, and the purchasing of raw materials. Additionally, after the Project is
constructed, the Project would provide jobs, economic stimulus and tourism. These impacts
will be estimated based on the Project’s anticipated construction cost and employment.
Operational impacts will be Projected based on the number of jobs and salary levels derived
from anticipated build-out. This analysis will be based on Project usage not specific retailers.
• Discuss the growth in economic activity from both tourism and property value increases.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
72
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
• Discuss whether the Project will have any disproportionately high human health or
environmental effects on minority and/or low-income populations. Demographic information
will be used for the analysis and, if required, appropriate mitigation measures will be
formulated and discussed.
• Discuss the diversity of housing unit types as well as pricing. This will include an estimate
on the number of units for each housing type and size.
• Evaluate existing market demand and need with a comparison to the proposed housing
portion of the Project.
• Discuss the gentrification of urban areas and the impacts to the City and Town with a
concentration on the scale of the development and tax revenues.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
73
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 10: EFFECT OF PROPOSED PROJECT ON THE USE AND CONSERVATION OF
ENERGY
This chapter of the DGEIS will discuss the impacts of the Project on the use and conservation of
energy under this Chapter (please note: a summary of the energy demands will be provided
under Section 6.8). Also, sustainability and energy efficient features will be considered in Project
development and implementation consistent with LEED ND. A discussion on strategies to
reduce energy consumption will be provided. The Project Sponsor will consider design
guidelines for the construction of "Green Buildings" and, to the extent applicable, evaluate the
certification of buildings under LEED guidance.
Alternative energy measures will be identified and evaluated including (but not limited to)
photovoltaic (PV), wind and combined heat and power (CHP) or cogeneration systems.
Resources include the 2011 Cornell University CEE 5910 Feasibility Study of Renewable
Energy Sources at the Emerson Plant in Ithaca, NY.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
74
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 11: THRESHOLDS FOR FUTURE ACTIONS
This chapter of the DGEIS will set forth conditions, criteria or thresholds to guide future site-
specific actions that may be undertaken. This includes requirements for any subsequent SEQR
and CEQR compliance. This will include thresholds and criteria for supplemental environmental
review to reflect specific c significant impacts that were not adequately addressed or analyzed in
the GEIS. For example, should a subsequent proposed action be carried out in conformance
with the conditions and thresholds established in the GEIS and relevant Findings Statements,
no further SEQR or CEQR compliance would be required. Conversely, if a subsequent
proposed action was not addressed or its components would exceed defined thresholds or
criteria set forth in the GEIS, then the appropriate environmental review documentation would
be required to comply with SEQR and CEQR. It is noted that in terms of noise impacts from
future phases of the Proposed Action, the Project Sponsor has chosen to include noise
generating activities as a threshold for future evaluation. Thus, for each and every phase of
development of the Project, a noise impact analysis will be undertaken to determine whether
there are substantial adverse noise impacts. To the extent that there are such impacts, a
supplemental GEIS will be required.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
75
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
CHAPTER 12: CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
This chapter of the DGEIS will summarize the cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action.
Cumulative impacts may result from separately minor but collectively significant actions that
take place over an extended period time. It is an impact that could result from incremental
impacts of a proposed action when added to other past, present, or reasonably foreseeable
future actions by other entities separate from the proposed action.
In the context of the Project, independent initiatives taking place in parallel are in various stages
of the planning process. A cumulative impacts assessment will be a part of the DGEIS to
consider Projects approved, recently completed or adopted by the City or the Town .
This chapter of the DGEIS will include a qualitative analysis of the relationship and implications
of such Projects in regards to the proposed action, noting any future environmental
documentation efforts conducted with such Projects.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
76
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
ISSUES NOT CONSIDERED SIGNIFICANT DURING THE SCOPING PROCESS
Noise – The first phase of the Project as proposed will not create additional noise impacts
beyond the existing ambient levels during normal operations. Noise associated with
construction activities will be mitigated with standard BMPs and operating requirements set by
the City and the Town during the Site Plan approval process. Phase 1 of the Project will not
have any operational noise impacts after construction is complete. Subsequent phases will
include open public areas that may allow events. Noise impacts from future phases will be
addressed as each phase moves through the approval process (see chapter 11 above). These
events will require compliance with Chapter 240 of the City Code (City of Ithaca Noise
Ordinance) and Chapter 184 of the Town Code (Town of Ithaca Noise Ordinance).
Odor – The Project as proposed will not create additional odor impacts beyond the existing
ambient levels. Even though the Chain Works District will include industrial uses, it was
determined that the Project will not create odors beyond the normal due to the mixed-use nature
of the Project and the inherent policing by the residents of the Project.
REFERENCES
This section of the DGEIS will provide references for all materials utilized in the development of
the DGEIS including, but not limited to, comprehensive plans, regulations, ordinances, other
land development approvals and other published studies.
APPENDICES
This section will include all relevant correspondences, technical studies, reports, engineering
and design documents, environmental assessments, and analyses that were relied upon in
preparing the DGEIS. Documents may include, but are not limited to, the following:
• Engineering Drawings and Details concerning the proposed development.
• Environmental Phase I and II ESA.
• PUD/PDZ Design Guidelines.
• Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan.
• Cultural Resources Studies.
• Biological Field Survey Data.
• Traffic Impact Studies.
• Utility Models and Analyses.
• Visual Impact Studies and Photosimulations.
• Scoping Documentation.
Final Scoping Document
Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement
December 22, 2014January 13, 2015
77
Blue edits by LMN indicating added comments
Purple and Orange edits by Adam Walters/Phillips Lytle
Pagination will be adjusted during final edit
• SEQR Documentation.
• Correspondence
PROPOSED RESOLUTION Final Scoping Document
Chainworks District
Planning and Development Board
January 13, 2015
Adoption of Scope for dGEIS –Chainworks District
WHEREAS, on October 28, 2014 the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, acting as
Lead Agency in environmental review determined that the proposed Chainworks District Project
may have a significant environmental impact and that a Generic Environmental Impact
Statement must be prepared, and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 2014, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board held a
Scoping Session to identify issues to be analyzed in the Generic Environmental Impact
Statement for the proposed Chainworks District Project, and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, after advertising a public
comment period on the proposed scope, also solicited written comments from the public
regarding the issues to be analyzed, and
WHEREAS: the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board also solicited comments from
this project’s involved agencies regarding the issues to be analyzed, now therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that after considering both the written scope and the comments made during the
public comment period, the Planning Board for the City of Ithaca does hereby adopt the scope
for the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for the Chainworks District Project, dated
January 13, 2015, including all changes made at that same Planning Board meeting.
Moved by:
Seconded by:
In Favor:
Against:
Abstain:
Absent:
Vacancies: 0