HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-01-19 Common Council Meeting AgendaOFFICIAL NOTICE OF MEETING
A Regular meeting of the Common Council will be held on Wednesday, May 1, 2019, at
6:00 p.m. in the Common Council Chambers at City Hall, 108 East Green Street, Ithaca,
New York. Your attendance is requested.
AGENDA
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
2. ADDITIONS TO OR DELETIONS FROM THE AGENDA:
3. PROCLAMATIONS/AWARDS:
4. SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS:
5. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
5.1 Reports of Municipal Officials
5.2 Friends of the Ithaca City Cemetery
6. PETITIONS AND HEARINGS OF PERSONS BEFORE COUNCIL:
7. PRIVILEGE OF THE FLOOR – COMMON COUNCIL AND THE MAYOR:
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
Superintendent of Public Works:
8.1 Kilpatrick’s Publick House Restaurant Alcohol Permit Request – Resolution
8.2 Le Café Cent-Dix Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution
8.3 Mercato Bar and Kitchen Restaurant Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution
8.4 Simeon’s American Bistro Alcohol Permit Request – Resolution
City Administration Committee:
8.5 Finance – City Chamberlain – Request to Waive Penalty on Taxes - Resolution
8.6 Youth Bureau – Amendment to 2019 Budget - Resolution
8.7 Cable Access Oversight Committee (AOC) - Recommendations for 2020 Budget
- Resolution
8.8 Youth Bureau - Amendment to Revocable License for Use of City Real Property -
Resolution
8.9 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Request to Amend Personnel Roster -
Resolution
9. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
9.1 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Amendment of Capital Project #839 for
Dryden Road Parking Garage - Resolution
9.2 Department of Public Works (DPW) – Exchange of Property with State of New
York - Resolution
Common Council Meeting Agenda
May 1, 2019
Page 2
CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE (Continued):
9.3 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Establishment of Capital Project for Traffic
Signal and Operations Improvements - Resolution
9.4 Youth Bureau – Authorization to Apply for a New York State Consolidated
Funding Grant for Cass Park Rink Enclosure Project - Resolution
9.5 City Controller’s Report
10. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
10.1 Approval of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Findings
Statement for the Chain Works District Redevelopment Project - Resolution
10.2 Resolution to Select Artwork for City Mural Program
10.3 Resolution Approving Joint Sewer Agreement Amendment to Eliminate
Chairperson Term Limit
10.4 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 164 Entitled
“Dogs and Other Animals”; to amend Article IV entitled “Backyard Chickens”
11. REPORTS OF SPECIAL COMMITTEES:
12. NEW BUSINESS:
13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS:
13.1 Alderperson Brock - Resolution in Support for the New York State Assembly and
Senate Bills to Establish a Process for the Adoption of an Environmental Bill of
Rights
13.2 Alderperson Brock - Resolution Supporting Universal Rent Stabilization and
Control
14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS:
14.1 Appointment/Reappointments to Cable Access Oversight Committee - Resolution
14.2 Appointment to Examining Board of Electricians – Resolution
14.3 Appointment/Reappointments to Community Police Board – Resolution
15. REPORTS OF COMMON COUNCIL LIAISONS:
16. REPORT OF CITY CLERK:
17. REPORT OF CITY ATTORNEY:
18. MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS:
18.1 Approval of the April 3, 2019 Common Council Meeting Minutes – Resolution
Common Council Meeting Agenda
May 1, 2019
Page 3
19. ADJOURNMENT:
If you have a disability that will require special arrangements to be made in order for you
to fully participate in the meeting, please contact the City Clerk at 274-6570 at least 48
hours before the meeting.
Out of consideration for the health of other individuals, please refrain from using
perfume/cologne and other scented personal care products at City of Ithaca meetings.
Thank you for your cooperation and understanding.
______________________________
Julie Conley Holcomb, CMC
City Clerk
Dated: April 25, 2019
8. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS:
Superintendent of Public Works:
8.1 Kilpatrick’s Publick House Restaurant Alcohol Permit Request – Resolution
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has received a request to allow
Kilpatrick’s restaurant to utilize certain areas along North Tioga Street for outdoor
dining; and
WHEREAS, this use of public property has been deemed proper and successful; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Primary and
Secondary Commons, including outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow
the serving and consumption of alcohol on the Primary and Secondary Commons; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for
outdoor dining at Kilpatrick’s Publick House Restaurant, including the responsible sale
and consumption of alcohol, is desirable; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public
property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a
minimum of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, For the year 2019, Common Council hereby approves a revocable
Alcoholic Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for
Kilpatrick’s Publick House Restaurant that includes the sale of alcohol in accord with the
terms and conditions set forth in application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop
coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit.
8.2 Le Café Cent-Dix Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has received a request to allow Le
Café Cent-Dix to utilize certain areas along North Aurora Street for outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, this use of public property has been deemed proper and successful; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Primary and
Secondary Commons, including outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow
the serving and consumption of alcohol on the Primary and Secondary Commons; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for
outdoor dining at Le Café Cent-Dix, including the responsible sale and consumption of
alcohol, is desirable; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public
property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a
minimum of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, For the year 2019, Common Council hereby approves a revocable
Alcoholic Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for Le Café
Cent-Dix that includes the sale of alcohol in accord with the terms and conditions set
forth in application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop coverage in the amount of
$1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit.
8.3 Mercato Bar and Kitchen Restaurant Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has received a request to allow
Mercato Bar and Kitchen Restaurant to utilize certain areas along North Aurora Street
for outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, this use of public property has been deemed proper and successful; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Primary and
Secondary Commons, including outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow
the serving and consumption of alcohol on the Primary and Secondary Commons; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for
outdoor dining at Mercato Bar and Kitchen Restaurant, including the responsible sale
and consumption of alcohol, is desirable; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public
property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a
minimum of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, For the year 2019, Common Council hereby approves a revocable
Alcoholic Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for Mercato
Bar and Kitchen Restaurant that includes the sale of alcohol in accord with the terms
and conditions set forth in application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop
coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit.
8.4 Simeon’s American Bistro Alcohol Permit Request - Resolution
WHEREAS, the Superintendent of Public Works has received a request to allow
Simeon’s American Bistro Restaurant to utilize certain areas along North Aurora Street
and the Ithaca Commons for outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, since 1987 the City of Ithaca has issued a license to Simeon's
American Bistro Restaurant allowing that restaurant to utilize certain areas along North
Aurora Street and on the Ithaca Commons for outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, this use of public property has generally been deemed proper and
successful; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca wishes to promote diverse uses of the Ithaca Commons,
including outdoor dining; and
WHEREAS, it is Common Council's responsibility to determine whether or not to allow
the serving and consumption of alcohol on the Ithaca Commons; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that the use of this public property for
outdoor dining at Simeon's American Bistro Restaurant, including the responsible sale
and consumption of alcohol, is desirable; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has determined that any use of this or similar public
property involving the same and consumption of alcohol should be covered by a
minimum of $1,000,000 insurance under the Dram Shop Act; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, For the year 2019, Common Council hereby approves a revocable
Alcoholic Beverage Permit for the outdoor sale and consumption of alcohol for Simeon's
American Restaurant that includes the sale of alcohol in accordance with the terms and
conditions set forth in the application therefore, including minimum Dram Shop
coverage in the amount of $1,000,000 and the approval of an outdoor dining permit.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS - Continued:
City Administration Committee:
8.5 Finance – City Chamberlain – Request to Waive Penalty on Taxes -
Resolution
WHEREAS, the owner of property at 208 Kline Rd, tax map #6.-1-2.1 presented check
#1569 in the amount of $4,529.28 on January 4, 2019, for payment of the County taxes
on the property; and
WHEREAS, the check was $20.00 short of the $4,549.28 payment in full as is required;
and
WHEREAS, the City Chamberlain’s Office attempted to call the writer of the check by
using the telephone number on the check to inform him of the discrepancy; and
WHEREAS, the noted telephone number was not a working number; and
WHEREAS, the City Chamberlain therefore returned check #1569 on January 4, 2019,
informing the owner that it was short and requesting submission of the correct amount;
and
WHEREAS, upon receiving a notice of unpaid taxes in March 2019, the owner called to
dispute the return of the original check and the accrued late penalties and fees but
ultimately sent a second check on March 26, 2019 in the amount of $4,642.27 which
included late penalties and notice fees due at that time; and
WHEREAS, this second check including March 2019, penalties and fees, has been
received and posted by the Chamberlain’s Office; and
WHEREAS, the owner has requested the late penalties and fees be refunded, even
though he admits he shorted payment in January; and
WHEREAS, refunding the late penalties needs Common Council approval; now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the request to waive and refund penalty and fees on the 2019
Tompkins County Taxes for 208 Kline Rd, in the amount of $92.99, be hereby
approved.
8.6 Youth Bureau – Amendment to 2019 Budget - Resolution
WHEREAS, The Ithaca Youth Bureau applied for and received a Tompkins County
Tourism Grant for Ithaca Bike Rental (IBR); and
WHEREAS, the money will be used to purchase adaptive bikes for use by community
members and visitors and a storage unit for the bikes; and
WHEREAS, IBR has grown into a very successful program that provides summer youth
employment to local teens, bikes to community programs, and rentals to visitors and
community members to explore, enjoy and experience the Waterfront and Black
Diamond Trails; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Ithaca Youth Bureau 2019 budget be amended as follows:
Increase Expenses:
A7310-5460-01203 Program Supply $10,475
Increase Revenues:
A7310-2070-01203 Donations $10,475
Ithaca Youth Bureau
1 James L. Gibbs Drive
Ithaca, New York 14850
Phone: (607) 273-8364
Fax: (607) 273-2817
“Building a foundation for a lifetime.”
To: City Administration Committee
From: Liz Klohmann, Director
Re: 2019 Budget Amendment
Date: 4/17/19
_______________________________________________________________________
The Ithaca youth Bureau applied for and received a Tompkins County Tourism grant to purchase
equipment for Ithaca Bike Rental. The grant will be used to purchase a vertical bike rack,
recumbent bikes and other adaptive bikes. We are requesting that the 2019 budget be amended
to reflect this award.
Please approve the following amendment:
Increase Expenses:
A7310-5460-01203 Program Supply $10,475
Increase Revenues:
A7310-2070-01203 Donations $10,475
Total - $10,475
8.7 Cable Access Oversight Committee (AOC) - Recommendations for 2020
Budget - Resolution
WHEREAS, Section 15.12 of the Franchise Agreement of January 2003 between the
City of Ithaca and the franchisee Time Warner Entertainment-Advance/Newhouse
Partnership (TWC), subsequently assigned to Charter Communications, Inc. (d/b/a
Spectrum Networks) after Charter's 2016 acquisition of TWC, requires the participating
municipalities (City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, Village of Cayuga Heights) to provide the
franchisee with an annual written budget for Public, Educational and Governmental
access operations (PEG) by June 30 of each calendar year; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca's Ordinance #2003-17, Par 18-4-G, requires the Cable
Access Oversight Committee (AOC) to provide the Participating Municipalities with a
recommended annual budget by May 31 of each calendar year; and
WHEREAS, in 2017 it was resolved not to use the 2018 Budget funds but have them
become part of the 2018 Budget; and
WHEREAS, in 2018 it was resolved not to use the 2019 Budget funds but have them
become part of the 2020 Budget except for a contingency of $5,000.00; and
WHEREAS, the AOC has reviewed PEG’s current equipment and anticipates that only a
limited amount of new or replacement equipment will be needed; and
WHEREAS, the AOC anticipates the replacement of computers and the current
playback system in the next few years; and
WHEREAS, such purchases would exceed the available funds of one budget year; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on April 2, 2019 the AOC recommended
earmarking up to $10,000.00 as contingency to purchase equipment as needed for the
functioning of PEG operations, and to let the remaining 2018, 2019 and 2020 Budget
funds accumulate and become part of the 2021 Budget; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca accepts the AOC
recommended budget for Spectrum TV’s 2020 annual budget for Public, Educational
and Governmental access operations.
8.8 Youth Bureau - Amendment to Revocable License for Use of City Real
Property between Ithaca Babe Ruth and the City of Ithaca - Resolution
WHEREAS, Ithaca Babe Ruth utilizes Union Field 8 at Cass Park to operate the Cal
Ripken Youth Baseball program and currently licenses from the City certain storage
spaces to support its public recreational activities in accordance with a revocable
license agreement approved by Common Council on June 1, 2016; and
WHEREAS, the current shed at Union Field 8 provided by Babe Ruth is old, has
sustained damage over the years, and is no longer weather or rodent proof; and
WHEREAS, the existence of this shed assists Ithaca Babe Ruth in offering quality
affordable youth baseball opportunities to local youth; and
WHEREAS, Ithaca Babe Ruth is currently in an Agreement/Revocable License for Use
of City Real Property that will be adjusted for the additional 36 square feet of shed
space; and
WHEREAS, Ithaca Babe Ruth will provide a new 12' x 12' shed and remove the existing
9' x 12' shed at their own expense; and
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau, the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Resources
Commission, and the Board of Public Works are supportive of this proposal, and the
Superintendent of Public Works does not anticipate any conflicts in the near future with
public works uses or needs; and
WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 170 “Use of City Real Property” vests in the Common
Council sole authority to grant approval of any license to make non-transitory use of City
parkland; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council finds that Ithaca Babe Ruth’s proposal to replace
the existing shed continues to support the broader public recreational activities in Cass
Park provided by Babe Ruth under the above-referenced Agreement/Revocable
License for Use of City Real Property; and
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby authorizes the Mayor, upon the advice of
the City Attorney, to amend the license agreement to permit replacement the existing 9'
x 12' shed with a 12' x 12' shed in the existing location at Union Field 8, including
installation and maintenance thereof.
Ithaca Babe Ruth, Inc.
P.O. Box 112
Ithaca, NY 14850
Date: March 6, 2019
To: Jim D’Alterio
Deputy Director, Ithaca Youth Bureau
From: Jim Yaggie
President, Ithaca Babe Ruth, Inc.
Re: Proposal for F8 shed at Cass Park
Pursuant to the “Agreement/Revocable License for Use of City Real Property” dated April 11, 2017
between the Ithaca Babe Ruth League and the City of Ithaca, we are requesting further consideration
for placement of a shed a Cass Park Field 8.
The objective of that agreement was to gain approval for a new shed (approximately 144 square feet)
at Field 9. Since, we have added the structure and it has been a tremendous asset. We request that
you consider the placement of a similar shed (12’x12’) at Field 8 to expand our ability to store &
maintain equipment essential to our care & use of the fields. As part of this proposal, we would
commit to removal of the old 9’x12’ shed and place the new shed in its footprint.
We understand that a new agreement for the proposed shed would alter the April 11, 2017 document
and any related fees associated with the new square footage.
If you have any questions related to this proposal, please email me, directly, at jyaggie@att.net or call
my cell at 858.349.8512.
8.9 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Request to Amend Personnel Roster -
Resolution
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Sidewalk Program’s 2019 Work Plan and Budget was
approved by Common Council on November 7, 2018; and
WHEREAS, the Sidewalk Program Manager needs assistance for construction
inspection duties, preparing engineering estimates, and preparing engineered drawings;
and
WHEREAS, the cost analysis for extending an annual seasonal position to a full-time
permanent position is marginal, and is a significant savings against hiring a consultant;
now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, That the Personnel Roster of the Engineering Division of the Department
of Public Works be amended as follows:
Add: One (1) Engineering Technician (40 hours)
; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the above changes shall be funded from Account S5410—Sidewalk
Assessment District.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 East Green Street, Ithaca, New York 14850-5690
Office of City Engineer
Telephone: 607 / 274-6530 Fax: 607 / 274-6415
To: City Administration Committee
From: Tim Logue, Director of Engineering
Johnathan Licitra, Sidewalk Program Manager
Date: April 3, 2019
Re: Request to an Engineering Technician to the Personnel Roster
We have hired a seasonal Engineering Technician each year for the past five years of the
Sidewalk Improvement District (SID) program, primarily focused on sidewalk
inspections, investigating complaints, and inspecting sidewalk repair and construction.
We have been lucky enough to have a returning seasonal employee a couple times, but
rehiring and training a new person is an otherwise time-consuming process. As our work
has grown, particularly with recent grant award successes such as Hector Street and
South Aurora Street, we have come to the conclusion that there is plenty of work to do
through the winter and it would be appropriate to convert the seasonal position to a
permanent rostered position. We believe there are a number of reasons to create a
permeant position:
1. Reduces the need for out-of-house costs associated with small topographic
surveys and engineering drafting for sidewalk replacement or new construction
2. Having the same person year after year will increase familiarity with City of
Ithaca and NYS DOT construction standards and DPW personnel – better
coordination across DPW divisions
3. Efficiency in preserving institutional knowledge and procedures.
4. Hiring an out-of-house consultant for construction inspection is very expensive
(on the order of $75,000 for 6 months ), so it makes sense for us to do this in-house.
Having the person on the roster eliminates the “winter furlough” and provides
better continuity with planning and budgeting, designing, and bidding, and then
heading into construction season.
Funding for this position has been budgeted within the 2019 SID Work Plan under the
Construction Inspection/Engineering Technician line item. No additional funding is
needed to bring this position on full-time.
9. CITY ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE:
9.1 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Amendment of Capital Project #839 for
Dryden Road Parking Garage - Resolution
WHEREAS, Capital Project #839 was established in 2017 at $51,000 for a Condition
Assessment of the Dryden Road Parking Garage, and the report identified and
prioritized capital repairs over a 5-year timeframe; and
WHEREAS, Common Council amended CP #839 by adding $375,000 to fund
engineering and construction of several high-priority safety issues requiring immediate
attention, including staircase, fire suppression standpipes, barrier strand cables; and
WHEREAS, bids were opened on March 26, 2019 for this scope of work, and the low
bidder was Crane Hogan at $483,840; and
WHEREAS, Engineering staff is recommending award of the contract to Crane Hogan,
conditioned on additional budget and completion of the full scope of work, plus an
allowance for construction inspection and material testing and a contingency; now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby amends Capital Project #839 by $200,000
for the repair of structural and safety issues at the Dryden Road Parking Garage,
bringing the total authorization to $626,000; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That funds needed for said amendment shall be derived from issuance of
Serial Bonds.
9.2 Department of Public Works (DPW) – Exchange of Property with State of New York
- Resolution
WHEREAS, upon staff recommendation, the City of Ithaca Board of Public Works
recommended an exchange of right-of-ways between the State of New York and the City of
Ithaca; and
WHEREAS, the right-of-way segments under consideration are:
- The City of Ithaca owned portion of Route 13, also known as Elmira Road, from the
south City line to a point approximately 0.85 miles to the north, and
- The New York State owned portions of Route 79 in the central business district,
including Green Street, Seneca Street and Seneca Way, from and including the
Tuning Fork intersection (State/Green/Seneca Way) to Route 13 southbound (Fulton
Street); and
WHEREAS, Common Council understands that there is a DOT Administrative Procedure that
will evaluate the proposed exchange and will ultimately require formal action from Common
Council and the NYS Legislature to effect the exchange; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca would expect to modify the existing Arterial Maintenance
agreement between the City and the State to include state owned roads segments after the
exchange; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca hereby endorses the exchange of
right-of-ways, including the rights and responsibilities thereto, with the New York State
Department of Transportation for the abovementioned roadways; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the Common Council of the City of Ithaca does hereby request the New York
State Department of Transportation to undertake the assessment for a jurisdictional realignment
in accordance with the NYSDOT Manual of Administrative Procedures for
- the City of Ithaca owned portion of Route 13, also known as Elmira Road, from the
south City line to a point approximately 0.85 miles to the north, and
- the New York State owned portions of Route 79 in the central business district,
including Green Street, Seneca Street and Seneca Way, from and including the
Tuning Fork intersection (State/Green/Seneca Way) to Route 13 southbound (Fulton
Street)
; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Common Council authorizes the Superintendent of Public Works to pursue
said exchange with the State of New York and return with a final proposal from NYSDOT for
local approval.
To: Common Council
From: Eric Hathaway, Transportation Engineer
Date: April 3, 2019
Re: Arterial Swap with NYSDOT - Update
In August of 2018, I received your support to request a jurisdictional realignment
through which the City of Ithaca would give NYSDOT our right of way on Route 13
(essentially the Elmira Road segment) in exchange for the segments of Route 79 that the
State owns in the central business district (Green and Seneca Streets, from the Tuning
Fork west to Meadow Street). I have attached those previous materials for your use.
Based on NYSDOT’s feedback, I made some minor modifications to the previous
request to resubmit for their consideration. Per the attached map, we are now
requesting that the City take over the blocks of W Green Street and W Seneca Street
between Fulton Street and Meadow Street, so as to create continuous ownership of
these roadways within the City. I would also now like to request that the City take over
ownership of the traffic signals at the intersections of Taughannock Boulevard (SR 89)
with State Street and Seneca Street (SR 79), as the City already owns these intersections,
per the attached map.
If you agree with these recommendations, I ask that you endorse the attached resolution
so that I can reengage with NYSDOT on this issue.
XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXX
Page 1 of 4
A comparison of arterials under consideration
for exchange with NYSDOT
Physical Inventory
City-owned portion of Elmira Road (Route 13/34/96)
Length = 4,500 feet or 0.85 centerline miles.
At 60 ft wide = 270,000 s.f. or 30,000 s.y.
Two (2) lanes in each direction plus two-way center turn lane.
5 lanes over 4,500 feet = 22,500 lane feet or approximately 4.25 lane miles
A 2011 traffic count on Elmira Road showed an AADT = 17,000.
Four (4) traffic signals:
Home Depot (ownership never transferred to City of Ithaca)
Spencer Road
Commercial Avenue
Wal-Mart/Friendly’s (ownership never transferred to City of Ithaca)
One (1) non-signalized intersection at Southwest Park Drive.
Culvert for stream - Friendly’s/Honda to Wal-Mart parcel
Culvert for creek at U-Haul (343 Elmira Rd)/Midas (347 Elmira Rd)
Culvert at 371 Elmira Rd?
Pedestrian bridge over Route 13 at City/Town line.
State-owned portion of Green and Seneca streets (Route 79)
From, and including, Tuning Fork to Meadow Street
Length = 8,500 feet or 1.61 centerline miles.
At 40 ft wide = 340,000 s.f. or 37,778 s.y.
Two (2) lanes in each direction. Very short sections of 3 lanes in Tuning Fork.
4 lanes over 8,500 feet = 34,000 lane feet or approximately 6.45 lane miles
A 2010 traffic count on Green Street showed an AADT = 7,196 and for Seneca
Street showed an AADT = 8,309. Total AADT = 15,505.
XXXXXXXXXXX
Page 2 of 4
Nine (9) traffic signals:
Green and Plain streets (flash mode/IFD pre-empt)
Green and Albany streets
Green and Cayuga streets
Green and Tioga
Tuning Fork system
Seneca and Aurora
Seneca and Tioga
Seneca and Cayuga
Seneca and Albany
Six (6) non-signalized intersections:
Green and Corn
Green and Fayette
Green and Geneva
Seneca and Geneva
Seneca and Plain
Seneca and Corn
There are no bridges or culverts in these segments.
Financial considerations for swap
CHIPs funding
For city, the swap yields 0.76 more centerline miles (1.12% of our existing 67.84
centerline miles) and 2.2 more lane miles (1.63% of our existing 134.88 lane miles)
In 2017, the City of Ithaca received $438,481 in CHIPs funding.
The City would likely receive about $4,300-$6,500 per year more with additional
centerline and lane miles. For example, a 1% increase in CHIPs funding over our
2017 funding would be $4,300 per year; a 1.5% increase in CHIPs funding would
be $6,500 per year. CHIPs funding has increased by $139,000 since 2007, or 26
percent.
Arterial Maintenance & Repair Agreement
Assuming NYSDOT wanted the City of Ithaca to enter into a maintenance
agreement for Elmira Road and the square yards for Seneca and Green streets
were deleted from the agreement:
Page 3 of 4
Net 7,778 s.y., reduction @ $0.85/sy/yr = $6,611 less per year
However, we did change the terms of the agreement in regard to traffic signals.
Each signal in the agreement is worth 195 sy x $0.85/sy = $165.75/yr. In the
exchange, there is a net decrease of seven (7) signals (the two un-licensed signals
can be licensed and annual maintenance payments would be made by the
developer), so this would add $1,160.25 back into the agreement.
So the total annual reduction in arterial maintenance payments would be
$5,450.75.
Other considerations
City completed project to mill and pave Elmira Road for approx. $280,000 in
2007.
The two city-owned signals (Commercial Ave & Spencer Rd) are in need of
replacement at a cost of approx. $300,000. The other two signals have not been
licensed yet.
8 of the 9 state-owned signals on Green & Seneca were built in 1988. The 9th
signal (the Tuning Fork) was built in 2006. Though the poles and mast arms may
last another 10 to 15 years, the signal controllers and cabinet would need to be
replaced for this swap. NYSDOT would likely want (and we do not want) their
2070 equipment; the City would want to replace with NEMA equipment. The
value of this trade out is on the order of $30,000 per signal, so approximately
$270,000 in total.
NYSDOT has completed a project to mill & pave Green & Seneca streets between
the Tuning Fork and Meadow Street in 2012. This work is valued at
approximately $400,000.
Summary of Annual Costs + for City - for City
Annual CHIPS $4,300
Annual Arterial Maintenance - $5,450
Net Annual Change = approximately - $1,150
By this accounting, the exchange is basically a fair trade for annual costs.
Page 4 of 4
Capital Cost Comparison
For planning purposes, NYSDOT uses a figure of $1.68M/lane mile to estimate
the cost for road reconstruction projects. This is for an urban section with curb,
closed drainage, sidewalks and utilities. The construction costs for urban traffic
signals are on the order of $100,000. Using these figures the capital value of these
roadways would be:
Elmira Road = $7,340,000 Green & Seneca Street = $11,736,000
For preventative maintenance, NYSDOT uses $36,000/lane mile for a vender
placed pavement type treatment and a $70,000/lane mile cost for a one course
mill and pave. Adding one of each of these over a 40 year life adds:
Elmira Road = $480,000 Green & Seneca Street = $683,700
For a total cost of:
Elmira Road = $7,790,500 Green & Seneca Street = $12,419,700
A Capital Recovery Factor uses a discount rate (time value of money) and a
useful life estimate to determine an annual amount that would be needed to
replace the asset. For this analysis, it is assumed that the useful life of the
pavement is 40 years. Using a 7% discount rate, the annual “cost” to own the
roads would be about $580,000 for Elmira Road and $930,000 for Green/Seneca.
Using a 4.5% discount rate (a little closer to our cost to borrow money), the
annual “costs” would be about $425,000 for Elmira Road and $675,000 for
Green/Seneca. In the former case, the difference is $350,000; in the latter, it is
$250,000.
In the long run, owning Green & Seneca streets has a larger capital cost.
EAH
7/18/2018
XXXXXXXXXXXX
E
a
s
t
S
h
o
r
e
D
r
NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 DatumMap Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-2019Data Source: City of Ithaca Department of Public Works, 2019Map Prepared by: GIS Program, City of Ithaca, NY, March, 2019±0 500 1,000 Feet
Roadway Ownership within City of Ithaca
Road Owner
NYSDOT
City
Other
£¤79
£¤13
£¤96
£¤96B
£¤89
£¤13A
£¤366
£¤13
£¤79
£¤96B
£¤13
£¤79
£¤79
£¤79 £¤89
£¤96
£¤13
S Albany StE Buffalo St
South Hill TerN Tioga StS Titus AveTurner PlUniversity AveE Clinton St
E State St
E Seneca St
S Plain StFair StF
i
f
t
h
S
t
S Cayuga StColumbia St
S
e
c
o
n
d
St
E Spencer StF
o
u
r
t
h
S
t
E Green St
W Spencer StS Aurora StN Fulton StW Clinton St
Esty St
Center St
W Buffalo St
W Court St
W Seneca St
W State St Willets PlS Corn StN Aurora StGiles StN Plain StN Meadow StN Corn StN Cayuga StFountain PlE Court St
Parker StS Meadow StH
u
d
s
o
n
S
t
S F
u
l
t
o
n
S
t
Cascad
i
l
l
a
A
v
e
Se
n
e
c
a
W
a
y
Cascadilla St
Washington StCeci
l
A
M
a
l
o
n
e
D
r Fayette StW Green St N Geneva StN Albany StPark PlSchuyler PlTerrace PlProspect St
Pleasant StSears StHillview Pl Linn StCleveland Ave
N Titus Ave S Geneva StCasca
d
i
l
l
a
A
v
e
S Ti
t
u
s
A
v
e
Cascadilla Park Rd
Portion of NYS Route 79 Owned by the State of New YorkUnder Consideration for Exchange with City of IthacaFrom Fulton Street to and including the Tuning Fork
Approximate Length of ArterialUnder Consideration is 9,600 feet
£¤13£¤
£¤3496
£¤96B
£¤79
£¤79
£¤79
£¤96B
£¤96B
Tuning ForkCommons
NY State Plane, Central GRS 80 DatumMap Source: Tompkins County Digital Planimetric Map 1991-2019Data Source: City of Ithaca Department of Public Works, 2019Map Prepared by: GIS Program, City of Ithaca, NY, February, 2019±0 200 400 Feet
Portion of Route 79
Buildings
Driveways and Parking Areas
Roads
Sidewalks
Waterway
Parks
£¤13£¤
£¤3496
£¤13£¤
£¤3496
9.3 Department of Public Works (DPW) - Establishment of Capital Project for
Traffic Signal and Operations Improvements - Resolution
WHEREAS, the City Engineering Department has identified grant funds available
through Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which would improve traffic signal
operations through the use of advanced detection equipment and crowd-sourced travel
information; and
WHEREAS, the City will submit a $700,000 grant application for said project, which
would require a 20% city match, estimated at $150,000; and
WHEREAS, the majority of the City of Ithaca’s traffic signals are not able to respond to
traffic demand from any users; and
WHEREAS, this operation leads to inefficiencies and frustration; and
WHEREAS, advanced signal detection equipment can improve traffic safety by better
reacting to all modes of traffic; and
WHEREAS, along with already funded communications improvements, this technology
would improve response time to traffic signal malfunctions; and
WHEREAS, crowd-sourced traffic data would greatly improve the quality and quantity of
data that the City is able to use in prioritizing transportation infrastructure; now,
therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council hereby establishes Capital Project #867 Traffic
Signal and Operations Improvement in the amount of $700,000, for the Federal
Highway Administration’s “Accelerating Innovations Demonstration” grant to equip 30
traffic signals with advanced detection equipment and purchase one year of crowd-
sourced traffic data; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That this project be undertaken with the understanding that the final cost
of the project to the City will be 20% of the total project costs, currently estimated at
$150,000; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That funds needed for said project shall be derived from the issuance of
serial bonds; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That said project funding shall be contingent on the approval of the FHWA
grant.
To: Common Council
From: Eric Hathaway, Transportation Engineer
Date: April 3, 2019
Re: Transportation Innovations Grant Proposal
I have identified a grant available through the Federal Highway Administration
(FHWA) that I believe will enable the City to vastly improve traffic signal operations
through the use of advanced detection equipment and crowd-sourced travel
information. The grant is offered through their Accelerated Innovation Demonstration
Program. The grant requires a 20 percent match from the local sponsor, which in this
case I estimate to be $150,000.
Signal Detection Equipment
The existing signal system in the City of Ithaca is primarily a pre-timed system,
meaning that traffic signals do not respond to traffic demand. I have found this to be
inefficient, especially during off-peak times when demand on main and side streets is
more equally balanced and unpredictable than during peak times. By adding advanced
detection equipment to traffic signals primarily in the urban core, the traffic signals
would be able to respond to demand changes from pedestrians, bicycles and
automobiles.
I believe this change would improve safety and efficiency and significantly reduce
idling. Detection equipment is now sophisticated enough to differentiate bicycles from
automobiles and gives practitioners the opportunity to program traffic signals to
respond appropriately to each mode. The detection equipment would also
automatically count all modes of users to give us an accurate picture of mode share and
how it varies throughout the year.
In coordination with a funded 2019 capital project that will allow the City traffic signals
to communicate with each other, this technology would allow us to know, in real time,
when a traffic signal loses power, or malfunctions. This knowledge would greatly
reduce response times to these potential safety threats.
In addition, by reacting to changes in pedestrian, bicycle and automobile demand, I
anticipate that delay for all of these modes will be significantly reduced.
Crowd-Sourced Traffic Data
It is now possible to analyze a robust set of transportation data for all modes by
collecting crowd-sourced data. This data includes travel time and speed, volume of
traffic, as well as origin-destination information. I propose that we would invest in one
year of data from one of several companies that offer this service. This would allow the
City to make more informed planning and engineering decisions. Not only will this
give us a better sense of seasonal variation in traffic conditions through the City, but
will provide information previously impossible to decipher.
For instance, this data can tell us what percentage of traffic entering the City on
Route 13 is traveling though, versus traveling to points in downtown or other
neighborhoods. It can also help us to quantify concerns that we hear from
neighborhoods about cut-through traffic. It would allow us to analyze long-term speed
evaluations at any time of year, which our existing equipment cannot do.
Conclusion
By investing $150,000, the City can receive $700,000 in traffic signal equipment and
strategic data to inform our future decisions.
9.4 Youth Bureau – Authorization to Apply for a New York State Consolidated
Funding Grant for Cass Park Rink Enclosure Project - Resolution
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Youth Bureau would like to apply through the Environmental
Protection Fund (EPF) Grant Program for Parks, Preservation and Heritage,
Consolidated Funding Application (CFA) 2019, for the Cass Park Rink Enclosure
Project on behalf of the City of Ithaca; and
WHEREAS, The Cass Park Rink serves as the hub of all Cass Park facilities and
programs, serves thousands of Ithaca area residents on a year round basis, and is
widely recognized as a valuable public asset; and
WHEREAS, the City has completed a series of Rink improvements as recommended in
structural and operational reports to complete Phase 1 and Phase 2; Year 1 of the
planned 3 Phase renovation project; and
WHEREAS, The Friends of the Ithaca Youth Bureau (FOIYB) has been actively
fundraising in the community; and
WHEREAS the grant funds would enable the City to move forward with the help of
FOIYB to complete Phase 2; Year 2 of the project which will enclose Cass Park Rink as
recommended for optimal operations; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the Director of the City of Ithaca Youth Bureau, is hereby authorized
to file an application for funds in an amount not to exceed $500,000 for the Cass Park
Rink Enclosure Project from the New York State CFA and, upon approval of said
request, to enter into and execute a project agreement with the State for such financial
assistance to the City of Ithaca for the Cass Park Rink Project; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That The City of Ithaca is authorized and directed to agree to the terms
and conditions of the Master Contract with OPRHP for such Cass Park Rink Enclosure
Project.
10. PLANNING AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
10.1 Approval of the New York State Environmental Quality Review Findings
Statement for the Chain Works District Redevelopment Project - Resolution
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2014, the Common Council adopted legislation allowing for the
City to establish Planned Unit Development (PUD) districts on any property in the City
currently zoned for industrial uses; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council has one pending application for a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
(CWD Project) to be located at 620 S. Aurora Street by Jamie Gensel of Fagan
Engineers & Land Surveyors PC, for David Lubin, Project Sponsor, Unchained
Properties (UP); and
WHEREAS, the proposed CWD Project seeks to redevelop and rehabilitate the +/-
800,000-SF former Morse Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility, located on a 95-
acre parcel traversing the City and Town of Ithaca’s municipal boundary (Site). The
PUD is for a mixed-use district, which includes residential, commercial, office,
manufacturing and a natural area, and which consists of four primary phases: (1) the
redevelopment of four existing buildings (21, 24, 33, & 34); (2) the repurposing of the
remaining existing buildings; (3) potential future development within areas of the
remainder of the site adjacent to the existing buildings/parking areas; and (4) future
developments within remaining areas of the Site. The CWD Project also requires a
subdivision approval and approvals from the Town of Ithaca for a Planned Development
Zone and site plan approval; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the adopted City process for consideration of a PUD,
the application was circulated in July 2014 to City boards and committees, as well as, to
the Town of Ithaca, and to the County Planning Department; and
WHEREAS, a required public information session, was held on August 5, 2014. In
accordance with PUD regulations, the meeting was advertised in the Ithaca Journal, the
property was posted with signs and property owners within 500 feet of the property were
notified by mail of the meeting; and
WHEREAS, a legal notice was posted to the Ithaca Journal, on July 29, 2014, in order
to advertise a legal public hearing on August 13, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the process for consideration of an application for the PUD requires that
the applicant obtain a preliminary approval in concept from the Common Council prior to
beginning the site plan review process; and
WHEREAS, that the Common Council did, on September 3, 2014 grant a preliminary
approval in concept to UP for their application for a PUD district to be established at the
Site; and
WHEREAS, that by granting a preliminary approval in concept, the Common Council
acknowledged that UP could begin the site plan review process, despite any zoning-
based deficiencies in the application; and
WHEREAS, UP did submit a site plan review application to the City of Ithaca Planning
Board in September of 2014; and
WHEREAS, the CWD Project exceeded the thresholds defined for Type I projects in
both the State and City Environmental Quality Review Law. Type I actions carry with
them the presumption that it is likely to have a significant effect on the environment.
Specifically, this CWD Project exceeds the Type I thresholds as defined in Chapter 176
of the City of Ithaca Code, Environmental Quality Review Ordinance, §174- 6
(B)(1)(i),(j),(k),(n), (2), (6), (7),(8)(a)and (b) and the State Environmental Quality Review
Act §617.4 (b)(2),(3), (5)(iii), (6)(i), and (iv); and
WHEREAS, Common Council, the Town of Ithaca Town Board, the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board, the Tompkins County Department of Health, the NYS Department of
Health, the NYS Department of Transportation, and the NYS Department of
Environmental Conservation all consented to the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board’s being Lead Agency for this CWD Project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency,
made a Positive Declaration of Environmental Significance on October 2, 2014,
directing the Project Sponsor to prepare a Draft Generic Environmental Impact
Statement (DGEIS) to evaluate potential impacts of the proposed CWD Project; and
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2014, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
held both an Agency Scoping Session and a Public Scoping Session to identify issues
to be analyzed in the GEIS; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board did, on January 13,
2015, approve a Scoping Document; and
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency for
the purpose of environmental review, did on March 8, 2016 review the DGEIS submitted
by UP for completeness and adequacy for the purpose of public review and comment,
and with the assistance of City Staff and the City’s consultants, Adam Walters of Phillips
Lytle LLP, find the DGEIS to be satisfactory with respect to its scope, content, and
adequacy; and
WHEREAS, on March 29, 2016, a public hearing was held by the Planning and
Development Board to obtain comments from the public on potential environmental
impacts of the proposed action as evaluated in the DGEIS, and written comments for
the same purpose were accepted until May 25, 2016; and
WHEREAS, Concurrent with the Environmental Review and over the same four year
period, Common Council, did, meet numerous times with the project team to review and
provide feedback on the draft PUD and Design Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, Common Council did circulate the draft PUD and Design Guidelines for
comments in December 2017 and again in December 2018 and all relevant comments
have been incorporated; and
WHEREAS, the final draft PUD is comprised of four districts: the CW1 Natural Sub
Area, containing 8.01 acres of predominately undeveloped land/open space and CW3A,
CW3B & CW3C, containing 21.31 acres of mixed use development in both new and
existing buildings. The Design Guidelines are intended to supplement the zoning and
provide clear but flexible guidance during the site plan review process; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Board as Lead Agency, did on February 26,
2019 accept the Final GEIS for the CWD Project as complete for filing, having duly
considered the potential adverse environmental impacts and proposed mitigating
measures as required under 6 NYCRR Part 617 (the SEQRA regulations) and Chapter
176 of the City of Ithaca Code (the City of Ithaca Environmental Quality Review
Ordinance, CEQRO); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Development Board as Lead Agency, did on March 26,
2019, issue positive written findings (Findings Statement) determining, among other
things:
(a) That consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations, from
among the reasonable alternatives available, the action to be carried out
minimizes or avoids, to the maximum extent practicable, adverse environmental
impacts disclosed in the Draft and Final Generic Environmental Impact
Statements; and
(b) The Findings Statement was prepared by the City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board, as Lead Agency relating to the Chainworks Redevelopment
Project, pursuant to the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act,
Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and the regulations promulgated
thereto at 6 NYCRR Part 617 (collectively referred to as “SEQRA”) and Chapter
176 of the City of Ithaca Code, City Environmental Quality Review Ordinance
(“CEQRO”). This Findings Statement draws upon the matters set forth in the
SEQRA/CEQRO record, including the Generic Environmental Impact Statement
(“GEIS”), consisting of the DGEIS and the FGEIS, as well as the public
comments on the DGEIS received at a public hearing and during the public
comment period; and
(c) A DGEIS and FGEIS have been prepared on behalf of the Lead Agency. The
purpose of the DGEIS and FGEIS was to identify and evaluate the potential
significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed project and, where
applicable, to identify reasonable alternatives or mitigation measures that would
reduce the effect of those impacts to the maximum extent practicable.
(d) The Findings represents the conclusion of the environmental review of the
proposed project by the Lead Agency. Under SEQRA and CEQRO, this Findings
Statement must:
1. Consider the relevant environmental impacts, facts and conclusions
disclosed in the GEIS;
2. Weigh and balance relevant environmental impacts with social, economic
and other considerations;
3. Provide a rationale for the Planning Board’s pending decision (regarding site
plan review for the Project);
4. Certify that the requirements of SEQRA have been met;
5. Certify whether, consistent with social, economic and other essential
considerations, from among the reasonable alternatives available, the action
is one that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the
maximum extent practicable, and whether any such adverse environmental
impacts will be avoided or minimized to the maximum extent practicable by
incorporating as conditions to any site plan approval those mitigation
measures that were identified, in the GEIS, as practicable.
(e) This is a “positive” findings statement, which means that the proposed Project is
potentially “approvable” (a relevant term used in the State’s “SEQR Handbook”)
by the Planning Board, as to its site plan. The Planning Board will use this
Findings Statement to assist in its review of the proposed site plan, and in
considering conditions that could be applied to any approval thereof.
(f) All involved agencies, as listed in the FGEIS, should prepare their own SEQRA
findings before making their own decisions.
; and
WHEREAS, Common Council has carefully reviewed the Lead Agency’s findings and
finds them thorough and comprehensive and consistent with SEQR; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That Common Council adopts the Lead Agency’s findings in their entirety
including the following certifications:
I. The requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Conservation Law
and the implementing regulations of NYSDEC, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and
local regulations, have been met; and
II. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from
among the reasonable alternatives available, the action is one that avoids
or minimizes adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent
practicable, and that adverse environmental impacts will be avoided or
minimized to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as
conditions to the decision those mitigative measures that were identified
as practicable.
To: Planning and Economic Development Committee
From: Lisa Nicholas, Deputy Director of Planning & Development
Date: April 4, 2019
RE: Chain Works District Planned Unit Development (PUD) – Findings for the Environmental
Impact Statement
Please find attached the findings adopted by the Planning Board on March 23, 2019 as well as a resolution
that outlines the EIS process, Common Council’s role in overseeing development of the PUD and resolving
that Common Council, as an Involved Agency in the environmental review, has “carefully reviewed the
Lead Agency’s findings and finds them thorough and comprehensive and consistent with SEQR” and
adopts the Lead Agency’s findings in their entirety.
In the next few months Common Council will be considering approval of the PUD and Design Guidelines
for the Chainworks Development Project. In accordance with the NYS Environmental Quality Review Act
(SEQRA), all involved agencies must prepare their own SEQRA findings before making their own decisions.
In accordance with the City’s PUD Ordinance, a project must receive final site plan approval from the
Planning Board for at least one phase of a development project before Common Council can adopt a
proposed PUD. The applicant intends to begin the site plan review process for Phase 1 in April and staff
estimates this may take 2-4 months.
Please contact me if you have questions of would like additional information. lnicholas@cityofithaca.org
607-274-6557.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
JoAnn Cornish, Director
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, BUILDING, ZONING, & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Division of Planning & Economic Development
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
4
STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW
CHAIN WORKS DISTRICT REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
FINDINGS STATEMENT
Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (State Environmental Quality Review Act) and the
City of Ithaca’s Environmental Quality Review Ordinance (collectively, SEQR), and applicable implementing
regulations, the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency under SEQR, makes the
following findings.
Name of Action: Chain Works District Redevelopment Project
Date: March 26, 2019
Lead Agency: City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Project Sponsor: UnChained Properties, LLC (UP)
Project Location: The Project is located on approximately 95 contiguous acres of land in central NYS,
South of Cayuga Lake in the Finger Lakes Region, and straddles the City and Town
border in Tompkins County (Site or Project Area). The 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. 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 multifamily homes in the City.
To the west, the Site slopes steeply to meet Spencer Street in the City, 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.
Classification: Type I Action; Positive Declaration Issued; DGEIS and FGEIS Prepared
Contacts: Lead Agency: Project Sponsor:
Lisa Nicholas David Lubin
City of Ithaca Planning Department UnChained Properties, LLC
108 East Green Street 225 Colonial Drive
Ithaca, New York 14850 Horseheads, NY 14845
Phone: (607) 274-6550 Phone: (607) 739-3826
5
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION:
The Chainworks District (CWD) Project (Project or Preferred Alternative) is a proposed mixed-use
redevelopment of the 95-acre former Morse Chain/Emerson Power Transmission facility (Site) that traverses
the City and Town of Ithaca’s municipal boundary. The Site is located along the New York State Route 96B
corridor and where Turner Street and South Cayuga Street meets the northern edge of South Hill. The Project
involves the redevelopment and rehabilitation of the existing architecture and landscape into a 1.7 million
square foot (sf) mixed-use “live, work, play” district. Attached hereto as Attachment A is FGEIS Figure 2.3-2
Conceptual Site Layout Plan. The Project consists of removing approximately 92,320 sf of the existing
821,200 sf buildings, constructing 86,600 sf of vertical additions, and constructing 890,700 sf of new buildings.
The Project is estimated to be completed over a seven-to-ten year period. The first phase (Phase I) will consist
of redeveloping four existing buildings generally located at the northern and southern most ends of the Site.
These first four buildings are approximately 331,450 sf and will contain a mix of office, residential, and
industrial uses. Subsequent phases of development will be determined as the Project proceeds and will include
new structures to complete a full buildout of 1,706,150 sf consisting of approximately 915 residential dwelling
units, 184,350 sf of commercial space and 260,900 sf of industrial use.
Infrastructure work related to the full development of the Project will include the following: (1) removing select
buildings to create public courtyard areas and a network of open spaces and roads; (2) creating pedestrian,
bicycle, and vehicular connections throughout the Site from South Hill to Downtown Ithaca; (3) improving the
existing roads within the Site while creating new access points into the Site; (4) mitigating existing
environmental impacts from historic uses; (5) fostering the development of a link, the Gateway Trail, to the
Black Diamond Trail network; and (6) installing stormwater management facilities, lighting, public water and
utilities, landscaping and other Site amenities.
The development of the Site is fostered by a proposed rezoning of the City portion of the Site into a Planned
Unit Development (PUD), and the Town portion into a Planned Development Zone (PDZ). Design Guidelines
are set forth in the proposed PUD/PDZ Zoning Code. The PUD/PDZ Zoning Code is attached hereto as
Attachment B. The zoning and related Design Guidelines for the Project divide the development of the Site
into four (4) Sub Areas, each with its own set of Design Guidelines to focus the Project Sponsor’s vision for the
Project as an integrated whole. Sub Areas CW2 and CW3 were further enumerated into subsections, as
shown in FGEIS Figure 2.3-1 below.
The addition of subsections and building buffers are in response to comments received during the Generic
Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) process, specifically regarding the character/size of the existing
residential structures adjacent to the Project and the additional need of a transition between the existing and
proposed structures along NYS Route 96B. The Sub Areas are defined as:
Natural Sub Area (CW1): A ± 23.9 acre conservation zone containing a mature Appalachian Oak-
Hickory forest to be used for passive recreation, generally located along the western portion of the Site.
Neighborhood General Sub Area (CW2): A ± 21.2 acre zone for clusters of new residential
development using a mix of housing styles and coinciding with primary points of access into the Site,
generally located at the southeastern end of the Site within the Town. The CW2 Sub Area is split into
subsections CW2A and CW2B. This allowed for the reduction from 6 to 4 stories in the CW2A in
response to GEIS comments.
Neighborhood Center Sub Area (CW3): A ± 39.7 acre zone for mixed uses ranging from residential to
industrial, using existing buildings at the core of the Site and clusters of new buildings at the northern
edge of the Site and along NYS Route 96B; all located in the City and Town. The CW3 Sub Area is split
into subsections CW3A, CW3B and CW3C in response to GEIS Comments. CW3A reduce the
maximum allowed above-grade stories from 6 to 4 and maximum allowed façade length from 180 feet
6
to 120 feet. CW3C also reduces the maximum allowed above-grade stories from 6 to 4 but also
prohibits below-grade stories.
Industrial Sub Area (CW4): A ± 10.3 acre zone for industrial uses centrally located on the Site using
existing buildings located in the City and Town.
FGEIS Figure 2.3-1 PUD/PDZ Sub Area Boundary Map (R+W)
Following a detailed design process with extensive public outreach and involvement, the Project Sponsor
unveiled a detailed conceptual site plan in October 2014. On October 20, 2015, the Planning Board issued a
positive declaration for the Project, requiring the preparation of a GEIS. The Lead Agency issued notices to all
then-known involved or interested agencies to solicit Lead Agency status for the Project on October 28, 2014.
The Project Sponsor then prepared a Draft GEIS (DGEIS), copies of which were made available for public
review. The DGEIS was accepted as complete by the Lead Agency on March 8, 2016, and a Notice of Public
Hearing appeared in the Ithaca Journal on March 18, 2016 and in the Environmental Notice Bulletin on March
23, 2016. A public hearing on the proposed Project was held on March 29, 2016. Due to extensive public
interest, the public comment period was extended from May 10, 2016 to May 25, 2016.
Many comments were received during the public comment period. Copies of all comments received are
provided in Appendices A and B of the Final GEIS (FGEIS), which also incorporates the DGEIS by reference.
Responses to every substantive comment received is provided in Chapter 3 of the FGEIS. Comments covered
the purpose and need for the Project, the alternatives considered, potential environmental impacts, and
mitigation measures, among other things. In light of the comments received, various changes were made to
the DGEIS. These changes are detailed in Chapter 4 and Appendix D of the FGEIS.
Final designs for less-defined, more conceptual Project phases and components, or any proposed changes to
the better-defined elements (collectively, Future Project Plans) will require further evaluation pursuant to
SEQR. The lead agency will be responsible for performing an environmental review on the Future Project
Plans proposed in relation to (i) the FGEIS and (ii) the Findings Statement. Once Future Project Plans have
been submitted to the lead agency, that agency must determine if the environmental impacts associated with
such Future Project Plans have been adequately addressed in the FGEIS and SEQR Findings Statement.
7
Additionally, the following reviews, permits and/or approvals are/were required to facilitate the proposed
Project:
SEQR: Preliminary Site Plan Approval of Conceptual Site Layout Plan and Final Site Plan Approval for
two Buildings (from the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board)
Rezoning to a PUD (from the City of Ithaca Common Council)
Building and Demolition Permits; Certificate of Occupancy (from the City of Ithaca Code Enforcement)
Highway Work Permits; Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the City of
Ithaca Board of Public Works)
Rezoning to a PDZ (from the Town of Ithaca Town Board) Preliminary Site Plan Approval of the
Conceptual Site Layout Plan and Final Site Plan Approval for two Buildings (from the Town of Ithaca
Planning Board)
Building and Demolition Permits; Certificate of Occupancy (from the Town of Ithaca Code Enforcement)
Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the Tompkins County Department
of Health (TCDOH))
County Planning Review (from the Tompkins County Department of Planning (TCDP))
Highway Work Permit (from the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT))
401 Water Quality Certification; State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) / Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP); (from the New York State Department of Environmental
Conservation (NYSDEC))
Water and Wastewater System Improvements Plan Approval (from the New York State Department of
Health (NYSDOH))
Federal and State Preservation (from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic
Places (NYSOPRHP))
Amendment to the current Record of Decision (ROD) to allow mixed-use development (NYSDEC)
Request for Boundary Modification to release southern portion of Site from Inactive Hazardous Waste
Disposal Site (IHWDS) Registry (NYSDEC)
8
FACTS AND INFORMATION RELIED UPON TO SUPPORT THE DECISION:
1. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency, conducted a coordinated review
pursuant to SEQR.
2. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board commenced the SEQR process for the Project in
October of 2014 by circulating a notice of intent to act as Lead Agency along with a Full Environmental
Assessment Form to all then-known Interested or Involved Agencies:
Involved Agencies
City of Ithaca (City)
City of Ithaca Board of Public Works
City of Ithaca Common Council
City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board (Lead Agency)
NYSDEC, Region 7
NYSDOH
New York State Department of Office of Parks, Recreation, and Historic Preservation (SHPO)
NYSDOT, Region 3
TCDOH
TCDP
Town of Ithaca (Town)
Town of Ithaca Town Board
Town of Ithaca Planning Board
Interested Agencies & Parties (note: some City groups are no longer in existence as of 2018)
South Hill Civic Association (SHCA)
Tompkins County Area Development
City of Ithaca School District
Community Advisory Group (CAG)
City of Ithaca Conservation Advisory Council (CAC)
City of Ithaca Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Council (BPAC)
City of Ithaca Shade Tree Advisory Committee (STAC)
Disability Advisory Council (DAC)
3. None of the Interested or Involved agencies objected to the City of Ithaca Planning and Development
Board acting as Lead Agency pursuant to SEQR and the City of Ithaca Planning and Development
Board was properly established as the SEQR Lead Agency for the Project in November of 2014.
4. Following a detailed design charrette planning process with extensive public outreach and involvement,
the Project Sponsor unveiled a detailed concept site layout plan for Chain Works in October 2014.
5. On October 2, 2014, the Lead Agency issued a positive declaration for the Project requiring the
preparation of the DGEIS.
6. Following issuance of the positive declaration, a Draft Scoping Report was issued. A Public Scoping
Meeting to solicit comments on the draft scope was held on October 18, 2014 and a Final Scoping
Document was approved on January 13, 2015.
9
7. Following issuance of the Final Scoping Document, the DGEIS was prepared by UP pursuant to the
requirements of SEQR. On March 8, 2016, the Lead Agency determined that the DGEIS was complete
and adequate for public review and scheduled a public hearing.
8. Copies of the DGEIS were made available for public review at the City of Ithaca Planning Department,
the Town of Ithaca Planning Department, the City of Ithaca Office of the Clerk and the Tompkins
County Public Library. A copy of the DGEIS was also posted on the CWD website.
9. A Notice of Completion of the DGEIS and Notice of Public Hearing appeared in The Ithaca Journal on
March 18, 2016 and the Environmental Notice Bulletin (ENB) on March 23, 2016.
10. A public hearing was held on March 29, 2016 at the Cinemapolis movie theater. Due to extensive public
interest in the Project and several requests made during the DGEIS public hearing, the public comment
period, originally scheduled to expire on May 10, 2016, was extended until May 25, 2016.
11. Notices of comment period extension were published in the Ithaca Journal, City of Ithaca Planning and
Development Board website and on the CWD website. Additionally, comments received after the end of
the public comment period prior to the issuance of the FGEIS have been accepted and responded to
within this FGEIS.
12. The FGEIS was issued on February 26, 2019 and a notice of completion of the FGEIS appeared in the
ENB on 3-13-19.
13. The FGEIS was distributed to the Interested and Involved agencies and copies of the FGEIS were
made available for public review at The Planning Department at the City of Ithaca and the Tompkins
County Public Library – Central Branch. A copy of the FGEIS has also been posted on the CWD
website. Pursuant to SEQR, the FGEIS was held open and available for more than 10 calendar days in
order to afford agencies and the public a reasonable time period in which to consider the FGEIS before
the Lead Agency issued its written findings statement.
14. The Lead Agency has carefully and thoroughly reviewed the information contained in the DGEIS,
including all appendices and the comments to the DGEIS, and the FGEIS including all appendices
(collectively referred to as the GEIS). The Lead Agency finds that the GEIS provides a thorough
examination of all significant potential impacts that would result from undertaking the Project. The Lead
Agency has carefully reviewed, questioned and analyzed the various impacts of, alternatives to, and
potential mitigative measures for the Preferred Alternative and weighed these issues against the social
and economic benefits of the Preferred Alternative and other essential considerations.
15. The Lead Agency recognizes that qualified experts on any topic may differ in their conclusions and, in
particular, may differ in the judgments employed during analysis. Nevertheless, the Lead Agency has
carefully reviewed many hundreds of pages of documentation on the various issues that have been
submitted by government agencies, experts, interested stakeholders and the general public that reflect
hundreds of hours of examination of the Project during a SEQR process that has taken more than four
years. On balance, and after careful consideration of all relevant documentation and comments, the
Lead Agency believes it has more than adequate information to evaluate all the benefits and potential
impacts of the Project as a basis for considering whether to undertake the Project.
10
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS SUPPORTING THE DECISION:
The GEIS provides a thorough and comprehensive analysis of the environmental, social and economic impacts
and details appropriate mitigation measures for the Preferred Alternative as well as the No Action Alternative,
Development in Accordance with Existing Zoning Alternative, and Maximum Development Alternative. A
summary of the relevant environmental impacts, facts and conclusions disclosed in the GEIS are described
below.
1. Land Use and Zoning
The GEIS examined the Project’s consistency with existing land use controls and local development
plans and policies to evaluate Project components alongside the visions for this area of the City and
Town. The predevelopment land use within the Site is industrial. The existing zoning for the majority of
the Site (64.37 acres) is classified as Industrial (I-1 in the City and I in the Town). The remainder of the
developable portions of the parcel is zoned medium density residential. The zoning for the adjacent
parcels is medium density residential except for the South Hill Business Park PDZ to the south of the
Site. The City of Ithaca adopted its Comprehensive Plan in September 2015 and PUD Zoning in
October 2014. The Town of Ithaca adopted its Comprehensive Plan in September 2014 and has been
using Special Land Use Districts (now called PDZs) since August 1984. There are currently 14 Special
Land Use (Mixed-Use) or PDZ districts within the Town of Ithaca.
Potential Impacts
The Project will create land use impacts in terms of both form and intensity of uses. The current
pattern of land use promoted by the existing land use regulations resulted in a large industrial
complex.
o The most substantial change in land use is the allowance for residential use where no
residential development is currently permitted.
o In terms of form, the existing zoning does not regulate the size, scale, massing or
disposition of buildings on the parcel in relationship to the surrounding land uses. In
contrast, the Project’s proposed PUD/PDZ Zoning Code will do so.
The most important potentially significant adverse impacts of a built-out landscape of
conventional zoning is the loss of the character along NYS Route 96B.
Existing zoning will be impacted by the Project through the rezoning of the Site as a PUD and
PDZ.
o Rezoning the City portion of the post-industrial Site as a PUD will allow the Project to
respond to and help implement planning and land-use concepts being set forth in the
City’s Comprehensive Plan which include the following impacts or opportunities:
Regional sprawl would be avoided by providing a mixed-use development that
bridges the City and Town, the Region, and Downtown.
Revitalizing the under-utilized Site with a mix of uses, including housing, would
extend and help implement the City’s goals to provide more housing and
revitalize the urban core.
Linkages between the City and Town, Ithaca College and Downtown, would be
strengthened by physically allowing the Site to be a link between them. This
would increase walkability and accessibility to Downtown, in turn reducing the
overall carbon footprint of the greater community.
A trail on the western side of the Site would link the Site and the City to a greater
network of trail connections within the City and beyond.
Natural areas will remain largely undeveloped to reduce stormwater runoff and
increase the acreage of environmentally valuable and sensitive areas.
o Rezoning the Town portion of the Site as a PDZ would allow the Project to respond to
the planning and land-use concepts set forth in the Town’s Comprehensive Plan, which
includes the following impacts or opportunities:
11
Sprawl would be avoided by providing denser clusters of housing with
significantly smaller footprints than other developments in the Town can offer.
Environmentally valuable areas would be preserved and protected as an amenity
for the neighborhood and surrounding community.
The CWD will promote human-scaled development and social connectivity within
the Project and around the community by providing a connection for the trail
network and between South Hill and Downtown Ithaca.
The new development will take on a cluster form avoiding environmentally and
visually sensitive areas.
CW1 Sub Area: This Sub Area is intended to remain undeveloped. With greater intensity of
uses adjacent to this Sub Area, there is a potential impact on the natural condition of this area
including the introduction of recreational trails bringing people within close proximity of a natural
area that has seen little human activity. There could be potential stormwater impacts in the
CW1 Sub Area as a result of the changes to intensity of land use in the CW2 Sub Area
upstream.
CW2 Sub Area: A potential impact on the surrounding natural areas could result from dense
residential development in what is currently an undeveloped wooded area.
o Having residential uses in close proximity to the CW1 Sub Area could increase the
amount of human activity within the natural wooded area.
o The increase in intensity of use will also impact the few off-site residential uses adjacent
to that area, but should have little effect on the commercial use to the south of the Site or
Ithaca College campus to the southeast.
o There will be a larger number of people moving by foot and by car between the Site and
the surrounding neighborhoods placing more stress on existing sidewalk and street
infrastructure.
CW3 Sub Area: A potential impact to the CW3 Sub Area includes impacts to the character of
the district and the relationship of new buildings and uses in close proximity to the existing
surrounding uses, specifically the Hillview-Turner place neighborhood.
o There will be a larger number of people moving by foot and by car between the Site and
the surrounding neighborhoods placing more stress on existing sidewalk and street
infrastructure.
CW4 Sub Area: The possibility of creating very large buildings with significant visual impact
exists by right without many restrictions in place.
Mitigation
The rezoning of the parcel to a PUD/PDZ with the establishment of Sub Areas and the adoption
of Design Guidelines will mitigate impacts to the form and intensity of land uses.
o Buffers will be maintained in areas adjacent to existing residential zones to control the
intensity of development.
o Form and intensity of uses will also be mitigated by following site plan review
procedures.
o Buildings within a 100-foot buffer along NYS Route 96B will be limited to a maximum of
four stories.
o In conjunction with the CWD PUD/PDZ Zoning Code approval, a Conceptual Site Layout
Plan will be submitted to the Town and City Planning Boards for preliminary site plan
approvals pursuant to §270-185 of the Town Code and §276-6 of the City Code.
o In the event a final Site Plan submitted for approval is not in substantial agreement with
the Conceptual Site Layout Plan and/or other Project thresholds are exceeded, the Town
and City Planning Boards - or whomever is the proper lead agency for the Project
component under consideration - will have the opportunity to determine whether such
changes warrant additional environmental review.
The Comprehensive Plans both describe the use of new mixed-use zoning as a tool to
implement shared land use goals for the Site.
12
The preservation of neighborhood is addressed through the development of the CWD PUD and
related Design Guidelines for the City and PDZ in the Town.
o In contrast to the existing pattern of development, the Project calls for compact
development, which integrates land uses, creates a strong multimodal network of streets
and paths, and makes for a more efficient use of infrastructure and existing services.
o The Design Guidelines will mitigate potential land use impacts by encouraging
development that will contribute to the CWD’s unique character. Moreover, the Design
Guidelines establish Site Plan Review procedures with specific regulations for the
district.
o The Design Guidelines have been prepared to provide clear and useful guidelines for the
design, construction, review, and approval of growth in the CWD. These standards will
help ensure that new buildings are compatible with either the existing historic industrial
buildings or the character of the immediate surrounding neighborhoods. The Design
Guidelines further address Site and building standards for each of the proposed Sub
Areas and identify site planning, thoroughfares, lighting, signage, and building design
requirements.
CW1 Sub Area: Retained a public passive recreation space. The Design Guidelines effectively
prevent the development of the CW1 Sub Area. There is no proposed specific mitigation for this
Sub Area because the preservation of this land as a natural area is in fact part of the proposed
mitigation for the other Sub Areas.
o Any potential buildings in CW1 would require design review by the Planning Board prior
to approval.
CW2 Sub Area: Allow the development of any Residential use. In response to DGEIS
comments, this Sub Area was split into two subsections.
o To the extent possible, the use of open space preservation techniques, such as the
clustering of dwelling structures, is encouraged for the undeveloped land within the Site
to mitigate impacts from dense development in other Sub Areas. This clustering
technique preserves the significant natural areas in the CW1 Sub Area and specific
designated trail linkages can be established to existing open space areas throughout the
Site during site plan review.
CW3 Sub Area: Same as CW2 (excluding detached dwellings) and including any Assembly,
Business, Educational, Factory, Mercantile or Storage use as defined by The Building Code of
New York State. This Sub Area was split into three subsections in response to DGEIS
comments. Buffers between the CW3 Sub Area and the existing residential uses are included in
the Design Guidelines to mitigate potential impacts from higher density uses in relatively close
proximity to lower density uses.
CW4 Sub Area: Any Business, Factory or Storage use as defined by The Building Code of New
York State.
2. Land
The GEIS examined the Project’s potential impacts to land for the 95 acre parcel including in-situ soils,
surface geology, and topography. 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 Site contains mostly
Lordstown series soils, similar to other hillsides in the area. The underlying in-situ soils have high
bearing capacity which makes the construction of buildings acceptable. The 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 Site meets Spencer Street. Approximately 50% of the Site contains
slopes of less than 20%, which are deemed appropriate for development.
13
Potential Impacts
The Project will utilize standard cut and fill excavation methods during construction of the new
roads, parking areas and building pads. The potential option for grading of the Site estimates
68,000+ cubic yards of fill will be necessary to balance the Site.
o This bulk cut and fill estimate provides total volumes and does not account for
construction materials that are required to be imported nor does it include the void
volume required for below-grade structures such as storage and parking areas.
The amount of disturbance for Phase I is limited due to the intent to start initial occupation at the
Site in the buildings that require the least amount of preparation. The impacts associated with
the Phase I buildings are as follows:
o Building 21: Limited to the minor sidewalk and parking area restorations required to
occupy the building.
o Building 24: Limited to re-surfacing existing pavement areas and establishing pedestrian
access into the building from parking areas.
o Buildings 33/34: Depending on parking requirements of future tenant(s), the
development of the south parking areas which includes the demolition of the existing
metal storage building and construction of two parking areas.
As with all earthwork operations, the full development of the Project will expose soils which will
increase the potential for short and long-term erosion impacts and potential loss of sediment
from the Site.
o Short term erosion impacts are mainly due to the site construction phase.
o Potential long-term erosion impacts are due to improper construction techniques
including non-compliance with State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES)
General Construction (GC) permit requirements for the stabilization of stockpiles or other
idled disturbed areas for periods exceeding 14 days as well as improper diversion of
stormwater flows through unstabilized areas of construction.
Potential impacts to adjacent parcels are anticipated to be limited due to the distance of the new
development from property lines. Other potential impacts include working in areas with
environmental concerns which are discussed in further detail under Public Health and
Environment.
Potential impacts for development beyond Phase I, listed by Zoning Sub Area, are as follows:
o Sub Area CW1: Impacts to soils and topography in the CW1 Sub Area are limited to the
sections where recreational trails or associated structures are constructed. Disturbance
due to the development of recreational features will be minimal. The largest potential
impacts to this Sub Area are due to the erosion potential associated with the
development of Sub Area CW2 located upgradient from CW1.
o Sub Area CW2: This Sub Area contains the potential for the most new development
within the Site and also the most potential impacts to Site soils and topography. CW2 will
be terraced to develop multi-family residential units configured in multiple stories that
benefit with the use of the sloping grades to construct structured parking under certain
residential buildings. Based on the previous geotechnical studies, it is anticipated that
blasting will not be required. Heavy construction equipment will be used to remove as
much of the fractured/weathered bedrock as feasible. If additional rock removal is
required, blasting may be necessary. The in-situ soils in CW2 are highly erodible.
o Sub Area CW3: The CW3 Sub Area consists mostly of terraced parking areas that will
be redeveloped for buildings, parking areas and roads. The portions of CW3 that are
anticipated to include new buildings and parking areas are uphill of the existing
developed portions of the core. The Conceptual Site Layout Plan was developed to
benefit from the existing terraced areas of the Site to limit total earthwork.
o Sub Area CW4: Impacts to CW4 are limited to the potential construction of two parking
areas that total less than 1 acre of disturbance. This is a minor amount of disturbance
and would normally not require a NYSDEC SPDES GC permit. However, since this is
14
part of a plan of common development, a full SWPPP will be required for this portion of
work.
Mitigation
Future development of new areas will be located primarily in areas with slopes less than 20%.
Sub Area CW1, which contains areas with slopes greater than 20%, will be preserved.
Development will be relocated away from areas with unstable soils.
o Such topographic restrictions on future development minimizes erosion and potential
impacts to topography while reducing the amount of cut and fill required.
The Conceptual Grading Plan prepared with the goal of balancing the amount of cut and fill
minimizes the import/export of materials to and from the Project.
o Detailed grading plans of each subsequent phase will be developed to mitigate the
excess fill requirements.
o Subsoils will be tested by a certified laboratory.
o Construction specifications will be developed based on the laboratory analysis and
recommendations of the geotechnical testing firm.
Side slope grades of all cut and fill areas are set to minimize the potential for future erosion.
Phase I Site Plan drawings include an existing conditions survey performed by a NYS Licensed
Surveyor.
o Subsequent Site Plans will also include existing conditions surveys.
Grading and Erosion Control plans and geotechnical reports for subsequent phases will be
developed during the Site Plan approval process.
Demolition and Grading Plans will be developed as part of all Site Plan submissions.
o Grading plans will be developed to balance cut and fill requirements with the design
intent of disposing of all excess material on-site.
o Excess soils created by the excavation for below-ground structure parking and storage
levels will be utilized as fill around adjacent structures and, if suitable, in pavement
areas.
o Complete construction specifications for earthwork and erosion control will be developed
for each phase.
Coverage under the NYSDEC SPDES GC Permit (GP-0-015-002) for erosion and sediment
control will be obtained. A SWPPP will be developed, and will require or implement the
following:
o Specific limits of disturbance (LOD) will be defined for each Phase to maintain impacts
within the permitted area.
o Develop Erosion & Sediment Control Plans as part of all Site Plan submissions.
o Minimize stream impacts from erosion by minimizing earthwork within 50 feet of the
banks as well as protecting from excess stormwater runoff during construction.
o Minimize the areas of disturbance for slopes exceeding 20%. Maintain those areas in a
vegetated state to the maximum extent practicable.
o Determine slope stability by a qualified engineer for development of slopes in excess of
3:1. Retaining walls, turf reinforcement mats or other Best Management Practices
(BMPs) will be designed by a qualified engineer for slopes exceeding 3:1.
o Inspect for site stabilization by a qualified inspector as part of the SPDES GC Permit to
achieve the same.
o Obtain written approval from the MS4 prior to the disturbance of five acres or more at
any one time.
o Obtain certification by a licensed professional engineer that attests to the construction
and implementation of the SWPPP upon completion of the site construction portion for
the individual phases.
Follow any applicable excavation management plan approved by NYSDEC to manage
appropriately any impacted soils encountered during construction.
15
If necessary, a system of controlled blasting would be specified that includes methodology,
mitigation and monitoring requirements.
o The blasting specifications will be developed in accordance with NYSDOT Geotechnical
Engineering Manual: Procedure for Blasting.
o All Local, National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Occupational Safety and Health
Association (OSHA) and NYS Department of Labor (NYSDOL) requirements will be
followed.
o A written blast plan will be developed and pre-operations meetings will be conducted
with the Project Sponsor, Engineer, Contractor, and City and Town Staff.
3. Water Resources
The GEIS analyzed the impacts to water resources that would be associated with each of the
alternatives. In particular, the GEIS analyzed the potential impacts associated with stormwater
management, groundwater and hydrogeological conditions. There are three unnamed tributaries that
converge and run east-to-west within the Site to Six Mile Creek, which is located approximately 500
feet to the northwest of the Site. No other surface water or ephemeral water features are known to exist
on the Site. There are no Federal or State mapped wetlands inventoried on the Site. No wetlands were
encountered on field walks in the developable areas of the Site. Groundwater at the Site includes a
shallow fractured bedrock horizon and a deeper, competent bedrock in which groundwater resides in a
fractured vertical network. Groundwater may also be found in certain locations within the thin
overburden and fill material located throughout the Site. Pockets of “perched” groundwater can be
encountered in the overburden areas. On-Site stormwater infrastructure is in place from previous
development, all of which predate current State, Local, and Federal stormwater regulations.
Potential Impacts
Surface Water and Hydrogeological Setting: It is anticipated that there will be four crossings of
the unnamed tributary proposed for the Project, all in CW2, that could result in impacts typical of
crossing intermittent streams without proper mitigation. Such impacts include erosion or bank
destabilization resulting in blockage or redirection of flow through the stream.
o Even though the potential of on-Site flooding is minimal because of topography and
existing grades, the increased amount of impervious surfaces will consequently increase
stormwater peak runoff rates that potentially will impact downstream stormwater
conveyance systems.
o The total volume estimated during the 100-year design storm event increases by 2.992
acre-feet. Even assuming no infiltration or evapotranspiration, the potential increase in
the water surface elevation for Cayuga Lake is immeasurable (0.00084 inches).
o Additional potential impacts include erosive velocities of peak runoff rates depending on
the discharge location.
Groundwater: The Phase II ESA indicates areas of perched groundwater due to the on-Site
bedrock. This will potentially impact structures with subgrade levels, specifically structured
parking.
o Construction may be potentially impacted by high groundwater or perched pockets of
groundwater that may be experienced at various locations.
o Groundwater may impact the design of the foundation including the selection of
materials as well as construction methods.
o Groundwater dewatering may also impact downstream drainage structures. Because of
the impacts to groundwater from historic uses, special handling of groundwater at certain
locations on the Site may be necessary.
Stormwater: The creation of impervious surfaces is the main cause of increased stormwater
runoff rates and impacts to stormwater quality.
16
o There are numerous existing catch basins and stormwater sewers to collect and
transport stormwater runoff along with grass swales. The full extent of the system and its
connection and outfalls are currently unknown.
o The Conceptual Site Layout Plan anticipates an increase of impervious surfaces of 11.2
acres (from 17.3 acres to 28.5 acres). The Project will maintain 35.75 acres, or 37% of
the Site, as pervious.
o The runoff flow and volume estimates for POS-A are anticipated to increase by
approximately 5% due to the utilization of the green areas adjacent to SR 96B.
o POS-B through POS-D consists of areas that are mostly redevelopment and are likely to
see negligible differences in the estimated runoff rates and storm volumes.
o POS-E, which includes all of zoning Sub Area CW1 and CW2, will be the area with the
most new development and therefore will have the greatest increase in stormwater
volume. The runoff rates for drainage Sub Areas E-3 and E-4 will peak higher but earlier
in the storm period. This will actually reduce the total peak stormwater runoff rates for
POS-E due to the much larger upstream area (Sub Areas E-1 and E-2).
Mitigation
The Town Code defines required setbacks for development along streams. A total setback of 50
feet for any new development along a stream will be maintained for this Project as required by
Town Code within the entire Site.
All stream crossings will be designed in accordance with NYSDEC standards.
The Generic SWPPP for the entire Site and SWPPPs for individual phases will provide specific
mitigation for surface water/hydrogeological resources.
Stormwater quantity and quality mitigation may include the following:
o The addition of more diversion swales.
o Use of the guidance for redevelopment projects in the NYS SWMDM Chapter 9.
o Runoff reduction practices in accordance with the NYS SWMDM Chapter 3.
o Utilization of traditional stormwater infrastructure such as curb, gutter and storm sewers
for collection/conveyance.
o Mitigation of stormwater velocity to insure protection from erosive flows including proper
groundcover protection (biological as well as structural).
o Green infrastructure mitigation which may include bioretention, planters, rain gardens,
green roofs, and other infiltration practices depending on the suitability of the in-situ soils
to mitigate both stormwater quantity and quality impacts.
o On-Site storage and reuse of stormwater flows as reduction practices such as
repurposing the on-Site underground water storage tanks near Driveway III or creation of
a new storage area in Sub Area CW2.
Alternative stormwater quality mitigation practices known as hydrodynamic systems such as
gravity and vortex separators will also be considered during site plan approval.
All existing stormwater utility structures will be mapped in accordance with the SWPPP.
All new stormwater facilities will be designed in accordance with the most current version of the
NYS Stormwater Management Design Manual.
Stormwater facilities will be reviewed for capacity during individual site plan reviews.
The NYSDEC will issue a ROD Amendment that identifies the required remedial work to support
mixed-use development and address previously unidentified potential impacts to groundwater
and stormwater from existing contamination in compliance with the Inactive Hazardous Waste
Site Program regulations and guidance documents. Typical remedial approaches associated
with any impacts to groundwater include:
o Excavation and off-Site disposal of source area materials to reduce or prevent
contaminants from impacting stormwater and groundwater.
o Capture/treatment of impacted surface or groundwater.
o Solidification/stabilization or capping of impacted soils to reduce or eliminate leaching.
o In-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater.
17
o Routine monitoring of groundwater.
o Implementation of any applicable groundwater management plan approved by NYSDEC
for groundwater encountered during construction.
The proposed Phase I mitigation is depicted on the Site Plan Drawings and includes:
o Reduction of impervious areas within the Phase I project limits.
o Rehabilitation of existing stormwater collection system in the existing road and parking
areas in the Phase I Project limits.
o Construction of stormwater collection systems in new parking areas.
o Conservation of natural areas directly adjacent to Phase I.
o Installation of rain gardens and/or bioretention areas in and adjacent to parking areas.
4. Vegetation and Fauna
The existing vegetation and fauna on the Site have been surveyed as part of the GEIS. 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%, are comprised of buildings, roads, and other impervious
surfaces. The New York State Natural Heritage Program (NYSNHP) was consulted to obtain a
summary of rarities found in the Site vicinity. A qualified biologist was unable to find any of these, or
any other species, listed as Rare, Threatened, Special Concern, or Endangered in NYS by NYSNHP or
NYSDEC within the Site.
Potential Impacts
There are potential impacts to plant and wildlife habitat, particularly with regard to the removal of
some plants and habitat areas for the construction of the proposed new development.
The Conceptual Site Layout Plan anticipates an increase of impervious surfaces of 11.2 acres
(from 17.3 acres to 28.5 acres).
o The vegetated area will decrease by approximately 11.2 acres, resulting in an impact to
existing permeable surfaces. A majority of this decrease is planned to occur in areas
containing invasive plants identified throughout the Site, resulting in fewer quantities of
invasive species on Site. The Project will maintain 35.75 acres, or 37% of the Site, as
pervious.
With the reduction of vegetated areas, wildlife habitat may also be impacted. The qualities of
forested areas vary, with some being highly disturbed.
As a result of development in CW2, CW3, and CW4, fauna found in these zones of lesser
habitat quality will be displaced, likely relocating to CW1 where forests containing higher habitat
quality will be preserved. Development may have an impact on the native deer population.
o DGEIS Table 5.4-1 describes the acreage of vegetative cover lost in each Sub Area as a
result of the Project:
Sub-Areas Existing Area
(Acres)
Developed Area
(Acres)
Change
(Acres)
Change
(%)
CW1
Appalachian Oak-Hickory 16.68 16.68 - 0.00%
Successional Forest 7.18 7.18 - 0.00%
Total 23.86 23.86
CW2
Appalachian Oak-Hickory 6.23 2.83 (3.40) -54.57%
Successional Forest 0.33 0.26 (0.07) -21.21%
Successional Old Field 14.61 2.51 (12.10) -82.82%
18
Lawn / Garden - 6.71 6.71
Impervious - 8.86 8.86
Total 21.17 21.17 -
CW3
Successional Forest 14.47 9.67 (4.80) -33.17%
Successional Old Field 0.40 0.12 (0.28) -70.00%
Formerly Cult. Successional Forests 2.71 0.89 (1.82) -67.16%
Lawn / Garden 3.65 10.99 7.34 201.10%
Impervious 18.50 18.06 (0.44) -2.38%
Total 39.73 39.73 -
CW4
Appalachian Oak-Hickory 0.13 0.13 -
Successional Forest 4.14 2.72 (1.42) -34.30%
Formerly Cult. Successional Forests 0.42 0.11 (0.31) -73.81%
Lawn / Garden - 1.37 1.37
Impervious 5.58 5.94 0.36 6.45%
Total 10.27 10.27 -
Entire Parcel
Appalachian Oak-Hickory 23.04 19.64 (3.40) -14.76%
Successional Forest 26.12 19.83 (6.29) -24.08%
Successional Old Field 15.01 2.63 (12.38) -82.48%
Formerly Cult. Successional Forests 3.13 1.00 (2.13) -68.05%
Lawn / Garden 3.65 19.07 15.42 422.47%
Impervious 24.08 32.86 8.78 36.46%
Total 95.03 95.03
The following describes what forest types will be impacted through full, partial, or selective
removal resulting from the Project by Sub Areas:
o CW1: Appalachian Oak-Hickory forest is a native, older growth forest containing high-
quality species and ecological habitat. All of this forest type located within CW1, which
constitutes 16.68 acres of the total 23.04 acres, or approximately 72.4% of this forest
type on the Site, will be preserved.
o CW2: This Sub Area consists of two types of vegetative cover:
Successional Old Field consisting of successional shrubs and young trees. The
make up of this vegetative cover largely consists of invasive species as is
typically found on disturbed sites. Portions of this vegetative cover will be fully
removed where new development will occur, and other areas will be selectively
removed and replanted as an open space amenity for CW2.
Appalachian Oak-Hickory as described in CW1 is in the north to northwestern
portions of this Sub Area, encompassing approximately 6.23 acres. A portion of
this vegetative cover is likely to be disturbed by proposed development in CW2.
o CW3: This Sub Area consists of three types of vegetative cover:
19
Successional Forests, which are characteristic of disturbed sites, consisting
largely of invasive and pioneer species. These areas are located in the eastern
area of CW3. This forest type is also located around the existing structures in
CW3.
Formerly Cultivated Successional Forest containing species that have been
cultivated in the past and have naturalized and become invasive. Some species
include Barberry and Norway Maples. These zones are largely located at the
junction between single-family homes and the Site. This vegetative cover is
found in the area around Building 21.
Maintained Lawns/Garden Areas are largely lawns with some cultivated plants.
This vegetative cover is found in the northeastern area of CW3.
Portions of the vegetative cover described above will be fully removed where
new development will occur, and other areas will be selectively removed and
replanted as an open space amenity for CW3.
o CW4: Successional Forests, as described in CW3 above. This vegetative cover is found
around the existing structures in CW4. As with CW3, portions of this vegetative cover will
be partially or selectively removed in area will the redevelopment of the existing
structures will occur.
Mitigation
Forested and cultivated areas on portions of the Site, which have historically been disturbed,
are of poor quality and contain numerous invasive species. Although new impervious areas will
be constructed, abandoned existing impervious areas – walks, parking lots, and stairs – that no
longer serve a purpose, will be removed and replaced with vegetated areas of higher quality.
Phase I is designed to minimize impacts to the existing trees, however there are some removals
necessary. A majority of trees which will undergo removal are either invasive or naturalized
species with little ecological value for native habitats.
o A detailed tree survey will be performed when development occurs in conjunction with
site plan review to minimize impacts to older trees.
Mitigation for an increase of the Site’s impervious area resulting from the Project includes the
designation of a portion of the Site as a new Sub Area known as CW1.
o The Project Sponsor is willing to offer mechanisms such as appropriate deed restrictions
or conservation easements to memorialize the dedication of the CW1 Sub Area. A
majority approximately 72% of the high quality Appalachian Oak-Hickory forest is located
in the CW1 Sub Area, and will be preserved as an amenity and recreational area.
o The designation of the CW1 Sub Area will minimize disturbance in an area with high
quality native vegetation, provide the means for the development of long term
conservation plans in specified areas of the Site, and landscape and tree preservation
standards.
o Any wildlife that may be disturbed due to the development of other Sub Areas will likely
relocate to CW1 where forests containing higher quality habitat will be preserved. Under
the rezoning of the Site, this area is to be maintained as natural forest that will be
preserved in perpetuity.
o Additional trails will be developed to allow the recreational and educational use of the
higher quality forested CW1 Sub Area.
5. Public Health and Environment
The GEIS evaluated potential impacts to public health and the environment that the Project and each of
the alternatives may have due to existing contamination. The existing very comprehensive
environmental investigation data generated by the property owner and the Project Sponsor provide
sufficient data to analyze potential significant impacts from identified areas of concern (AOCs) as a
20
result of the Project and the alternatives as well as an analysis of mitigation measures to protect human
health and the environment from impacts that may arise from redevelopment of the Site.
Potential Impacts
Multiple AOCs were found to have contaminants exceeding their relevant cleanup standards for
soil and groundwater, including but not limited to Trichloroethylene and other VOCs, arsenic,
barium, cyanide, polychlorinated bi-phenyls, and petroleum products. If not addressed over time
these contaminants can have impacts to public health and the environment.
o Specifically, impacts in soil can leach to groundwater or if within the surface soil can be a
potential contact issue for people on site or off site if erosion occurs.
o Impacts in subsurface soils can be a concern in the event the future ground intrusive
work encounters those impacts and they are not properly handled.
o Impacts in groundwater can migrate off-Site and can present in surface water down
gradient in locations where bedrock fractures outcrop at the surface creating seeps.
o Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) impacting soils or groundwater beneath a building
can impact indoor air through soil vapor intrusion.
The Lead Agency understands that in anticipation that the Project will move forward in a manner
consistent with the Conceptual Site Layout Plan, NYSDEC has approved an Interim Remedial
Measure (IRM) Work Plan using, in some instances, the Soil Cleanup Objective (SCO) that
applies to the proposed use of an area based on the Conceptual Site Layout Plan. In other
instances, the Protection of Groundwater SCO is proposed.
o As part of implementing the IRM, select locations along the sanitary sewer lines will be
investigated to assess pipe integrity and potential impacts in soil beneath or adjacent to
the sewer lines.
o Any areas where soil impacts exist above the applicable SCOs will need to be
remediated.
The Lead Agency further understands that the property owner performed a Boundary
Reassessment Study that assessed conditions on the 36.76 acre undeveloped portion of the
Site to the south of the creek that runs east/west across the Site and produced evidence that
prior operations and/or disposal did not take place in that area. As a result, NYSDEC realigned
the IHWDS boundary to exclude that southern portion of the Site from remedial requirements of
the IHWDS Registry. Because of the presence of soil vapors in the vicinity of the sewer lines
running through that portion of the Site, the property owner filed a declaration of covenants and
restrictions requiring that the potential for soil vapor intrusion be addressed to the satisfaction of
NYSDEC and NYSDOH whenever any habitable structures are built within an 80 feet wide area
around the sewer lines.
The current Record of Decision (ROD) calls for the Site to be remediated to allow only for
industrial use. Therefore, NYSDEC will need to amend the ROD to allow for the proposed mixed
uses at the Site contemplated under the Project. The requirements for remediating the Site will
be more stringent for mixed-use with a residential component than industrial or commercial uses
alone. As a result, the Project will improve the existing impacts from the Site’s historic uses and
the Preferred Alternative will be more beneficial from a public health and environment
perspective than the No Action Alternative and the Existing Zoning Alternative.
This more stringent cleanup will mitigate impacts to the environment, public health, and
surrounding residences by: (1) completing the remediation of more contaminants for a mixed-
use than under an industrial use; (2) addressing previously unknown contaminants thus
significantly reducing the potential for migration downgradient and impacting the surrounding
community and environment; and (3) establishing proper management of the Site over time.
Specifically, for soils, the following AOCs will have to be addressed:
o Former department 507 Degreaser Area (AOC1).
o Building 24 area (AOC26).
o Former salt baths area (AOC27).
o Building 30/oil shed area (AOC28).
21
o Former propane storage area (AOC29).
o Rice paddy area (AOC30).
o Upper Parking Lot 6 area (AOC31).
o Former spray pond area (AOC32).
o Area east of Buildings 13A and 14 (AOC34).
o East of Building 24 (AOC35A).
o Building 11A (AOC35C).
o Near Parking Lot 4 (AOC35D).
o South of Parking Lot 3 (AOC35G).
o Parking Lot 3 (AOC35H).
o Former railroad right-of-way (LBA-SB-240) (AOC35K).
o Former railroad right-of-way (DS-1) (AOC35L).
If the No Action or Existing Zoning alternatives were to be implemented only the industrial use
and, in some instances, the protection of groundwater SCOs would apply leaving the following
AOCs not remediated or remediated to a lesser extent for soils:
o AOC29
o AOC31
o AOC32
o AOC35A
o AOC35G
o AOC35H
o AOC35K
o AOC35L
Additional environmental issues that will need to be addressed to a greater degree than under
the No Action or Existing Zoning alternatives include:
o Vapor intrusion for VOCs for existing buildings that will be routinely occupied.
o Vapor intrusion for VOCs for any habitable structures to be built in the vicinity of the
NCR sewer or Ithaca College sewer lateral within Sub Area CW2 and an eastern portion
of CW3.
Construction for the Project will encounter impacted soil and fill materials. These activities have
the potential to impact the on-Site workers or the environment if not properly handled.
Specifically, the Project may incur the following impacts:
o General construction activity creating dust which could have contaminants such as
heavy metals or SVOCs.
o Excavations within areas of soil impacted with VOCs could create vapor emissions.
o Dewatering to support excavations could result in the discharge of contaminated
groundwater to surface soils, surface waters and/or the sewer system.
o Construction workers could come into contact with impacted media.
o Construction vehicles could transport impacted media off-Site to unregulated areas.
o Stockpiled soils exposed to precipitation could transport contaminants through runoff.
Typical remedial approaches discussed in the GEIS include:
o Excavation and off-Site disposal of impacted soils, which has been and is currently being
implemented by an IRM for 16 AOCs and previously employed for PCB impacted soils
around a former transformer pad.
o Placing a barrier or cap above soil/fill materials impacted with contaminant
concentrations above the applicable SCOs. Again, a technique currently being
implemented as part of a NYSDEC approved IRM.
o Solidification/stabilization of impacted soils.
o In-situ chemical treatment of impacted soil and/or groundwater.
o In-situ or ex-situ thermal treatment of soil and/or groundwater.
o Extraction and treatment of impacted groundwater and/or soil vapor.
o Routine groundwater monitoring.
22
o Sub slab depressurization (SSD) systems and/or pressurization monitoring of buildings
for mitigation of potential soil vapor intrusion.
Mitigation
An amendment to the existing ROD must be approved by NYSDEC. The amendment will
facilitate development of the Site in a manner that protects public health and the environment
under a mixed-use redevelopment scenario with a residential component.
The specific final remedy or remedies at the Site will depend on the contaminant type, location
and impacts to groundwater. The pros and cons of each remedial approach will be evaluated as
part of the study of remedial alternatives that will be presented in a feasibility study and
reviewed by NYSDEC in a separate regulatory process that results in the further amendment of
the ROD. Specifically:
o A feasibility study evaluating remedial approaches will be completed by the property
owner for review and approval by NYSDEC. Following NYSDEC approval, all necessary
remedial work will be completed to the requirements of the use for the specific area
being developed or which will be affected by development.
o All disturbances of soil (e.g., construction of new buildings, renovation of existing
buildings, and/or utility work) within Sub Areas CW3 and CW4 and that portion of CW1
north of the creek that runs generally west to east across the Site will require the
implementation of an SMP and associated Excavation Work Plan, Groundwater
Management Plan and a Community Air Monitoring Plan (CAMP)
All such work would require an Environmental Monitor to complete appropriate
oversight and management/characterization of disturbed materials. This includes
continuous air monitoring for VOCs and fugitive dust, monitoring excavations for
potential impacted media, sampling of all water and soil generated, stockpiling
soils on plastic and covering with plastic until the final disposition of materials are
determined and approved by NYSDEC.
These measures will address concerns related to VOC emissions, transport of
impacted media off-Site, fugitive dust and run-off.
All work will be done by appropriately trained personnel, under oversight by an
environmental monitory and with NYSDEC approval.
The Site must be: (1) remediated to restricted residential, commercial and/or industrial SCOs,
as appropriate based on the proposed uses at the Site, or to protection of groundwater
standards if a particular area of the Site experiences impacts to groundwater above relevant
standards; (2) subject to groundwater treatment and/or monitoring in those areas where
groundwater impacts exceed applicable standards; (3) subject to appropriate use restrictions
consistent with the proposed uses at the Site; (4) subject to appropriate prohibitions on the use
of groundwater at the Site without approval from NYSDEC; (5) subject to development and
implementation of an appropriate Site Management Plan (SMP); and (6) subject to on-going
monitoring that institutional and/or engineering controls are being properly implemented and/or
maintained.
An SMP will be developed by the property owner and approved by NYSDEC after completion of
the IRMs and issuance of the amended ROD which will set forth engineering and institutional
controls for that portion of the Site north of the creek that remains on the IHWDS Registry.
o The SMP and its components will be used to facilitate redevelopment and be amended
as needed subsequent to installation of additional remedial systems and completing all
remediation activities at the Site.
o Implementation of an SMP will assure that the IRMs and other remedial actions selected
through a feasibility study and amendment of the ROD will remain functional and
effective.
o Regular inspection of the caps, soil covers, and permanent erosion controls (e.g., gravel
and vegetation) will identify potential problems and allow maintenance actions to be
taken before more serious issues arise.
23
o An inspection procedure and frequency will be developed as part of the SMP to record
and track Site conditions. Repair and maintenance procedures will be described to
restore the deficiencies to the desired conditions. The plan will include routine
maintenance activities such as sealing of asphalt cracks.
o The SMP will identify locations where contamination remains and will include procedures
for assuring the institutional controls remain in place and effective.
o An excavation work plan will address proper management of soils and groundwater that
may be encountered during any future ground intrusive activities. These plans will
provide the process by which one properly manages both known and any unknown
contamination that may be encountered during ground intrusive activities and require
monitoring of such activities by an environmental professional.
o In addition to soil excavation and groundwater management, the SMP will contain a
CAMP, and operation, monitoring and/or reporting requirements specific to the remedial
alternatives selected by NYSDEC for the Site.
o Finally, the SMP will contain operation, maintenance and monitoring requirements for
treatment systems and/or monitoring programs for groundwater treatment systems or
soil vapor intrusion systems that may be employed at the Site as part of the final remedy
along with a schedule of regular reporting on the activities conducted under the SMP to
NYSDEC.
o Enforcement of the SMP requirements will be through the filing of an environmental
easement covering the Site.
Areas of impacted concrete (Buildings 4, 8, 13A, 14 and 34) will require remediation which will
most likely take the form of removal or capping.
In the event air monitoring indicates fugitive dust or VOCs, appropriate vapor and/or dust
suppression actions will be taken.
Occupation of existing buildings and construction of new ones in the CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas
will require the Project Sponsor to address the potential for soil vapor intrusion via mitigation
and/or monitoring. Specifically, for the Preferred Alternative this includes:
o Mitigation of Buildings 1, 2 (basement portion), 3, 4, 5, 6 and 6A (remaining portions), 8,
9,10, 18, 21, 24, 33 (remaining portions) and 34.
o Monitoring of Buildings 13A and 17.
o Building 2 (upper portion) would require additional analysis to determine whether
additional actions are required to reduce exposure as part of the feasibility study.
o Evaluation of areas designated for new construction in CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas for the
potential for soil vapor intrusion followed by NYSDEC and NYSDOH approval.
o Compliance with the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions that requires evaluation
of areas designated for new construction in the CW2 Sub Area for the potential for soil
vapor intrusion when habitable structures are planned to be constructed in the vicinity of
the former NCR and Ithaca College sewer lines.
Filing and compliance with an environmental easement that: (i) restricts the use of the portion of
the Site still on the IHWDS Registry to Restricted Residential, Commercial and Industrial uses
(as those terms are defined by the relevant NYSDEC regulations); (ii) restricts the use of
groundwater without NYSDEC approval; and (iii) requires the implementation of an SMP.
The property owner has commenced NYSDEC approved IRMs to address 16 different AOCs at
the Site based upon cleanup objectives consistent with the Conceptual Site Layout Plan. All
approve IRMs will be completed in compliance with NYSDEC-approved plans.
Mitigation also includes development of emergency action plans and compliance with
Community Right to Know requirements by tenants using hazardous substances.
o Pre-demolition/rehabilitation surveys will be performed during each phase of
development on those buildings where warranted based upon historical use, visual
evidence, and prior investigation results to further assess the need for special
management of demolition debris.
24
6. Historic and Archaeological Resources
The GEIS evaluated the potential impacts on Cultural Resources listed on or eligible for listing on the
State or National Register of Historic Places (“S/NRHP”) in and in the vicinity of the Project Area. This
included evaluating potential effects to architectural and archaeological resources. A Determination of
Eligibility (DOE) was prepared for the Site for review by the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation,
and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP) to determine whether the above-ground historic architectural
resources are eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The Site has been
determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. A Phase 1A archaeological survey was
conducted under the supervision of a Registered Professional Archaeologist and in accordance with the
NYSOPRHP’s Phase 1 Archaeological Report Format Requirements. Archaeological investigations did
not result in information that would significantly add to the understanding of the construction, function,
or use of the manufacturing facility and no additional archaeological investigations were recommended.
Potential Impacts
In order to bring air and light into the redeveloped complex, and provide sufficient space for
circulation, selective demolition is planned, potentially resulting in impacts to the existing
structures through partial or full removal. These buildings are: Buildings 3A (1920s), 4A
(1920s), portions of 6 (1950s) and 6A (1940s), 8A (1920s), 9 (1900s), 10A (1940s), 11A (1940s)
and 14(1940s).
Mitigation
Currently the Project Sponsor is not seeking historic tax credits as originally considered during the
DGEIS process. Subsequent consultation with NYSOPRHP determined that the redevelopment of the
buildings as mixed-use structures utilizing the Architecture 2030 goals precluded coverage under the
historic tax credit system. The change of use and redevelopment of the existing buildings in
accordance to current energy/buildings codes will take precedence over the following historic
mitigation:
The Project Sponsor is pursuing a variety of options to retain the historical character and
significance of the CWD by retaining key individual structures, including the pre-1965 portions of
the factory building (all sections except 13B, 34 and 35), the Office Building (21), and the
Office/Commercial Building (24), to mitigate any potential impacts to the existing structures
resulting from the selective or full demolition of buildings.
The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and Guidelines serve as a methodology to identify,
document, and evaluate which existing structures and areas within the Site are appropriate for
preservation and rehabilitation. These guidelines help determine how best to accommodate
building removal, how best to maintain/rehabilitate significant structures, and which how to
integrate complementary (adjacent and out-lying) new development. The Project Sponsor has
and will continue to employ these guidelines where feasible.
Pursuing certification by the USGBC for LEED ND, a framework for identifying, implementing,
and measuring green building and neighborhood design.
o Credits 6 and 7 require the retention of at least 20% of the surface of historic buildings
except when authorized by the Ithaca Landmarks Preservation Commission and/or
NYSOPRHP and to the extent allowed while maintaining compliance with applicable
energy codes and goals set forth under Utilities and Effects on the Use and
Conservation of Energy Resources.
Restoring and/or rehabilitating existing structures-to-remain in a way that preserves, reflects,
enhances and promotes the inherent historic and architectural significance of these selected
buildings.
Cleaning and repairing existing exterior walls as individual buildings are redeveloped and
occupied.
Repairing, enhancing and restoring existing fenestration at existing openings.
25
Replacing existing windows (deteriorated to the point of inoperability) to closely emulate the
design, pattern, color, and perhaps material construction of what currently exists on various
existing CWD structures.
Wherever possible, restoring and maintaining the interior character of key existing structures
with additional modifications developed to meet the needs and requirements of potential tenants
as well as applicable building codes.
Enacting architectural guidelines, as described in the PUD/PDZ Design Guidelines, that help
establish a common character for new Site development and which will in turn complement the
rhythm, variety, proportion, size, and scale of the existing and remaining historical structures.
Working with an appropriate professional to adequately photo document those structures that
will be demolished, so that a historical record of the architecture will remain.
Selectively preserving historically significant elements of buildings, both internal and external,
that contribute to the historical narrative of both the structure and the Morse Chain Factory itself.
7. Transportation and Circulation
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts related to the local transportation network. A broad study
area was scoped in consultation with City and NYS Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). The
study locations consist of 30 existing intersections. The study intersections were observed during both
peak intervals to assess current traffic operations. Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure are key
to providing a complete transportation system for residents and visitors of the City/Town. Within the City
alone, approximately 42% (15% Town) commute to work via walking (2012 American Community
Survey 5-year Estimates). The TCAT system provides transit service for over 100,000 Tompkins
County residents. Ridership has been increasing steadily over the past several years, with a 6.3
percent increase in trips between 2011 and 2013. Of the 33 routes that service the County, Route 65
provides rural commuter service along NYS Route 96B with stops at the nearby South Hill Business
Park and Longview and Route 11 provides downtown coverage and services Ithaca College and travels
along Coddington Road/Hudson Street. The Site is currently accessed via four drives along NYS Route
96B as well as a connection at Turner Place. Marginal access is also available via S. Cayuga Street.
A Traffic Impact Analysis was prepared to assess existing and future traffic operations on the street
network in the vicinity of the Site, to evaluate potential traffic impacts resulting from the Phase I
development and the full build out of the Site, and to identify appropriate mitigation measures to avoid
or minimize potential impacts to the transportation system (the Traffic Impact Analysis is included in
Appendix I of the DGEIS).
Potential Impacts
The Project significantly increases 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 Site is in close proximity to residential neighborhoods, which will
be impacted by increased traffic volume. The Site’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).
A review of both AM and PM peak hour capacity analysis results for the pre-developed condition
indicate that the overall levels of service (LOS) operate at “D” or better at the signalized
intersections, which is an acceptable capacity level. The signalized intersections are the major
roads leading to and around the Site.
o The overall vehicle traffic in this area will be higher subsequent to completing the
Project.
o Availability of queue spacing has been identified as a potential impact.
The eastbound and westbound approaches at the intersection of Clinton Street/Aurora
Street/Prospect Street operate at LOS “F” during both peak hours for the pre-developed
condition.
26
o Generally, all other approaches to the study area intersections operate at “D” or better,
with only four intersections operating with approaches of “E.”
The Phase I trip generation estimates are 228 vehicles per hour (vph) for the AM peak hour and
182 vph during the PM peak hour. The Full Development trip generation estimates are 945 vph
for the AM peak hour and 925 vph for the PM peak hour, as shown in FGEIS Table 5.7-5,
provided below:
PHASE LAND USES SIZE AM PEAK PM PEAK
ENTER EXIT ENTER EXIT
Phase I
Office 82.55 ksf 114 15 21 102
Residential 80 Units 8 25 26 15
Industrial 170.6 ksf 94 12 10 66
Sub-total 216 52 57 183
Trip Reductions -30 -10 -18 -40
Total New Trips 186 42 39 143
Phase II,
Full Build-out
Office 185.6 ksf 254 37 48 229
Residential 835 Units 84 240 259 159
Retail 52.2 ksf 47 13 88 105
Restaurant 7.2 ksf 0 0 36 18
Industrial 246.5 ksf 158 23 20 139
Sub-total 543 313 451 650
Trip Reductions -76 -63 -178 -180
Total New Trips 467 250 273 470
Full
Development Total New Trips Under Full Development 653 292 312 613
The cumulative effect of Project-generated traffic on the transportation network is dependent on
the origins and destinations of that traffic and the location of the access drives serving the Site.
o Based on the network’s traffic volumes, it is estimated that 62 percent of the total trip
generation will originate from west, north, and east of the Site.
o An estimated 8 percent will travel from NYS Route 96 and Elmira Road.
o The remaining 30 percent will originate from areas south of the Site.
The capacity analysis results shown in FGEIS Table 5.7-8 indicate most of the approaches and
overall LOSs at the study intersections will operate within acceptable parameters between
existing, background, and full development conditions.
o Additional traffic from the proposed Project may increase the potential for collisions.
o Proposed Driveway I/Aurora Street
Under Phase I full development conditions, the eastbound approach is projected
to operate at LOS “E” and “D” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
Between Phase I and Phase II, the LOS is projected to decrease to LOS “F”
during both peak hours.
Driving patterns may change to reflect the typical operating conditions along NYS
Route 96B at the Site’s driveways and may utilize other points of ingress/ egress.
o Proposed Driveway II/Aurora Street
This intersection is projected to operate as an enter-only driveway.
Little to no delay is projected at this proposed intersection.
o Aurora Street (NYS Route 96B)/Proposed Driveway III
27
Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions, the eastbound LOS
decreases from “C” and “B” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, to
“F” during both peak hours.
o Coddington Road/Danby Road/Driveway IV
Under Phase I full development conditions, the eastbound left/thru approach is
projected to operate at LOS “D” during both peak hours. Between Phase I and
Phase II full development conditions, the LOS decreases to “F” during both peak
hours. The anticipated delay and corresponding LOS for the eastbound
movement is characteristic of un-signalized side roads on heavily trafficked
arterials such as NYS Route 96B. Between both phases of full development, the
westbound approach from Coddington Road decreases in LOS from “C” to “E”
during the AM peak hour and from “C” to “D” during the PM peak hour.
o Proposed Driveway V/Danby Road (NYS Route 96B)
This intersection will be constructed during Phase II of full development
conditions. A LOS of “C” is projected for eastbound exiting traffic during the AM
and PM peak hours. All other approaches operate at LOS “A.”
o Clinton Street (NYS Route 96B)/Aurora Street/Prospect Street
The eastbound left and westbound approaches operate at LOS “F” between all
conditions during both peak hours. Between Phase I and Phase II full
development conditions during the AM peak hour, the eastbound right approach
decreases from LOS “C” to “E”.
o State Street/Aurora Street
The westbound left approach operates at LOS “C” during the AM peak hour and
“F” during the PM peak hour under Phase I development conditions. The AM
peak hour LOS for the approach decreases to “F” under Phase II full
development conditions. The northbound approach decreases from “B” and “C”
to “C” and “D” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively, between Phase I
and Phase II full development conditions.
o Clinton Street/Cayuga Street
Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions during the AM peak
hour, the overall LOS decreases from “D” to “E”. The southbound left approaches
decreases from “E” to “F” during both peak hours between Phase I and Phase II
full development conditions.
o Pine Tree Road/NYS Route 79
The southbound approach during the PM peak hour between Phase I
background conditions and Phase I full development conditions decreases from
LOS “E” to “F”. Between Phase I and Phase II full development conditions, delay
increases by 55.1 seconds.
o Access via Turner Place and Cayuga Street
The alternative capacity analysis performed shows that delays are projected to
increase for all approaches during both peak hours at the Aurora Street/Clinton
Street/Prospect Street intersection.
The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant provided the following table which depicts the results of
queuing analysis at the proposed Site access driveways during Phase I and Full Development
Conditions:
AM Peak Hour Queuing Results
Site
Access
Driveway
Phase I Queue
Length
(in feet)
Full Development
Queue Length
(in feet)
Full Development
with Mitigation
Queue Length
(in feet)
Conceptual
Available Storage
to First
28
Average 95th
Percentile Average 95th
Percentile Average 95th
Percentile
Intersection
(in feet)
Driveway
I 20 49 46 78 52 91 160
Driveway
II NA NA NA NA NA NA N/A
Driveway
III 7 26 36 60 19 39 211
o Based on the above queuing analysis there are sufficient storage lengths at Driveways
IV and V during both peak hours. Driveway III during the PM peak hour is borderline
based on 95th percentile queues. However, queues of this length are expected to be
infrequent and are intended to illustrate a worst-case scenario. On the other hand,
Driveway I during the PM peak hour shows queues that are longer than the conceptual
available storage.
The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant provided the following sight distance evaluation:
Drive North South
Drive I > 500 ft. 400 ft.
Drive II (proposed to be only an entrance) 400 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive III > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive IV > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
Drive V > 500 ft. > 500 ft.
AASHTO Intersection Sight Distance
Speed Distance
40 mph 445 ft.
45 mph 500 ft.
Based upon the above data, there is sufficient sight distance at all the proposed access points
except for Drive I, south and Drive II, north.
Mitigation
Mitigation will include all direct access points to the Project including existing and proposed
drives on NYS Route 96B as well as extensions of Turner Place and South Cayuga Street into
the Project.
o The mitigation will include access drive improvements. Such improvements may include
signalization, signal coordination, turn lanes, and geometric improvements.
o Off-Site mitigation will consist of signalization optimization and other traffic control
measures.
o Additional mitigation will take the form of vehicle sharing and improvements to
pedestrian/bicycle facilities.
Phase I Specific Mitigation
Relative to Phase I, NYSDOT has specified certain mitigation requirements relative to Route
96B. Specifically, NYSDOT will require the following Phase I mitigation:
o Changing the four-lane section of NY 96B south from the city/town line to past Bella
Vista Dr. by reconfiguring the two southbound lanes to one through lane and
incorporating left turn lanes for both directions at intersections, and hatching where
appropriate.
29
o Sidewalk will be required along the frontage of the Site on the western side of Route
96B, from the city/town line to the Coddington Rd. intersection.
o The proposed driveway, immediately south of city/town line, will be a one-way ingress
only; no traffic will be allowed to exit onto Route 96B at this location.
In addition, the Project Sponsor shall introduce and implement Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) strategies to reduce Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) trips to and from the
Site. The following potential TDM strategies will be considered for Phase I implementation:
o Market-priced parking
o Preferential parking for ridesharing services
o Bicycle parking facilities
o Subsidized transit passes
o Connections to transit stops (i.e. construct sidewalks to existing stop at Hillview Place)
o Dedicated shuttle service
o Transportation Alternatives Information
o Coordination with Smart Trips Ithaca
o Connected and improved pedestrian network within the Phase I limits (i.e.,
improvements to sidewalks within Sidewalk Improvement District No. 4)
o Pedestrian oriented design within the Phase I limits
o Bicycle network facilities within the Phase I limits and provide easement to nearby
Gateway Trail
o Follow Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in all
design
o Coordination with Ithaca College and South Hill Business Park
Post-Phase I Mitigation
A post-Phase I Traffic Study will be performed as part of the Phase II site plan application.
The Lead Agency understands that Washington State’s Commute Trip Reduction (CTR)
program and CTR Efficiency Act, a law passed by the State Legislature, requires local
governments in urban areas with traffic congestion to develop programs that reduce SOV trips
and Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) per capita. The Project Sponsor has committed to adapt and
scale this program to the projected employment centers proposed within the CWD.
Addition TDM or CTR initiatives will be implemented as follows:
o Transit Coordination – Continued coordination with TCAT on transit routes and
marketing the nearby routes of 65 and 11. TCAT bus line will boost ridership through
increased awareness coupled with improved service.
o Route Expansion – Working with TCAT to provide new/expanded bus service through
the Site provides an opportunity for greater mode choice resulting in trip and parking
reductions.
o Bus Stop Amenities – A clean, well-lit, informative bus stop with shelters and seating
greatly improves the image of the transit serving an area. Bus stop amenities make
taking the bus a comfortable experience, while proper maintenance tells people that
transit makes up an important part of the neighborhood.
o Employer Carpooling – Carpooling will be encouraged by providing incentives and other
services such as ride-matching.
o Emergency Ride Home – In case of a personal emergency during the day, transportation
is provided at no cost to one’s vehicle, residence, or other place such as childcare,
doctor’s office, etc.
o Preferential carpool/vanpool parking – Investigate the use of vRide for employers
located on the Site.
o Transportation Alternatives Information – Bus schedules, walking and bicycling maps,
neighborhood and on-Site wayfinding will be made readily available.
o Telecommuting and compressed work schedules – Employers will be encouraged to
offer flexible work options. Employee vehicle trips are reduced by the percentage of
30
employees that telecommute or have a “free” day gained through a compressed
schedule, on an average day.
o Location and Quantity of Bicycle Parking Spaces – The Project will include convenient
bicycle parking locations in clear sight of access points into buildings, safe and secure
longer term storage within parking areas, and a sufficient number of bicycle parking
spaces that encourages a greater number and demographic of residents, employees,
and visitors to utilize bicycling as a means of transportation.
o The Price of Parking – Parking spaces that are typically included in building and rental
costs will be reviewed, and “unbundled” parking, paid as a separate item, will be
considered.
o Financial Incentive Programs – Developing Commuter Financial Incentive Programs,
such as Parking Cash Out, offer employees the choice of receiving a subsidized parking
space an equivalent financial incentive.
o Bike Share – A micro bike share system that is developed for the Site or a more robust
system that is developed for the City and Town (i.e. Lime Bike) encourage more transit
ridership and provide additional public transportation options. A bike share system can
offer mobility, economic, health, safety, and quality of life benefits.
o Car Share – Coordination with Ithaca Carshare will be pursued during Phase I as
demand potentially grows through increased residential and commercial based
occupancy rates.
o Relationship with Ithaca College – The Site is located less than a half-mile from Ithaca
College. An integrated and coordinated approach to the development of the Site and
potential for interaction between the two entities should be explored.
o Electric Vehicle charging station – The County will be conducting a study to identify
needs and opportunities. This could be included in the Project as an amenity to
residents, and it supports the County’s goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
In order to mitigate post Phase I traffic impacts to the maximum extent practicable, following
completion of Phase I, the Project Sponsor will implement an on-going Monitoring and Mitigation
Implementation Plan (MMI Plan).
The MMI Plan will include an update of traffic conditions based on full occupancy of Phase I of
the development utilizing field collected data and before the next phase of development begins
to verify underlying assumptions and evaluate the effectiveness of TDM strategies.
All traffic study updates will be reviewed by NYSDOT and a City Traffic Engineer.
This post-Phase I occupancy traffic update will evaluate the following intersections: (i) Aurora
Street/Prospect Street/Clinton Street, (ii) Aurora Street/State Street, (iii) State Street/Seneca
Way, (iv) State Street/Green Street, (v) Clinton Street/Cayuga Street, (vi) Cayuga
Street/Seneca Street, and (vii) Cayuga Street/Spencer Street.
o This post-Phase I occupancy traffic update will also include an evaluation of whether a
traffic signal is warranted at all site access driveways.
The MMI Plan will also provide for additional traffic study updates at the following stages of
development:
o Immediately following tenant occupancy of Phase I of the Project;
o When proposed post Phase I development within the CWD results in more than 75
vehicle trips per hour (cumulative over Phase I); and
o Each time a proposed post-Phase I development within the CWD will result in more than
150 vehicle trips per hour
o In addition, per NYSDOT, a traffic study update will be required for each phase of the
project where modifications and/or additional mitigation is proposed in the NYSDOT
R.O.W
Traffic study updates will verify trip distribution models and confirm when traffic mitigation
measures identified in the GEIS should be implemented. Other than the update immediately
following tenant occupancy of Phase I of the Project, all updates will be submitted and reviewed,
31
per the thresholds established herein, in conjunction with proposed site plans for each phase of
development. The intersections to be analyzed in each traffic update include:
o Site Accesses 1 and 2
o Site Accesses 3, 4 and 5 (NYSDOT owned)
o Aurora Street/Prospect Street/Clinton Street
o Prospect Street/Turner Place
o Columbia Street/Aurora Street
o Aurora Street/State Street
o State Street/Seneca Way (NYSDOT owned)
o State Street/Green Street (NYSDOT owned)
o Clinton Street/Cayuga Street
o Cayuga Street/Seneca Street (NYSDOT owned)
o Cayuga Street/Spencer Street
o Pine Tree Road/SR 79 (NYSDOT owned)
o State Street/Stewart Avenue
o Turner Place corridor between site access and Prospect Street
o Cayuga Street corridor between site access and West Spencer Street
Additional mitigation measures at specific intersections (dependent upon and subject to future
traffic study updates) are described as follows:
o Prospect Street/S Aurora Street – Impacts to Aurora Street/ Clinton Street/Prospect
Street and potential mitigation does not include physical improvements to the
intersection, as ROW and existing buildings limit the ability to expand the intersection.
Additionally, a traffic signal is not an appropriate treatment. Therefore, higher capacity
people mover systems (i.e., new TCAT routes and improved headway, and potential
automated transit service between the Commons and the Site) are needed.
o S Aurora Street/Columbia Street – Traffic signal warrants are not met at this intersection
to alleviate delays for Columbia Street traffic. All traffic can be accommodated, as
needed, at the existing traffic signal at Aurora Street/Hillview Place. The reduction of
SOV trips and increased mode share of pedestrian, bicycle, and transit trips will reduce
total site generated traffic passing through this intersection.
o S Aurora Street/Site Access 3 – Delays at Driveway III are projected to decrease from
LOS “F” to LOS “E” with the installation of traffic signals at Driveway I and IV.
o Cayuga Street/Clinton Street – The Project Sponsor’s traffic consultant developed signal
timing adjustments for the PM peak hour and the associated capacity analysis results
which are presented at Appendix F of the FGEIS. These adjustments reduce the
projected LOS “E” for the northbound thru/right approach and LOS “F” for the
southbound left approach to LOS “D” for both approaches. The Project Sponsor has had
discussions with ITCTC about an automated fixed route system along Cayuga Street
that would shuttle people between the Commons and the Site. The Lead Agency
recommends that a feasibility study of such a system be performed by ITCTC with
participation from the Project Sponsor.
o The capacity analysis indicates most of the approaches and overall LOSs at the study
intersections will operate within acceptable parameters between existing, background,
and full development conditions. Project driveway specific results and mitigation are as
follows:
Driveway I: Under Phase I development conditions, the eastbound approach is
projected to operate at LOS “E” and “D” during the AM and PM peak hours,
respectively.
Between Phase I and Full Development, the LOS is projected to decrease
to LOS “F” during both peak hours.
This intersection should be monitored after redevelopment of the Phase I
buildings for delay and operation for drivers entering and exiting the Site
to determine what point in the future a traffic signal is installed.
32
Internal roadways interior to the Driveway I access will be designed to
mitigate potential spillback into internal intersections.
The Project Sponsor’s proposed mitigation for Driveway I includes
installing advanced intersection warning signage (Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) W2-2L) for northbound approaching
vehicles.
Driveway II: This intersection is projected to operate as an enter-only driveway.
Therefore, little to no delay is projected at this proposed intersection. No
mitigation is warranted or recommended.
Driveway III: Between Phase I and Full Development conditions, the eastbound
LOS decreases from “C” and “B” during the AM and PM peak hours, respectively,
to “F” during both peak hours.
Driveway IV: Under Phase I development conditions, the eastbound left/thru
approach is projected to operate at LOS “D” during both peak hours. Between
Phase I and Full Development conditions, the LOS decreases to “F” during both
peak hours.
Driveway V: This intersection will be constructed during Full Development after
Phase I. A LOS of “C” is projected for eastbound exiting traffic during the AM and
PM peak hours. All other approaches operate at LOS “A”.
During Full Development conditions, all of the proposed driveways along NYS
Route 96B potentially warrant a left-turn lane during the AM peak hour. The
warrants during the PM peak hour are met for the proposed Driveway II,
proposed Driveway III immediately south of Grandview Avenue, and the
proposed Driveway V. Left-turn lanes are recommended at the proposed
Driveways III, IV, and V under Full Development if conditions warrant the same.
Under Full Development conditions, the guidelines for a full width right-
turn lane are satisfied at the proposed Driveway I under AM conditions
only. The remaining driveways are not met.
Based on the expected delays under Full Development conditions and a
traffic signal warrant analysis, a three-colored traffic signal is
recommended for the intersection of Coddington Road/Danby
Road/Driveway IV. The traffic signal should be designed to provide a
permitted/protected northbound and southbound left-turn phase. Left-turn
lanes are recommended at Proposed Driveways III, IV, and V.
Aurora Street/State Street (MLK Jr. Street): In order to improve the existing and
future peak hour operating conditions at this critical intersection, an alternative
that provides two westbound approach lanes on State Street was investigated.
By restriping the westbound approach to include separate left and right-
turn lanes (the right-turn lane should be restriped to include 100 feet of
storage), the overall delay decreases during the AM peak hour by 17
seconds per vehicle.
Similarly, during the PM peak hour there is a decrease in delay by over
13 seconds per vehicle. In order to provide the two approach lanes on
State Street, peak hour ONLY parking restrictions are recommended for
the two metered parking spaces on the approach to the intersection.
During off-peak hours of operation, drivers can continue to use the
approach as a single-lane approach with the ability to continue using the
two metered parking spaces on the north side of State Street.
Summary
Mitigation measures have been developed upon completion of Phase I and Full Development
(Phase II):
33
PHASE LOCATION MITIGATION MEASURE
I
All signalized City intersections System-wide signal timing update to ensure optimized signal
operation.
Aurora Street/Clinton Street/
Prospect Street
The use of TDM strategies should be utilized to reduce vehicle trips
generated as a result of the Project.
Seneca Street/Cayuga Street System-wide update of signal timings as mentioned above.
Clinton Street/Cayuga Street TDM strategies.
Pine Tree Road/Slaterville
Road
The intersection should be monitored for delay as it relates to
potential future signalization.
Proposed Driveway I/Aurora
Street
Consider installation of a three-color traffic signal after
redevelopment of the existing buildings, prior to new
development in Sub Areas CW3 and CW4. A study of
intersection delay at this point will confirm the need for a
potential signal. This signal should be coordinated with the
traffic signal at Hillview Place.
II
Aurora Street/State Street
Restripe the westbound approach to provide separate left and
right-turn vehicle movements during peak hours only. Enforce peak
hour ONLY parking restrictions on north side of State St. approach.
NYS Route 96B/Coddington
Road/Proposed Driveway IV
Realign, restripe the intersection to include opposing
northbound/southbound left-turn lanes, and install a three-color
traffic signal. The Project Sponsor should work with NYSDOT and
the property owners affected by any intersection realignment.
Proposed Driveways III and V
at NYS Route 96B
Install northbound left-turn lanes at Proposed Driveways III and V.
Cayuga Street/Seneca Street System-wide update of signal timings.
Cayuga Street/Clinton Street System-wide update of signal timings.
Downtown Ithaca
Update a downtown circulation plan with the purpose of
developing a workable multimodal circulation system
supportive of all modes of travel in the Ithaca CBD. The plan
should be flexible to accommodate evolving modes of
transportation.
The Project will incorporate pedestrian, bicycle, and transit friendly accessibility and mobility
design characteristics where possible.
o Crossing treatments should be installed at all intersections and use high-visibility
treatments. Mid-block crossing locations may be installed, where feasible, and not be
located further than 400 feet from the nearest crossing location. In lieu of dedicated
bicycle lanes where street widths are too narrow for one to be installed (bicycle lanes are
required to be at least 5 feet in width adjacent curbs), shared lane markings – “sharrows”
– should be used to indicate bicycle friendly streets.
o Bicycle signage along the roadways can be used to increase driver’s awareness of
bicyclists as well as encourage bicycle ridership.
o An on-Site multi-use trail system should be considered to provide off-street circulation
routes for pedestrians and bicyclists. This trail system should be connected to the
Gateway Trail along the western ridge of the Site.
34
o The internal pedestrian network should connect to the existing sidewalk network along
NYS Route 96B and allow connections to Ithaca College and Downtown through or
along the edge of the Site. As of April 2015, a Pedestrian Corridor Study is underway to
determine the appropriate locations for a sidewalk/off-road multi-use path system and
crossing locations between the City/Town line and King Road. Internal sidewalks should
be installed in the anticipation a complete sidewalk network is developed along NYS
Route 96B to encourage non-motorized travel.
Parking and parking lot Design Guidelines have been developed as further mitigation. While it is
important to provide parking as a component of the Project, a number of measures have been
incorporated into the plan to minimize the need for parking by increasing trail, pedestrian and
bicycle connections to strongly encourage walking and bicycling.
The proposed Gateway Trail will be developed via easements between the Project Sponsor and
the City and Town to connect to the South Hill Recreation Way to the existing Black Diamond
Trail.
Pedestrian sidewalks will be constructed in safe and convenient locations, connecting users of
the Project to the existing pedestrian network in adjacent neighborhoods.
Bicycle facilities will be present throughout the Site via on-street pavement markings and
signage directing riders to destinations on and off-Site.
Mass transit access will be provided in locations that are agreed upon through coordination
between the Project Sponsor and TCAT as the Site is developed. The Conceptual Site Layout
Plan depicts two on-Site bus stops.
8. Utilities
The GEIS evaluated the potential impacts to the utility infrastructure with additional emphasis on public
water supply, sanitary sewer and stormwater systems. The Site is currently served by public utilities
that have sufficient capacity to provide for additional demand and without the need of expanding public
district or service areas. The Site is supplied with potable water by the City. The water is connected to
the public water system on Turner Place and at a dead-end line on South Aurora Street near Parking
Lot 4. The City Department of Public Works (DPW) indicates there is adequate capacity and pressure
in the water supply system. The on-Site private portion of the water system consists of approximately
3,960 lineal feet of 12-inch water main. Approximately 2,340 lineal feet is located outside of the
buildings and 1,620 lineal feet is located inside the buildings. The watermain is a mixture of an older
cast iron pipe and a newer ductile iron pipe. All upgrades and repairs to the water system were
completed using ductile iron pipe. There are 15 fire hydrants connected to the private watermain that
protect the existing structures. The system performs with a static pressure of 90 to 130 psi with the
ability to provide up to 1,700 gpm for fire flow.
Potential Impacts
The total estimated water usage for the redeveloped core of the District is approximately
110,000 GPD and 161,500 GPD for the new buildings. This is an average demand of 188 gpm.
Using a peaking factor of 8.0, there is a peak demand of 1,500 gpm.
o Overall, the main impact to the water system is the increased usage estimated for the
Project.
The existing sanitary sewer system connects to the City sanitary sewer system at two locations.
There is a 12-inch sewer located on Turner Place, adjacent to building 21, and a 10-inch sewer
located on South Cayuga Street. The total flow capacity for these two mains is 2,033 gpm and
1,450 gpm, respectively. The wastewater generation rates will mirror the estimates for the
public water usage. The estimated wastewater generation is 271,500 GPD. This is an average
demand of 188 gallons per minute. Utilizing an 8.0 peaking factor, it is estimated that the peak
flows are approximately 1,500 gpm.
o The main impact to the sanitary sewer system is the increased usage estimated for the
Project
35
The Site is currently served with stormwater drainage facilities consisting of catch basins,
stormwater sewers, and grassed swales.
o The Site does not have any stormwater control facilities, such as retention basins or
underground infiltration systems. The Site does not have good infiltration characteristics,
as it contains many rock outcroppings and generally the depth to bedrock is minimal.
o There is also very little existing green space to develop traditional drainage basins.
The existing 6” natural gas line serving the Site is rated at medium pressure which is currently
operating at approximately 20 psi. It is assumed that total energy consumption is 98,000 BTU/sf
for commercial space and 94,000 BTU/sf for residential space for the purposes of estimating
annual baseline usage. Natural gas usage is estimated at 32% of the total usage. Therefore the
natural gas usage annual base line is 45,900 MMBTUs.
The Site is served by the NYSEG South Hill electric substation located on South Cayuga Street.
The Coddington-South Hill 34.5 kV Line #526 traverses the Site from the South Hill substation
easterly to Coddington Road.
o The Site is also served by a private electric substation that is powered by Line #526.
This substation was sized to serve the entire Site at its peak operational needs. Based
on conversations with NYSEG Staff, depending on final electric usage as well as on-site
generation (i.e. photovoltaic), additional upgrades to the existing substation equipment
may be necessary.
The Project will require high-speed data to provide services expected in a new community such
as the CWD. The 915 dwelling unit and approximately 400,000+ gross square footage of space
dedicated to business uses will put a demand on these utilities.
Lighting from the Project, once fully developed, will be greater than under current conditions and
will increase light levels in the outdoor environment. Without proper planning and design, light
trespass (the spillage of light into a neighboring property) can occur. Light going up into the sky,
or sky glow, can reduce visibility of the stars.
Mitigation
Water/Sanitary Sewer
o The City may be able to restore the old cast iron pipe likely to have heavy tuberculation
that historically fed the three water storage tanks on Site to have better flowrates.
However, the City recommends adding a new public water connection point
further down South Aurora Street near the main entrance drive to loop the
system when the new buildings are constructed in the CW3 Sub Area.
If the tuberculation cannot be mitigated, then a replacement watermain will be
installed.
o Loop existing City water system through Sub Area CW3 from the current connection at
NYS Route 96B/Driveway III intersection to a new point of connection at the NYS Route
96B/ Driveway I intersection.
o Construct any new public water and sewer mains to have a minimum diameter of 8-
inches and be looped (if practicable). All work shall be in accordance with (Ten State)
Recommended Standards for Water Facilities and Water Works.
o Use NYS required water saving plumbing fixtures. The Project will follow LEED ND
guidelines for new buildings and buildings undergoing major renovations by reducing
indoor water usage 20% from a baseline, demonstrable through product cutsheets and
fixture schedules.
o Meter and audit individual buildings.
o Investigate the on-Site storage and reuse of stormwater by repurposing the on-Site
underground water storage tanks near Driveway III or creating a new storage area in
Sub Area CW2 to reduce on-Site water demand.
Stormwater Infrastructure
o At a minimum, the on-Site storm sewer collection system will be designed for the 10-
year design storm.
36
o A full SWPPP and coverage under NYSDEC General Construction SPDES permit will be
required. The stormwater mitigation features for the redeveloped portions of the site will
designed in accordance with NYSDEC’s guidelines for redeveloped projects. The new
construction areas will fall under NYSDEC regulations for traditional development.
o A majority of stormwater controls will be green infrastructure suitable for the urban
setting. The “Water Quality Volume” and ‘Runoff Reduction Volume” will be treated using
a combination of green roofs, stormwater planters, and hydrodynamic separators.
o Develop an Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Plan to insure the proper use of the
stormwater conveyance system.
Electric/Natural Gas Energy Use
o Alternative energy measures are being investigated for the Site including PV, wind, and
CHP or cogeneration systems.
o New buildings will meet LEED criteria and include efficient design and renewable energy
systems necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in compliance
with the Architecture 2030 Challenge. That would reduce energy usage by up to 53,000
MMBTUs per year and return the usage estimates to pre-developed estimates for typical
industrial use of the existing Site based on the 821,200 sf GSA.
A full photometric plan will be submitted with each site plan application and will incorporate
“Dark Sky” techniques to confine and minimize light to the extent practicable while maintaining
proper safety.
9. Air Quality
The GEIS focused specifically on the potential impacts to area wide/regional air quality and air quality
on the Site. The Project Sponsor evaluated whether the Project would result in violations of ambient air
quality standards or health-related guidance values related to vehicle emissions, building emissions
and historical impacts. The area wide/regional air quality analysis included an evaluation of National
Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for six common pollutants and an assessment of Greenhouse
Gas Emissions from on-Site emissions. The six common pollutants analyzed were carbon monoxide,
lead, nitrogen oxides, ozone, particulates and sulfur dioxide. On site air quality was analyzed by
studying numerous investigations of indoor and outdoor on site air quality for over a decade. The GEIS
also evaluated whether the Project would result in violations of ambient air quality standards or health
related guidance values for vehicle emissions, building emissions and historical impacts.
Potential Impacts
There will be some air quality impacts during construction due to vehicle emissions for a limited
timeframe.
In addition to the vehicle emissions, Greenhouse Gases (GHG) from Building emissions have
also been evaluated.
o GHG emissions resulting from the use of natural gas (45,901 mmBTU annually) to serve
the buildings for the Project are projected to total 2,686 Tons of Carbon Dioxide
equivalent (CO2e).
o The GHG components include Carbon Dioxide (CO2 - 2,685 MT/yr), Methane (CH4-
0.048 MT/yr) and Nitrous Oxide (N2O - 0.00025 MT/yr).
o Based on the criteria identified in the NYSDEC FEAF Workbook and the assessment of
the GHG emissions due to the Project, there are impacts to air quality from the Project
due to carbon dioxide emissions.
In addition to GHG from building emissions related to energy consumption, tenants with certain
types of commercial or industrial operations may emit pollutants into the air. The degree and
type of air pollutants emitted depends on the tenant’s specific operations.
Since the Project includes occupation of many existing buildings not routinely occupied, adverse
impacts have the potential to arise from the occupation of Buildings 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 6A (any
remaining portions), 8, 10, 13A, 13B, 15, 24, 33 (remaining portions), 34 and 35.
37
o The potential for SVI into existing buildings to be occupied and new buildings would
need to be addressed by mitigation, monitoring, or further analysis.
The analyses performed reveal no significant impacts to air quality with the exception of
potential exceedance of threshold criteria for carbon dioxide from building emissions and soil
vapor intrusion from historical impacts potentially effecting indoor air quality.
Mitigation
Vehicle Emissions: No mitigation measures are proposed beyond those set forth under traffic
mitigation measures.
Building Emissions: Will be mitigated via the following:
o Investigate alternative energy measures to reduce building emissions of carbon dioxide
o New buildings will meet LEED ND criteria and include efficient design and renewable
energy systems necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in
compliance with the Architecture 2030 Challenge. That would reduce total energy usage
by up to 53,000 MMBTUs per year (note, only a portion of this would be for on-Site
building emissions).
o Any commercial or industrial tenant operations with the potential to emit air pollutants
must identify and control those sources through the NYS Air Pollution Control Program
(6 NYCRR Part 201) and any other applicable laws and regulations.
Historic Impacts: The prior testing for soil vapor intrusion will be utilized by the Project Sponsor
in coordination with NYSDEC and NYSDOH to determine which structures warrant mitigation or
monitoring. Existing buildings likely to require mitigation, monitoring or additional analysis
include:
o Mitigation of Buildings 1, 2 (basement portion), 3, 4, 5, 6 and 6A (remaining portions),
8,10, 18, 21, 24, 33 (remaining portions) and 34
o Monitoring of Buildings 13A and 17
o Buildings 2 (upper portion), 10A, 13B, 15 and 35 may require some additional action to
identify sources and reduce exposure.
Prior to any new building construction in the CW3 or CW4 Sub Areas, the VOCs data for soil
and groundwater within the proposed building footprint will be analyzed for the potential for soil
vapor intrusion and mitigation will be included as part of the construction as warranted.
Mitigation measures set forth for Public Health and Environment and Traffic shall also serve to
mitigate impacts to air quality.
10. Visual and Aesthetic Resources
Visual and aesthetic resources are characterized by various elements that form a viewer’s perception
and aesthetic response to a place, object, or setting. The GEIS reviewed critical vantage and
viewpoints where the visual environment is considered an important aspect of the Site from within the
City and Town. Many of these views are listed in the Town Scenic Resource Inventory & Analysis and
the Tompkins County Scenic Resources Inventor. These views included Danby Road, Taughannock
Boulevard, Cliff Street, Hector Street, West Haven Park, Sheffield Road, Upper Botswick Road, East
Shore Park, and Tutelo Park. Specific points in the City include Meadow Street, Route 13 heading
south mid-way down the hill, Stewart Park, Allan H. Treman State Marine Park, Cass Park, South
Cayuga Street heading south, and Cornell University on East Hill.
A field analysis included a before/after comparison using photography to collect near and distant views.
Eighteen (18) existing views were documented in late February during leaf off conditions in order to
capture the maximum visual impact. Massing models have also been created to illustrate the potential
visual and aesthetic impacts of proposed development in the context of existing Site conditions. The
visual impact analysis includes the following:
Photographs of existing views of the Site during leaf off conditions, as identified in the
Scoping Document.
38
Photographic perspectives, visual renderings, and visual simulations of the Project from
each critical receptor point, providing a before/after comparison.
Maps of each viewshed illustrating the sight lines and views internal and external to the
Site.
View descriptions from critical vantage points of the proposed development using
photographs.
Architectural elevation drawings of the Phase I buildings were developed.
Potential Impacts
The existing Site buildings are, and some proposed new buildings will be, visible from a number
of locations throughout the City and Town in varying degrees.
The visual and aesthetic character of Route 96B, as illustrated in viewsheds 9 and 10, will incur
the greatest impacts, as the Project will create a new and vibrant street front.
More distant views and views of limited visibility of the Project, such as viewsheds 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 11, 12, 13 and 14 will have far less impacts, as the proposed new structures relate to and
blend with the existing structures from a distance.
Mitigation
Mitigation measures include strategies such as architectural approaches and themes consistent
with the surrounding neighborhood, visual screening and planting/landscaping and, carefully
locating components within the Project. The Conceptual Site Layout Plan serves as mitigation.
The Conceptual Site Layout Plan mitigates visual impact through the careful placement of
proposed structures in a manner that forms a relationship between the topography and the
structures across the landscape.
The Design Guidelines require development to be of similar character with the existing
structures. For example, the application of architecture strategies such as fenestration of the
proposed structures that continue the rhythm and character of the existing structures allows for
new structures to blend with the Site as it exists. The Design Guidelines include detailed limits
on the heights of proposed building (different limits for each Sub Area), building setbacks,
maximum façade length, and public frontages.
Sub Area CW1 is designated as a Natural Area, which includes the steep slopes on the western
side of the Site and will include the Gateway Trail. This Sub Area is highly visible from many
viewpoints and will be preserved. The existing vegetation in this area provides some screening
of the existing upslope buildings. Designating Sub Area CW1 as a Natural Area mitigates
potential impacts from proposed buildings.
The Project Sponsor will be following LEED ND guidelines including compact development,
tree-lined and shaded streetscapes, and minimized site disturbance.
11. Community Services
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts to community services including Government Facilities, Solid
Waste Management, Educational Facilities, Cultural Facilities, Religious Facilities, Health Care
Services, and Public Safety. The Site, located in both the City and Town, is relevant to both
municipalities’ offices. The City of Ithaca City Hall is located at 108 East Green Street and the Town of
Ithaca Town Hall is located at 215 North Tioga Street, each respectively 0.5 miles and 0.6 miles north
from the Site. The United States Postal Service Downtown Ithaca Office is located at 213 North Tioga
Street, approximately 0.6 miles north of the Site. Additionally, a number of approved postal provider
satellite sites are located within a 1.5-mile radius from the Site.
39
Potential Impacts
Government Facilities: The Project will result in a notable increase of the tax base, as described
under Cumulative Impacts, thereby increasing the revenue for the City, Town and County
Governments.
Solid Waste Management: The Project will result in an increase of solid waste. In addition to the
solid waste generated by residences on-Site, there will be an increase in commercial and/or
manufacturing waste, depending on tenants. Consultation with the TCRSWC revealed that it is
currently operating at 21% of its capacity for waste and 41% for recyclables.
Educational Facilities: The Site is located within the Ithaca City School District (ICSD) boundary.
The Project estimates there will be approximately 50 children living on-Site creating a new
demand on the ICSD. Based on correspondences with ICSD, schools in the ICSD have the
capacity to accommodate future residents of the CWD. Higher learning educational facilities in
close proximity to the Site include Cornell University (located approximately 1.0 mile northeast
of the Site) and Ithaca College (located approximately 0.5 miles to the southeast).
Cultural Facilities: The Site is positioned near a variety of existing cultural facilities. The
Tompkins County Public Library is located at 101 East Green Street, approximately 0.5 miles
from the Site. Cinemapolis, a 5-screen cinema house, is located at 120 East Green Street,
approximately 0.5 miles from the Site. The State Theatre of Ithaca, a historic 1,600 seat theatre
that hosts bands, dramatic performances, and films, is located at 107 West State Street, 0.6
miles from the Site. CSMA also offers public dances, musical events, and art shows.
o The Project will result in a greater demand on existing cultural facilities. It is expected
that some employees commuting to the CWD would use existing cultural facilities during
their non-work hours. The Project will also provide a significant amount of community
space resulting from the selective demolition of portions of existing buildings. This
increased internal open space will provide opportunities for markets, collective
gatherings, festivals, and other larger community events.
Religious Facilities: The City is the home to many religious institutions including over a dozen
within a 1 mile radius. The Project will result in a greater demand on the existing religious
facilities. Additionally, it is expected that some employees commuting to the CWD would use
existing religious facilities during their non-work hours. It is expected that this would result in a
negligible or otherwise positive impact through increased attendance, participation, and
donations.
Health Care Services: The City and Town have a number of facilities which provide health and
medical care. Cayuga Medical Center is the largest medical facility in the area, with a 204-bed
acute care hospital serving inpatient and outpatient needs and an Emergency Department that
is open 24-hours per day.
o The Project will result in a greater demand on the existing health care services due to
increased demand largely as a result of the increased residential population, but also to
a lesser extent, the workforce employed at the CWD. The Project’s residential population
is expected to be approximately 1,830, and the employee population to range between
approximately 800-1,000 people.
Public Safety Services: The Project Site is served by a City police station, fire station, County
sheriff’s office, NYS police and Bangs Ambulance service. The Project will construct
approximately 1,830 bedrooms, or approximately 915 units.
o This will impact the existing public safety services, requiring resources and staff time
from the police (City of Ithaca Police Department, the Tompkins County Sheriff’s Office
and at times the New York State Police), fire (the City of Ithaca Fire Department and as
needed adjacent and nearby community fire stations and departments) and emergency
medical services.
Mitigation
Analyses of the community services indicate that there will be adequate capacity for community
services despite increased demands resulting from the Project. Any increased demands from
40
the Project on such services will be mitigated by the additional tax base generated by the
increased property assessment for the Site. The assessed value of the Site will increase from
$3.5M to an estimated $236M.
Additional mitigation includes sales tax and other taxes on revenue generated by the operations
of the Project as well as individual business operations located on-site. These additional taxes
have not been considered in this analysis but would nevertheless further mitigate the cost of
providing community services to the Project.
Although the Site lies in both the City and Town, there would be no jurisdictional confusion as
police protection operates on a “close-car” concept, and fire protection and emergency medical
services operate without regard to the City and Town distinctions.
12. Open Space and Recreation
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts to open space and recreation as a result of the Project and its
alternatives within and adjacent to the Site, including parks, trails and other recreational resources. The
City, Town, and Tompkins County own many open spaces within a developed urban environment and
provide residents and visitors with a wide variety of recreational resources, including hiking, biking,
boating, fishing, and educational resources. There is a large quantity of trail networks within and
connecting to these parks and recreational resources. Buttermilk and Robert H. Treman State Parks
have their own internal hiking trails and are connected by the Finger Lakes Trail System. The Finger
Lakes Trail system is over 950 miles in length and runs from the Pennsylvania-New York border in
Allegany State Park to the Long Path in the Catskill Forest.
Potential Impacts
The existing impervious area on the Site is 35.75+/- acres. The Project will reduce the overall
potential open space on the Site by approximately 11% or 11.2 acres with an increase of
development and impervious surfaces in the future.
The Project will impact open space and recreation by allowing the construction of the proposed
Gateway Trail. The Gateway Trail will provide a missing link between South Hill Recreation
Way, Buttermilk Falls State Park, the Finger Lakes Trail, and the Black Diamond Trail, creating
broader connections between the City, Town, and Tompkins County.
The construction of the Gateway Trail will impact current residents and visitors to the City,
Town, and Tompkins County as a whole, as well as the future residents and employees at the
CWD.
The construction of the Gateway Trail will provide another pedestrian route to, from, and
through the Site. This will result in the Site becoming an important link and node in connecting
an extensive hiking and recreational trail network that allows for non-motorized activities such
as snowshoeing and cross-country skiing in the winter. This action promotes transportation
efficiency through multimodal transportation and impacts public health by facilitating physical
activity.
Mitigation
To ensure the long term benefits on open space, Sub Area CW1 Natural Conservation Area is
proposed to limit development and uses to only recreationally-base programming.
In addition to the Gateway Trail, with the development of the Project, the Site will become a
bridge between South Hill and Downtown Ithaca. A pedestrian network will traverse the Site,
connecting NYS Route 96B to S. Cayuga Street, allowing for greater accessibility to Downtown
amenities and services, and vice versa. A pedestrian network is also being established
internally within the Site with sidewalks along many streets and pedestrian-dominated
courtyards.
Open spaces, courtyards, and a pedestrian network of sidewalks and trails will provide passive
and active recreational opportunities throughout the CWD.
41
The City of Ithaca and its consultants published a draft Parks and Recreation Master Plan in
November 2017. The Plan, among other things, highlights the future connection of the Gateway
Trail/Buttermilk Falls Corridor as one of the key planned trail system enhancements. A
permanent easement will be established along the western portion of the Site to assist with such
trail enhancements.
13. Construction Activities
The GEIS analyzed the potential impacts from Project construction activities and measures to mitigate
them. The Site has been utilized as a construction staging area for multiple off-Site projects in the area
including the City sponsored Commons infrastructure redevelopment project.
Potential Impacts
The Project calls for the full development of the Site over a seven to ten year period in multiple
phases. Planning and coordination will be required for the construction of the various phases.
The NYSDEC ROD amendment and market conditions will influence phasing and timing of the
redevelopment plan.
Because the Project will have multiple phases over many years, there are both short and long
term potential impacts. Many of these impacts are typical of any construction project, and
include work related to: (1) site work; (2) foundations; (3) steel work; (4) concrete flatwork; (5)
exterior wall construction; (6) roofing; (7) interior finish work; and (8) exterior site improvements.
Construction work for the Project in the CW3 and CW4 Sub Areas may encounter impacted
media and building materials such as concrete floor slabs. As such, these activities have the
potential to impact on-Site workers, neighboring properties, or the environment if not properly
handled.
Additional construction impacts typical for a project of this nature include:
o Construction Staging: Due to the multiple phases, a construction staging area may
potentially impact the residents/occupants of the Site as well as the adjacent property
owners.
o Soil Erosion/Dust: Development of the Site will include clearing and grading of land
which creates the potential for soil erosion due to land disturbance and stormwater
runoff. Particulate matter and dust generation is also a potential impact due to demolition
and grading.
o Solid Waste: Construction and demolition on the Site will generate related solid waste.
Those materials not reused or recycled will require disposal.
o Noise/Emissions: Noise, air emissions and vibration will be generated from construction
activities, worker traffic, heavy equipment operation and delivery vehicles.
o Construction Traffic: Traffic volumes will increase from the movement of construction
workers and off-Site construction equipment.
o Asbestos: Projects that involve demolition typically encounter asbestos containing
materials (ACM).
o Worker Safety: Projects of this type have potential impacts to workers including health
and safety concerns typically associated with construction activities.
Mitigation
NYSDEC ROD Amendment: A SMP (which includes an Excavation Work Plan and
Groundwater Management Plan) and various other Remedial Work Plans specific to the area
being addressed will be developed and implemented for all areas of the Site that remain on the
IHWDS Registry, i.e., all areas generally located north of the creek that runs west to east across
the Site.
All work at the Site involving the disturbance of impacted soils or groundwater in the IHWDS
areas will also be implemented under CAMPs and Health and Safety Plans in order to ensure
that impacts to on-Site workers and the surrounding community are mitigated.
42
o This includes continuous monitoring during periods of impacted soil or groundwater
disturbance by an environmental professional.
Construction activity will be coordinated with NYSDEC-approved remediation to eliminate or
minimize disturbance of impacted media and building materials.
Construction Staging: The majority of the construction will be staged in former Parking Lot #6
(which is the parking area east and uphill of Building 34). This staging area is centrally located
and will allow ease of access to the Site and also provides a large paved area to reduce
temporary construction impacts. The area utilized for staging will be fenced and gated to control
access.
o Lot #6 will be used as a staging area and will minimize traffic interruptions by providing
two separate construction access points on NYS Route 96B that can easily be operated
and maintained with typical flagging in accordance with NYSDOT requirements or with
the addition of temporary traffic signalization. This central staging area will also maintain
the pedestrian, bicycle and vehicle access and parking for the CWD population
throughout the multiple development phases.
o Limits of disturbance during construction will be clearly delineated to reduce
encroachment into sensitive or prohibited areas and the areas of disturbance will be
limited to the extent practicable.
o The Site Plan drawings for Phase I include a detailed construction staging plan.
o Project identification and wayfinding signage to distinguish construction and public
access points will be used. Signage shall also be provided to indicate contacts for
complaints and/or questions regarding the Project. Signage shall be maintained
throughout the construction phase.
Soil Erosion/Dust: A generic SWPPP has been prepared for the full development of the Site. A
Full SWPPP is developed for the Phase I Site Plans in accordance with the NYS SWMDM and
the NYS Erosion and Sediment Control Manual. Mitigation will include coverage under a
SPDES General Construction Permit (GP-0-15-002), installation of proper erosion and sediment
(E&S) control measures in accordance with the approved SWPPP, and weekly inspections by a
Qualified Professional.
Dust creation is also mitigated by implementing the SWPPP. Specific mitigation will include
wetting of roadways and hydroseeding/mulching immediately upon grading to minimize dust and
promote vegetative cover. Potential fugitive dust emissions from material storage piles will be
controlled through the use of enclosures, seeding, covers or spraying with a dust suppressant
as necessary.
The generation of airborne demolition-related dust will be reduced through standard
construction practices including application of dust suppressants over the involved area to
minimize blowing and circulation of exposed soils/materials.
The need for blasting will be minimized as much as possible. If blasting is deemed necessary,
any permits and authorizations will be clearly identified and obtained as part of the Site Plan
approval process prior to commencing. Blasting specifications would be developed in
accordance with NYSDOT procedures for blasting. Any blasting will be minimized when
developing grading plans.
Solid Waste: Prior to demolition, the Project Sponsor will consult with Finger Lakes ReUse to
determine eligibility for their “deconstruction” program that identifies suitable buildings for
deconstruction, safely dismantles them by hand to harvest maximum materials, and then sells
the materials through their existing ReUse Center at discounted prices. All other metal
construction debris will be separated and recycled. Any remaining debris will be disposed of at a
permitted construction and demolition (C&D) landfill.
Construction disposal plan for non-recyclable construction waste handling and removal in
accordance with local regulations and following LEED guidelines will be developed. Phase-
specific disposal plans will be developed during the Site Plan Approval process.
All remaining demolition debris will be disposed of at C&D landfills or recycling facilities
permitted by NYSDEC (per 6 NYCRR 360 Solid Waste Management Facilities). NYSDEC
43
requires demolished materials containing lead paints to be disposed of at permitted C & D
facilities.
Noise/Emissions: Proper maintenance of all construction equipment and appropriate muffler
systems on all equipment will be required. Construction vehicles will be shut down whenever
practicable and the idling of such vehicles will not be permitted.
The Project will be governed by the respective City and Town guidelines for construction
schedules and local noise ordinances. Hours of operation for exterior construction will be limited
to the hours of 7:00 am to 6:00 pm Monday through Saturday, or as per the City/Town
Ordinances for noise. Interior construction will be limited to Monday through Saturday from 7:00
am to 11:00 pm.
Construction Traffic: A safe construction/delivery routing plan will be developed. This includes
the development of a Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan for all work zone areas.
Parking for construction-related personnel will be located on-Site.
Asbestos/Hazardous Materials: An asbestos survey in accordance with 12 NYCRR 56 Section 5
will be completed for all structures scheduled for renovation or demolition prior to such activity to
determine the presence, if any, of asbestos-containing building materials. This survey will be
performed by a licensed asbestos inspector certified in compliance with 12 NYCRR 56 Section
3.2.
Worker Safety: All work will be completed in accordance with OSHA requirements including
developing an accident prevention program that provides for frequent and regular inspection of
the jobsites, materials, and equipment by competent persons designated by the employers in
accordance with 29 CFR 1926.20(b).
14. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources
As part of the impact analysis SEQR requires that the GEIS identify the irreversible and irretrievable
commitment of resources, if any. The GEIS identified several irreversible and irretrievable commitments
of resources required for construction and operation of the Build Alternatives, which would include
construction materials, energy (construction and operation phases), labor, capital, and land. The
Project Sponsor will undertake practical efforts to minimize impacts through the implementation of a
project-specific Sustainability Program, using LEED ND as the framework for the development and
operation of the Project.
Public and private financial commitment is likely to provide residents and municipalities in the
immediate area, region, and State with increased property and sales tax revenue, growth in land values
surrounding the Site, other revenues directly or indirectly generated by the new development, and other
intangible quality of life benefits to the City and Town such as the provision of improved access to
downtown and the 95 acre parcel itself. Therefore, the financial investment in the Project represents
long-term beneficial effects, rather than irreversible or irretrievable commitments of resources.
15. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts
SEQR also requires an analysis of unavoidable adverse impacts. The GEIS found that the Build
Alternatives are generally consistent with local and regional plans and policies for redeveloping the Site
and would result in significant short- and long-term benefits. However, some unavoidable adverse
impacts would result from implementation of the Build Alternatives. The unavoidable adverse impacts
are similar for each Build Alternative but may vary in degree of impact.
Construction-phase impacts would include localized and temporary impacts to soil erosion, solid waste
generation, sound levels, air quality, and traffic. Short-term noise impacts associated with construction-
related vehicles would be regulated by local and State regulations and standards. Soil erosion would be
mitigated through the NYSDEC SPDES process and the development of project specific SWPPPs. Air
quality impacts would be limited to short-term increases in fugitive dust and mobile source emissions
44
from construction equipment. Construction traffic will be minimized with the development of on-site
staging areas.
Overall, the Build Alternatives would have significant, positive long-term impacts. However, as with any
sizable urban development, there may be minor long-term impacts. These impacts include increased
vehicular traffic, noise and air quality resulting from denser development patterns. Some existing
viewsheds will be altered due to the placement of new structures on the site. In addition, there would
be impacts to public utilities due to increased usage including natural gas, electric, fiber optics, public
water, and sanitary/storm sewers.
16. Growth Inducing Aspects
Under SEQR the GEIS must also analyze potential growth-inducing aspects of the Project. The GEIS
identified the following growth-inducing aspects: The Project would provide significant investment and
potential growth in the City and the Town through the revitalization of a vacant industrial site. Through
the revitalization and transformation of a large, underutilized Site with identified environmental
challenges, the CWD will function as a lively, mixed-use, sustainable community and regional
destination.
In particular, the Project would include the construction of a substantial mixed-use neighborhood
including residential, commercial, office, and industrial/maker-space opportunities. This, in turn, would
expand the City’s employment base as well as add much needed new housing. The Project addresses
two of the underlying causes of gentrification: low housing supply and a shortage of developable land in
the City for new housing. Rezoning the CWD to allow the development of new housing will reduce
pressure on existing neighborhoods to accommodate Ithaca’s job growth and demand for housing in
walkable neighborhoods.
17. Effects on the Use and Conservation of Energy Resources
The construction and operation of the Build Alternatives would have both short-term and long-term
impacts on the use and conservation of energy resources. In the short-term, construction of all Build
Alternatives would require the use of nonrenewable energy resources including: gasoline, diesel fuel,
and electricity. In addition to construction-related energy use by equipment, the indirect use of energy
would also occur as a result of construction workers commuting to and from the construction site.
The long-term impacts of each Build Alternative on energy resources would differ in magnitude for each
of the Build Alternatives with the Low-Density Alternative having the least impact and the High-
Long-term impacts on the use and conservation of energy will result from the consumption of energy
from day-to-day Project operations, such as heating, cooling, powering various commercial and
industrial operations and lighting buildings, and from Project generated traffic. Long-term impacts on
the use and conservation of energy will result from the consumption of energy from day-to-day Project
operations, such as heating, cooling, powering various commercial and industrial operations and
lighting buildings, and from Project generated traffic.
New buildings will meet LEED ND criteria and include efficient design and renewable energy systems
necessary to achieve at least a 70% reduction in fossil fuel use in compliance with the Architecture
2030 Challenge. That would reduce total energy usage by up to 53,000 MMBTUs per year and return
the usage estimates to pre-developed estimates for typical industrial use of the existing Site based on
the 821,200 sf gross square area (GSA) .
Finally, the Project’s adaptive reuse of existing buildings allows for the preservation of the energy
embodied in existing buildings. By preserving the existing buildings where feasible, the Project will
avoid the disposal of thousands of BTUs worth of building materials. Building reuse extends the life
45
cycle of buildings and conserves resources such as energy by requiring less manufacturing and
transportation of materials.
46
THRESHOLDS:
Pursuant to SEQR, Agencies may prepare a GEIS when there is a need to assess a wide variety of impacts at
a more conceptual level on a larger geographic area, often including cumulative impacts, rather than project-
specific or site-specific EISs. As Project plans move forward, Project changes may occur as the conceptual
development plan is developed into final design proposals for the well-defined elements, but more likely, for the
less defined components. Such changes may specifically include proposed changes to the contemplated
development program.
The Project was evaluated utilizing a GEIS to analyze Site-specific impacts associated with various aspects of
the Preferred Alternative as well as more long-term and/or cumulative impacts associated with future phases of
Project development. Final designs for less-defined Project components as well as any proposed changes to
the more well-defined elements (hereinafter referred to as “Future Project Plans.”) would require further
evaluation pursuant to SEQR. The City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board, as Lead Agency, would be
responsible for performing an environmental review on Future Project Plans and must consider Future Project
Plans proposed in relation to the GEIS and the Findings Statement. Upon development of Future Project
Plans, the Project Sponsor would work with the Lead Agency to determine if the environmental impacts
associated with such Future Project Plans have been adequately addressed in the GEIS and SEQR Findings
Statement, taking into account whether the proposal exceeds any of the thresholds outlined below. Such a
determination must be made before any Future Project Plans are approved. A Checklist for Future Project
Plans Consistency with GEIS has been developed and is attached hereto as Attachment C.
In the event that the Lead Agency determines that:
I. Future Project Plans would be carried out in conformance with the conditions and thresholds
established in below, then no further SEQR compliance would be required;
II. Future Project Plans would be carried out in conformance with the conditions and thresholds
established below, but are not addressed or are not adequately addressed in this Statement of
Findings, then an amended findings statement must be prepared;
III. Future Project Plans are not addressed or are not adequately addressed in the GEIS for the
Project, but the proposal does not exceed any of the thresholds established below, or the
proposal does exceed a threshold(s) established in below, but would not result in any significant
adverse environmental impacts, then a negative declaration must be prepared; or
IV. Future Project Plans are not addressed or are not adequately addressed in the GEIS for the
Project and/or the proposal would exceed one of the thresholds established below and may
have one or more significant adverse environmental impacts, then a supplement to the GEIS
must be prepared.
Future Project Plans that exceed any one of the following conditions or thresholds shall not be considered to
have been addressed by the GEIS/Findings Statement and must be evaluated by the Lead Agency to
determine whether additional environmental review (e.g., a Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact
Statement) would be necessary:
Environmental Setting
Threshold/Condition
Land Use
Material changes to when site plan approvals are triggered; allowable uses
in Sub Areas; size and location of Sub Areas (see Figure 2.1-3 and Table
2.7-1); required buffers; maximum Sub Area coverage; and maximum
density.
47
A material change to the Conceptual Site Layout Plan such as the general
location or grouping of structures and streets or Site access points.
Total square footage of uses (residential, commercial and industrial) as set
forth in Table 2.7-1.
Land – Topography
Development proposed on slopes greater than or equal to 20%.
Water Resources – Stormwater
Future proposed action likely to exceed total impervious site coverage rate
of 70%.
Vegetation
Non-recreational facilities proposed in CW1.
Material change to size (23.86 acres) and location of CW1.
Public Health and Environment
The NYSDEC Issued ROD Amendment to allow for the mixed-use of the
Site does not call for a remedial action different from those analyzed in the
GEIS.
Transportation
Future proposed action likely to exceed a mixed-use development of 1.7
MSF or square footage allocations for land uses set forth in Table 5.7-4.
Utilities
Water
Discharge to Turner Place Sewer
Discharge to South Cayuga Street Sewer
Total peak sewer discharge
Natural Gas / Electric
Light
Proposed action likely to cause the Project’s total demand to exceed:
271,500 GPD and peak @ 1500 gpm
2,033 gpm
1,450 gpm
1,500 gpm
143,400 MMBTUs
Not to exceed Design Guidelines, Table 13
Air Quality
Proposed action likely to cause Project’s total emission of carbon dioxide
equivalent to exceed 2,686 tons/year.
Visual and Aesthetic Resources
Proposed maximum building height exceeds Design Guidelines, Table 7.
Material change to size (23.86 acres) and location of CW1.
Open Space
Non-recreational facilities proposed in CW1.
Material change to size (23.86 acres) and location of CW1.
48
CERTIFICATION OF FINDINGS:
Having considered the DGEIS and the FGEIS, including the comments received on the DGEIS and the FGEIS,
and having considered the preceding written facts and conclusions relied upon to meet the requirements of 6
NYCRR 617.9, the Lead Agency finds and certifies that:
III. The requirements of Article 8 of the New York State Conservation Law and the implementing
regulations of NYSDEC, 6 NYCRR Part 617, and local regulations, have been met; and
IV. Consistent with social, economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable
alternatives available, the action is one that avoids or minimizes adverse environmental impacts
to the maximum extent practicable, and that adverse environmental impacts will be avoided or
minimized to the maximum extent practicable by incorporating as conditions to the decision
those mitigative measures that were identified as practicable.
The City’s designees are hereby directed to file and distribute this Findings Statement as required by 6
NYCRR Part 617 pertaining to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law (SEQR).
These Findings were adopted by majority vote of the City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board at a duly
called meeting held on March 27, 2019.
City of Ithaca Planning and Development Board
108 East Green Street
Ithaca, New York 14850
Signature of Responsible Officer:__________________________________ Date:___________________
Name/Title of Responsible Officer:_________________________________
10.2 Resolution to Select Artwork for City Mural Program
WHEREAS, in 2010, the City created a mural and street art program to beautify blank
walls within the city, while providing local artists from all sections of the community an
opportunity to showcase their work; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Public Works approved several locations for future murals and
street art, throughout the City, by resolution on May 19, 2010 and the City-owned
parking garages and municipal electrical boxes are pre-approved mural locations; and
WHEREAS, Rusty Keeler, Melody Often, and Annabelle Popa have submitted
proposals to paint murals on an electrical box on S. Titus Ave, in the Dryden Road
Parking Garage, and on the exterior of the Seneca Street Parking Garage, respectively;
and
WHEREAS, the Community Life Commission formed a mural subcommittee to assess
mural proposals, hold public comment and recommend proposals for consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Mural Subcommittee held a public comment period on the mural
designs and locations at its meeting on March 12, 2019 to gather input on the proposed
murals, and the responses to the proposals have been mixed; and
WHEREAS, the installation of the murals will be funded by the artists and will be
budget-neutral to the City; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on March 18, 2019, the Community Life Commission voted to
recommend that the Common Council approve the three mural projects at their
proposed locations; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council selects the proposals by Rusty
Keeler, Melody Often, and Annabelle Popa as recommended by the Community Life
Commission, for installation on an electrical box on S. Titus Avenue, in the Dryden
Road Parking Garage, and on the exterior of the Seneca Street Parking Garage; and,
be it further
RESOLVED, That the selected artists may proceed with the installation of their murals
upon the execution of an agreement with the City as reviewed by the City Attorney.
To: Planning & Economic Development Committee
From: Alex Phillips, Planner
Date: April 3, 2019
RE: 2019 Murals – Round 1 Recommendations
Three artists are seeking approval for murals recommended by the Community Life
Commission. Last fall, the Community Life Commission (CLC) agreed to change the City’s
mural review. The change in procedures established two deadlines for mural proposals
(February 15th and May 15th) that would allow final approval to happen during warmer
months for painting. A Mural Subcommittee was established to undertake a more detailed
review of proposals, collect public comments, and make a recommendation on proposals to
the CLC. After reviewing the subcommittee’s work, the CLC made its formal
recommendation to the Common Council. The set of proposals is now ready for
consideration by Common Council.
The first deadline under these new procedures was February 15, 2019, and five proposals
were submitted. Planning staff worked with CLC member Rusty Keeler to establish the 2019
Mural Subcommittee, which included Jim Garmhausen (mural artist), Samantha Hillson
(former Public Art Commission member), John Spence (Executive Director, Community Arts
Partnership), and Jay Stooks (mural artist).1 The group met for its initial review of the
proposals on February 26th and asked staff to circulate three of the proposals for public
comment. These proposals were: "Giraffe Box" by Rusty Keeler (electrical box at NE corner
of S. Albany St. & S. Titus Ave.); "Aikido" by Melody Often (Dryden Road Parking Garage); and
"The 'Other' World" by Annabelle Popa (Seneca Street Parking Garage). The subcommittee
also asked staff to work with the remaining two artists to identify alternative locations for
their proposals and encourage them to resubmit in May.
The Mural Subcommittee met again on March 12th to review public comment. The public
response to the proposals was mixed. Members made the following comments and
recommendations on individual proposals:
1 Rusty Keeler submitted a mural proposal in February and did not serve on the Mural Subcommittee for
Round 1. He will join the group for the second round of proposals in May.
CITY OF ITHACA
108 E. Green St. — Third Floor Ithaca, NY 14850-5690
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
JoAnn Cornish, Director
Planning & Development – 607-274-6550 Community Development/IURA – 607-274-6565
E-Mail: dgrunder@cityofithaca.org
“Giraffe Box” by Rusty Keeler (Electrical Box at S. Albany Street & S. Titus Avenue)
Public comment on this proposal was neutral. This particular electrical box is scheduled for
replacement within the next few years. The subcommittee recommends approval of this
proposal for the current City-owned box.
“Aikido” by Melody Often (Dryden Rd. Parking Garage)
The proposal is not intended to communicate or promote violence or fighting. It is intended
to highlight a relationship and the role of power. It features a powerful female African-
American figure, which is often absent from public art. The artist’s work is of high quality,
and the proposal features bold colors that will enliven the space. That said, the
subcommittee acknowledged that there is a lot of openness surrounding this piece and much
is left to personal interpretation. While it is good to have art that is thought-provoking and
encourages conversation, there should be a way to learn more about the design and the
artist’s intent. The subcommittee recommends this proposal for approval but also
recommends that access to the artist’s statement be provided.
“Other World” by Annabelle Popa (Seneca Street Parking Garage)
Most negative comments about this proposal were focused on the eel. The subcommittee
did not find the design to be frightening and disagreed with asking the artist to alter her
design, noting that asking an artist to change the central component of a design is to ask for
a new design altogether. The artist’s work is of high quality, colorful and bold and is worthy
of a prominent location. The subcommittee recommends this proposal for approval for the
exterior of the Seneca Street Parking Garage at the corner of N. Tioga Street and E. Seneca
Street.
At the March 18th Community Life Commission meeting, the commission reviewed public
comment, the subcommittee’s work and recommended the three proposals.
The proposals and the submitted public comments are attached for your review. If you have
any questions prior to the meeting, please contact me at aphillips@cityofithaca.org.
LOWE'S EMERSON POWER
TRANSMISSION CORP
TOPS
PLAZA
HOBBY
LOBBY
WEGMANS
ITHACA
PLAZABEDBATH
&BEYOND
SOUTH HILL
SCHOOL
CAYUGA ST
GARAGE
THRESHOLD
PLAZA
STAPLES
ALTERNATIVES
HIGH SCHOOL
ISLAND HEALTH
FITNESS
GATEWAY
CENTER
TITUS
TOWERS II
SENECA ST
GARAGE
GREEN ST
GARAGE
ER
LANT
SOUTH HILL
SCHOOL
CAYUGA ST
GARAGE
DRYDEN RD
GARAGE
FALL CREEK
SCHOOL
GATEWAY
CENTER
WATER TREATMENT
PLANT
SENECA ST
GARAGE
GREEN ST
GARAGE
ER
LANT
SOUTH HILL
SCHOOL
CAYUGA ST
GARAGE
DRYDEN RD
GARAGE
FALL CREEK
SCHOOL
GATEWAY
CENTER
WATER TREATMENT
PLANT
SENECA ST
GARAGE
GREEN ST
GARAGE
10.3 Resolution Approving Joint Sewer Agreement Amendment to Eliminate
Chairperson Term Limit
WHEREAS, the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Facility (“IAWWTF”) is owned and
operated by the City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, and Town of Dryden (“Municipal
Owners”), with oversight provided through this Special Joint Committee (“SJC”)
composed of representatives from the three Municipal Owners; and
WHEREAS, the Municipal Owners entered into a December 31, 2003 Joint Sewer
Agreement that governs IAWWTF administration and operations; and
WHEREAS, Section 13.3 of the Joint Sewer Agreement provides as follows:
“13.3 The SJC will elect its own chairperson annually and shall establish
scheduled monthly meeting dates to provide for timely referrals to the Parties’
respective boards or governing bodies. No chairperson shall serve for more than
two consecutive one-year terms but may be re-elected after a minimum of a one-
term period has elapsed since that person last served as chairperson.”
; and
WHEREAS, at its meeting on February 20, 2019, the SJC adopted a resolution
recommending elimination of the limit on a chairperson serving more than two
consecutive terms, because it often takes an SJC chairperson more than a year to
develop enough understanding of the IAWWTF and the chairperson role to function
efficiently and effectively with the other SJC members and staff; and
WHEREAS, Section 17.1 of the Joint Sewer Agreement provides that it may be
amended as follows:
“17.1 This Agreement may be modified or amended by an instrument in writing,
duly executed and acknowledged by the duly authorized representatives of each
Party, upon approval by majority vote of the voting strength of the respective
governing bodies of said Party.”
; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca/Town of Ithaca/Town of Dryden approves and
authorizes the Mayor/Ithaca Town Supervisor/Dryden Town Board to execute an
amendment to the Joint Sewer Agreement, subject to the approval of the City
Attorney/Attorney for the Town, that eliminates the chairperson term limit by deleting
the second sentence in Section 13.3, so that Section 13.3 reads as follows:
“13.3 The SJC will elect its own chairperson annually and shall establish
scheduled monthly meeting dates to provide for timely referrals to the Parties’
respective boards or governing bodies.”
Page 1 of 2
AMENDMENT TO JOINT SEWER AGREEMENT
AMONG CITY OF ITHACA, TOWN OF ITHACA AND TOWN OF DRYDEN
This Amendment to the Joint Sewer Agreement is made by and among the City of Ithaca, Town
of Ithaca, and Town of Dryden (the “Parties”) and is effective on February 20, 2019.
Whereas, the Parties’ Joint Sewer Agreement, dated December 31, 2003, provides in Section
13.3 as follows:
“13.3 The SJC [Special Joint Committee] will elect its own chairperson annually and
shall establish scheduled monthly meeting dates to provide for timely referrals to the
Parties’ respective boards or governing bodies. No chairperson shall serve for more than
two consecutive one-year terms but may be re-elected after a minimum of a one-term
period has elapsed since that person last served as chairperson.”
Whereas, the Parties wish to eliminate the chairperson’s term limit,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements contained herein, the parties agree as
follows:
1. Section 13.3 of the Joint Sewer Agreement is amended by deleting the second sentence in
Section 13.3, so that Section 13.3 reads as follows:
“13.3 The SJC will elect its own chairperson annually and shall establish scheduled
monthly meeting dates to provide for timely referrals to the Parties’ respective boards or
governing bodies.”
2. This amendment shall take effect on the date written above.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Agreement to be executed by their duly
authorized officers on the day(s) and year set forth below.
CITY OF ITHACA
By:
Date:
Svante L. Myrick
Mayor
Amendment to Joint Sewer Agreement
Among City of Ithaca, Town of Ithaca, and Town of Dryden
Page 2 of 2
TOWN OF ITHACA
By:
Date:
William Goodman
Supervisor
TOWN OF DRYDEN
By:
Date:
Jason Leifer
Supervisor
By:
Date:
Alice Green
Dryden Town Board Member
By:
Date:
Daniel Lamb
Dryden Town Board Member
By:
Date:
Linda Lavine
Dryden Town Board Member
By:
Date:
Kathryn Servoss
Dryden Town Board Member
10.4 An Ordinance to Amend the City of Ithaca Municipal Code Chapter 164
Entitled “Dogs and Other Animals”; to amend Article IV entitled “Backyard
Chickens”
ORDINANCE 2019-___
BE IT ORDAINED AND ENACTED by the Common Council of the City of Ithaca as
follows:
Section 1. Amendments to Chapter 164, Article IV.
Chapter 164, Article IV shall be amended to read as follows:
[164-27 Backyard Chickens
The prohibition against keeping chickens in this Chapter shall, during a two-year pilot
program that shall expire on May 1, 2018, not apply to up to twenty pilot applicants
approved for the keeping of up to four female chickens (hens) per 3,000 Square Foot
Lot while the animals are kept in such a manner that all requirements of this Article are
satisfied.]
164-28: Requirements for Keeping Chickens
A. [Chickens] Up to 6 female chickens may only be kept on those Lots with a
Property Class Code of 210, 215, 220, 240, 250, or substantially identical
successor designations.
B. Chickens may only be kept on those [L]lots possessing a Lot Square Footage of
[not less] more than [3]2,000 square feet.
C. No chicken facility or any structure that houses chickens or any fenced pen area,
either temporarily or permanently, shall be located within any of the following
prohibited areas:
1. Within the setback requirements of the zone in which it is located;
2. Within twenty [20] feet of any adjacent Lot’s residential principal structure
or accessory structure that contains a residential unit, [or within five feet of
any principal structure on the Lot housing the chickens]; and
3. Within five feet from any abutting residential property line, unless the
adjacent owner agrees in writing to a lesser setback.
D. Chickens may only be kept by a domiciliary of a dwelling unit located on the Lot
on which the chickens are kept.
E. Chickens must be kept in and confined in a properly designed and constructed
coop or chicken house, or a fenced and covered enclosure that is at least 4
square feet per chicken in size, which additionally includes a run. Each covered
coop and run combined shall be located in, and shall not cover more than 50%
of, the Rear Yard of the Lot.
F. It shall be unlawful for any person to allow chickens [hens] to run at large upon
the streets, alleys or other public places of the City, or upon the property of any
other person.
G. During daylight hours the adult chickens shall have access to the chicken coop
and, weather permitting, shall have access to an outdoor enclosure on the
subject property, adequately fenced to contain the chickens and to prevent
access to the chickens by dogs and other predators.
H. Chicken feed must be in rodent resistant and weather proof containers.
I. A chicken coop, and the premises where the chicken coop is located, shall be
maintained in a condition such that the facility or chickens do not produce noise
or odor that creates a nuisance for adjoining Lots and the responsible domiciliary
and the owner shall remove any odorous or unsanitary condition. The Lot owner
shall be responsible for the repair on any adjoining Lot of any damage caused by
the chickens, including but not limited to damage to dwellings, structures and
yards, and shall be responsible for repair of any unsafe condition.
J. The person keeping the chickens shall abide by all Solid Waste Storage and
Collection standards of the City's Exterior Property Maintenance Code, §331-7.
K. Roosters and Guinea Fowl are expressly prohibited, regardless of the age or
maturity of the bird.
L. [Pilot] R[r]egistration pursuant to Section 164-29 is required for the keeping of
chickens.
M. [Approved pilot] R[r]egistrants must provide evidence of having completed a
seminar regarding the care of chickens in an urban environment from the Cornell
Cooperative Extension Office, or similarly qualified organization acceptable to the
Clerk’s Office.
164-29: [Pilot] Registration Process and Parameters.
[A. No more than twenty pilot registrations for the keeping of chickens shall be
approved under this Article IV.]
A[B]. Registration shall take place at the City of Ithaca Clerk’s Office upon
submission of a $35 registration fee, and verification of a completed
chicken-keeping seminar.
B[C]. [The City Clerk and Police Department shall, at least three months prior to
the expiration of the pilot program, report to a Committee of the Common
Council on the status of the pilot program.] The City Clerk and Police
and/or Cooperative Extension shall report to a committee of
Common Council annually about the numbers of households
registered to keep chickens and any complaints arising as a result.
C As a courtesy, property owners shall notify the City Clerk at such
time when they are no longer keeping chickens.
[D. Should the pilot program not be extended after the two-year period,
Cornell Cooperative Extension Office may help rehome the hens in the
program.]
D[E]. The City Clerk may revoke registration for a specific site via written notice
to the property owner when the City Clerk or designee finds, at his or her
sole discretion, that any requirements of this Article are not met, a
rebuttable presumption of which shall be created by (a) a record of three
or more complaints to the Ithaca Police Department about a specific site’s
chickens, (b) on the recommendation of Cornell Cooperative Extension, or
(c) on the recommendation of the Ithaca Police Department. Upon
revocation, the City Clerk shall notify the owner in writing of the same, in
compliance with sub-section 164-30, and if the revocation stands, the
owner must remove the chickens [hens] from the property in coordination
with such assistance as may be available from the Cornell Cooperative
Extension Office, who may assist with rehoming them.
Section 5. Severability. Severability is intended throughout and within the provisions of
this Ordinance. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this
Ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
then that decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance.
Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon
publication as provided for in the City Charter.
Review of the City of Ithaca Pilot Chicken Ordinance and recommendations for a Permanent Ordinance
to keep chickens in the City of Ithaca.
Fall 2017 – Pilot project review conducted by Monika Roth, CCE Tompkins, and two Cornell Graduate
students taking an agriculture and food policy course in the Law school.
Stephen Flynn is a 3rd year Law Student.
Jonathan Burk is a senior economics student.
Review process
-Students investigated ordinances for chicken keeping in other cities to determine how similar or
different those are from Ithaca’s and to determine if some provisions might be removed or added to a
permanent City ordinance.
In general, the city pilot program provisions are very similar to those in other communities of our size.
-Students and Ms. Roth, visited 5 of the residents with Chickens to evaluate compliance and satisfaction
with the City Ordinance.
All chicken owners were generally in compliance – two had coops located on the property line but in
both cases there was no residence on the adjacent properties and in one case, the owner had
permission. There was a mix of coop styles and run space available at all sites. The coops were either
homemade or prefabricated and the runs used a variety of fencing including both wire and mesh. All
appeared to be secure enough to contain chickens and at least provide a deterrent from predators.
Feed and water were appropriately provided. Manure was commonly being turned into a compost bin
covered with straw bedding. No odors were detected during the Fall day on which we conducted our
visit.
Residents were satisfied with the city ordinance. Most indicated they had prior chicken raising
experience so for these people, a class did not provide much additional information. One person who
has a 6-person household, indicated that 4 hens were not quite enough to meet their egg needs and
that 6 hens would be ideal. Most people raised the chickens for eggs, and valued having access to fresh
eggs from their own chickens and the folks with children also valued the opportunity to teach them
about animal care. A number of people had dogs and chickens with no issue arising. Only one resident
suspected a hawk might have taken a chicken. Some indicated there were some mice and rats about
but did not feel the numbers had increased over what they had seen before having chickens. All were
interested and supportive of a permanent ordinance.
Recommendations
-Remove the 3000 SF Lot requirement – given the setbacks and the requirement to locate chickens in
the rear yard and that to coop and run not cover more than 50% of the lots it seems that there is
appropriate space on smaller lots while at the same time maintaining distance from neighboring
residences. Another option might be to have a lower SF minimum.
-Consider allowing up to 6 hens – as long as the 4 SF per bird requirement is met, many yards could
accommodate 6 hens and provide more fully for the family food needs.
-Consider allowing coops to be located against a garage or even home where appropriate. This gives
the homeowner more flexibility in locating a pen on their properties.
-CCE class on chicken keeping – may not be needed if someone has experience, but then there is no
standard set of “instructions” that all residents have received. The class does not seem to have been a
huge impediment to getting registered as CCETC is now offering the instruction by appointment in cases
where we do not have a class scheduled and someone is eager to keep chickens.
-Consider some sort of re-registration or check in process – should residents re-register after so many
years? Or should the clerk annually check on how many people in the city are keeping chickens? And
document complaints. This may take time and may not be a top priority for the clerk or police dept.
Perhaps contract with CCETC to conduct an annual survey/site visit and to be the first responder for
complaints. Or the City Life Commission might take this on?
13. INDIVIDUAL MEMBER – FILED RESOLUTIONS:
13.1 Alderperson Brock - Resolution in Support for the New York State
Assembly and Senate Bills to Establish a Process for the Adoption of an
Environmental Bill of Rights
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca Common Council supports the right of each resident to
clean air and water; and
WHEREAS, in the United States there are many states/commonwealths with
Constitutions that contain some form of “environmental rights” or expression of
environmental values; and
WHEREAS, it is the constitutional duty of all levels of government within New York
State to protect the health, safety and welfare of their residents giving residents a right
to live and work in a clean environment; and
WHEREAS, communities in New York State like Hoosick Falls, Long Island and
Newburgh, along with many other communities throughout the United States like Flint,
Michigan and Toledo, Ohio have suffered contaminated water systems caused by lack
of intervention and/or protection by either government and/or private interests; and
WHEREAS, in watersheds throughout the Finger Lakes, municipalities and individuals
draw drinking water that has in recent years been affected by Harmful Algae Blooms
making treatment more expensive for municipal water supplies, and sometimes
impossible for individual households that draw water directly from the lake; and
WHEREAS, there is at present a uniform bill before both the New York State Assembly
(A. 2064 [Englebright, Gottfried, et al.])1 and the New York State Senate (S. 2072
[Carlucci et al.])2 to add the following language to the New York State Constitution that
will formally establish in the New York State Constitution a right to clean water, clean
air, and a healthful environment:
Resolved, that article 1 of the constitution be amended by adding a new section
19 to read as follows: § 19. Environmental rights. Each person shall have a
right to clean air and water, and a healthful environment.
; and
WHEREAS, formally establishing such a civil environmental right will help drive better
government decision-making at all levels, helping prevent conditions in which land,
water and air become contaminated; and
WHEREAS, establishing such a right will also affect individuals and private enterprise
and promote better decision-making based on the New York Constitution’s
acknowledgement that all residents have environmental rights; and
1 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/A2064
2 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/S2072
WHEREAS, passing these bills will address a gap in the state’s legal foundations and
provide an expression of values that other states have already seen fit to establish;
now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council supports a New York State
Environmental Bill of Rights Amendment, Assembly Bill 2064 and Senate Bill 2072,
amending Article 1, the Bill of Rights, of the New York State Constitution by inserting a
new Section 19, reading: “Each person shall have a right to clean air and water, and a
healthful environment.” which recognizes the inalienable and self-executing right of all
New Yorkers to clean water, clean air, and a healthful environment; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That this right be as fundamental as a person’s right to freedom of speech
and assembly; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is directed to send a copy of this resolution to U.S.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, Governor Andrew Cuomo,
New York State Senator Thomas O’Mara, New York State Assemblywoman Barbara
Lifton, Senate Assembly Chair Brian Kavanagh, and Assembly Housing Chair Steven
Cymbrowitz.
Ohio
Protecting private property rights in ground water, lakes and other watercourses.
. §19b.
(A) The protection of the rights of Ohio's property owners, the protection of Ohio's natural
resources, and the maintenance of the stability of Ohio's economy require the recognition and
protection of property interests in ground water, lakes, and watercourses.
(B) The preservation of private property interests recognized under divisions
(C) and (D) of this section shall be held inviolate, but subservient to the public welfare as provided in
Section 19 of Article I of the Constitution.
(C) A property owner has a property interest in the reasonable use of the ground water underlying
the property owner's land.
(D) An owner of riparian land has a property interest in the reasonable use of the water in a lake or
watercourse located on or flowing through the owner's riparian land.
(E) Ground water underlying privately owned land and nonnavigable waters located on or flowing
through privately The Constitution of the State of Ohio 5 owned land shall not be held in trust by any
governmental body. The state, and a political subdivision to the extent authorized by state law, may
provide for the regulation of such waters. An owner of land voluntarily may convey to a
governmental body the owner's property interest held in the ground water underlying the land or
nonnavigable waters located on or flowing through the land.
(F) Nothing in this section affects the application of the public trust doctrine as it applies to Lake Erie
or the navigable waters of the state.
(G) Nothing in Section 1e of Article II, Section 36 of Article II, Article VIII, Section 1 of Article X, Section
3 of Article XVIII, or Section 7 of Article XVIII of the Constitution shall impair or limit the rights
established in this section.
Massachusetts
Article XLIX.
[The conservation, development and utilization of the agricultural, mineral, forest, water and other
natural resources of the commonwealth are public uses, and the general court shall have power to
provide for the taking, upon payment of just compensation therefor, of lands and easements or
interests therein, including water and mineral rights, for the purpose of securing and promoting the
proper conservation, development, utilization and control thereof and to enact legislation necessary
or expedient therefor.] [Superseded by Amendments, Art. XCVII.]
Article XCVII.
Article XLIX of the Amendments to the Constitution is hereby annulled and the following is adopted in
place thereof: ‐ The people shall have the right to clean air and water, freedom from excessive and
unnecessary noise, and the natural, scenic, historic, and esthetic qualities of their environment; and
the protection of the people in their right to the conservation, development and utilization of the
agricultural, mineral, forest, water, air and other natural resources is hereby declared to be a public
purpose.
The general court shall have the power to enact legislation necessary or expedient to protect such
rights.
In the furtherance of the foregoing powers, the general court shall have the power to provide for the
taking, upon payment of just compensation therefor, or for the acquisition by purchase or otherwise,
of lands and easements or such other interests therein as may be deemed necessary to accomplish
these purposes.
Pennsylvania
§ 27. Natural resources and the public estate.
The people have a right to clean air, pure water, and to the preservation of the natural, scenic,
historic and esthetic values of the environment. Pennsylvania's public natural resources are the
common property of all the people, including generations yet to come. As trustee of these resources,
the Commonwealth shall conserve and maintain them for the benefit of all the people.
(May 18, 1971, P.L.769, J.R.3)
1971 Amendment. Joint Resolution No.3 added section 27.
Montana
. Section 3 . INALIENABLE RIGHTS. All persons are born free and have certain inalienable rights. They
include the right to a clean and healthful environment and the rights of pursuing life’s basic
necessities, enjoying and defending their lives and liberties, acquiring, possessing and protecting
property, and seeking their safety, health and happiness in all lawful ways. In enjoying these rights,
all persons recognize corresponding responsibilities.
Michigan
§ 52 Natural resources; conservation, pollution, impairment, destruction. Sec. 52. The conservation
and development of the natural resources of the state are hereby declared to be of paramount public
concern in the interest of the health, safety and general welfare of the people. The legislature shall
provide for the protection of the air, water and other natural resources of the state from pollution,
impairment and destruction. History: Const. 1963, Art. IV, § 52, Eff. Jan. 1, 1964.
Oregon
(1) Protect and restore water quality, watersheds and habitats for native fish and wildlife that
provide a healthy environment for current and future generations of Oregonians;
Virginia
Section 1. Natural resources and historical sites of the Commonwealth.
To the end that the people have clean air, pure water, and the use and enjoyment for recreation of
adequate public lands, waters, and other natural resources, it shall be the policy of the
Commonwealth to conserve, develop, and utilize its natural resources, its public lands, and its
historical sites and buildings. Further, it shall be the Commonwealth's policy to protect its
atmosphere, lands, and waters from pollution, impairment, or destruction, for the benefit,
enjoyment, and general welfare of the people of the Commonwealth.
Illinois
ARTICLE XI
SECTION 1. PUBLIC POLICY ‐ LEGISLATIVE RESPONSIBILITY
The public policy of the State and the duty of each person is to provide and maintain a healthful
environment for the benefit of this and future generations. The General Assembly shall provide by
law for the implementation and enforcement of this public policy. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
SECTION 2. RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS
Each person has the right to a healthful environment. Each person may enforce this right against
any party, governmental or private, through appropriate legal proceedings subject to reasonable
limitation and regulation as the General Assembly may provide by law. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)
Rhode Island
Section 17. Fishery rights — Shore privileges —Preservation of natural resources.
The people shall continue to enjoy and freely exercise all the rights of fishery, and the privileges of
the shore, to which they have been heretofore entitled under the charter and usages of this state,
including but not limited to fishing from the shore, the gathering of seaweed, leaving the shore to
swim in the sea and passage along the shore; and they shall be secure in their rights to the use and
enjoyment of the natural resources of the state with due regard for the preservation of their values;
and it shall be the duty of the general assembly to provide for the conservation of the air, land,
water, plant, animal, mineral and other natural resources of the state, and to adopt all means
necessary and proper by law to protect the natural environment of the people of the state by
providing adequate resource planning for the control and regulation of the use of the natural
resources of the state and for the preservation, regeneration and restoration of the natural
environment of the state.
Hawaii
ENVIRONMENTAL RIGHTS
Section 9. Each person has the right to a clean and healthful environment, as defined by laws
relating to environmental quality, including control of pollution and conservation, protection and
enhancement of natural resources. Any person may enforce this right against any party, public or
private, through appropriate legal proceedings, subject to reasonable limitations and regulation
as provided by law. [Add Const Con 1978 and election Nov 7, 1978]
13.2 Alderperson Brock - Resolution Supporting Universal Rent Stabilization
and Control
WHEREAS, the City of Ithaca has documented and identified unmet need for affordable
housing opportunities to serve low and moderate income residents; and
WHEREAS, as a result, in 2018, Common Council amended the Community Investment
Incentive Tax Abatement Program (“CIITAP”) to expand its applicable boundaries and
to require new residential developments participating in the program of ten (10) units or
more to have a minimum of twenty percent (20%) of their housing units be affordable to
households earning up to seventy-five percent (75%) of the Area Median Income
(“AMI”) calculated using the average AMI of the three (3) most recent years; and
WHEREAS, CIITAP is only one way to address housing affordability, and aside from the
new construction that is required to be affordable according to this program, currently
state law does not provide local authority to form a local board that would determine
annual allowable rental increases in order to protect tenants from arbitrary rent
increases; and
WHEREAS, according to recent data, seventy-three percent (73%) of the residents in
the City of Ithaca are renters, and the average vacancy rate is the lowest in Tompkins
County at approximately one percent (1%); and further, over fifty percent (50%) of
Tompkins County residents pay thirty percent (30%) or more of their income (a standard
affordability metric) to pay their rent; and
WHEREAS, the New York State’s Emergency Tenant Protection Act (ETPA) of 1974
provides rental protections including rent stabilization whereby landlords are subject to
regulated rent increases and tenants have the right to renewal leases3; and
WHEREAS, under the current ETPA law only municipalities in Nassau, Westchester,
Rockland counties and New York City are eligible to adopt a form of rent stabilization,
resulting in rent protections only applying to tenants in 8 of the state’s 62 counties; and
WHEREAS, in 2019, New York State’s Emergency Tenant Protection Act (ETPA) of
1974 will be expiring, presenting an opportunity for our leadership in Albany to improve
and extend the tenants’ rights moving forward; now, therefore be it
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca Common Council calls upon our leaders in Albany
to strike the geographic restrictions from the ETPA so that local governments can take
an active role addressing the cost of rental housing and to provide critical rental rights to
tenants in the City of Ithaca and across the state; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That the City of Ithaca supports and endorses S2892A/A5030 the “Good
Cause” bill, which would bring the right to a lease renewal with limited rent increases to
all renters in non-owner occupied buildings in the state4; and, be it further
3 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/ETP
RESOLVED, That the City Clerk is directed to send a copy of this resolution to U.S.
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, U.S. Senator Charles Schumer, Governor Andrew Cuomo,
New York State Senator Thomas O’Mara, New York State Assemblywoman Barbara
Lifton, Senate Assembly Chair Brian Kavanagh, and Assembly Housing Chair Steven
Cymbrowitz.
4 https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2019/s2892
14. MAYOR’S APPOINTMENTS:
14.1 Appointment/Reappointments to Cable Access Oversight Committee -
Resolution
RESOLVED, That Rich DePaolo be reappointed to the Cable Access Oversight
Committee, as a representative from the Town of Ithaca, with a term to expire
December 31, 2020; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Wies vanLeuken be reappointed to the Cable Access Oversight
Committee, as a representative from the Village of Cayuga Heights, with a term to
expire December 31, 2021; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Gossa Tsegaye be appointed to the Cable Access Oversight
Committee, as a representative from the City of Ithaca, to fill a vacancy with a term to
expire December 31, 2019.
14.2 Appointment to Examining Board of Electricians – Resolution
RESOLVED, That Tim Hayes be appointed to the Examining Board of Electricians to fill
a vacancy with a term to expire December 31, 2021.
14.3 Appointment/Reappointment to Community Police Board – Resolution
RESOLVED, That Shirley Kane be reappointed to the Community Police Board with a
term to expire December 31, 2021; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Richard Onyejuruwa be reappointed to the Community Police Board
with a term to expire December 31, 2021; and, be it further
RESOLVED, That Hannah Logue be appointed to the Community Police Board as a
Youth Member with a term to expire December 31, 2020.