No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-12-17REGULAR TOWN BOARD MEETING Date: December 17, 2003 Time: 7: 00 p. m. Place: Lansing Town Hall Board Room AGENDA 1. Call Meeting to Order. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. 3. Public Hearing — 7:05 p.m. Intermunicipal Wastewater (Sewer) Agreement. 4. Public Hearing — 7:15 p. m. Adoption of SEAR Findings Statement. S. Privilege of the Floor. 6 Engineer's Report. 7. Gary Wood — Request to Build Self Storage Complex — Triphammer Road. 8. Code Enforcement Officer's Report. 9. Highway Superintendent Report. 10. Approve Audit. IL Approve Minutes of November 19`h and December 3'd 2003. 12. Board Member's Report. 13. Executive Session if Needed. 14. Adjournment. HAPPY HOLIDAYS 423 HE December 17, 2003 The Lansing Town Board met in Regular Session at the Lansing Town Hall Board Room at 7:00 p.m. with Supervisor Farkas presiding. The Supervisor called the meeting to order and had the clerk take the Roll Call, Stephen Farkas Katrina Greenly Doug McEver Meg Overstrom Francis Shattuck Bonny Boles Guy Krogh ROLL CALL Supervisor Councilperson Councilperson Councilperson Councilperson Town Clerk Town Attorney Present Present (7:05) Present Absent Present Present Present VISITORS: Jack French; Dick Platt, Dave Herrick, Connie Wilcox, John Butler, Gary & Jane Wood, Dan Konowalow, Nickolas Bellisario, Jr., Otis Phillips, John Young, David Fernandez and two students. The Supervisor lead all present in the Pledge of Alegiance. PUBLIC HEARING — INTERMUNICIPAL WASTEWATER AGREEMENT: Notice of Public Hearin`), having been advertised as required by law, the Public Hearing was opened at 7:05 p.m. All persons desiring to be heard, having been heard the public hearing was closed at 7:11 p.m. and the following resolution was adopted: Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Protect STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT STATEMENT OF FINDINGS Adopted: 17 December 2003 1. Introduction This is the Town of Lansing's Findings Statement for the Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Project ( "the Project ") in Tompkins County, New York. The Town of Lansing is an involved agency for this Project. A Findings Statement sets forth the basis for an Agency's decision on an action, in this case the funding and construction of sewer lines and pump stations in the Town of Lansing; the funding and construction of transmission mains in the Town of Lansing and Villages of Lansing and Cayuga Heights; the funding and construction of two flow diversions in the Village of Cayuga Heights and Town of Ithaca; and approval of an Intermunicipal Wastewater Agreement, which includes new coterminous service areas for the Village of Cayuga Heights Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant and expands existing service areas in the Towns of Lansing, Dryden and Ithaca. The State Environmental Quality Review Act ( SEQRA) requires that the Lead Agency and each Involved Agency make findings with respect to an Action. The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) is the Lead Agency for this Action. Involved Agencies include the Project Sponsors, which are the City of Ithaca, the Villages of Lansing and Cayuga Heights and the Towns of Ithaca, Dryden and Lansing. This Findings Statement contains a brief description of the Action, a description of the SEQRA process, a discussion of significant impacts and mitigation measures, and a certification required by the SEQRA regulations. Continued, December 17, 2003 The discussion of impacts and mitigation measures makes up the bulk of these findings. The discussion is organized by topic or area of the environment, as were the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) documents. In making findings it is important to note that an Agency need not find that the Action will result in no environmental impacts. Rather, SEQRA requires that agencies engage in a balancing process whereby environmental concerns are weighed against social, economic and other essential considerations. These findings set forth the basis of the Town of Lansing's decision, and set forth conditions where appropriate. 2. Description of the Action The Project involves the construction of approximately 26 linear miles of public collector sewers (both gravity and vacuum sewers) in the Town of Lansing, as well as the Construction of three pump stations to convey sewage from topographic low points and 21 and 24 -inch gravity transmission pipes to convey the sewage to the Village of Cayuga Heights Wastewater Treatment Plant (VCHWTP). The Project further involves interconnection of the VCHWTP service area and the Ithaca Area Wastewater Treatment Plant (IAWWTP) service area to allow for the diversion of up to 1.3 million gallons per clay (MGD) (over the 20 -year planning period) of sewage from the VCHWTP to the IAWWTP to utilize the existing permitted capacity at the IAWWTP. Much of this diversion will be from the northeast portion of the Town of Ithaca that is Currently served by the VCHWTP, and the Town of Ithaca will utilize existing excess capacity it already owns in the IAWWTP. The Project also involves expanding the sewer service area in the Town of Lansing and the Town of Dryden, although no new sewers are proposed in Dryden at this time. Three small areas in the corners of the Town of Ithaca will also be added to the sewer service area. The Project will make existing wastewater treatment capacity available to serve the Village of Lansing. hinally, the Project also involves the approval of an Intermunicipal Wastewater Agreement by the six municipal sponsors. Among other things, this Agreement creates a new coterminous sewer service area for the VCHWTP and IAWWTP and expands the sewer service area into new parts of the Towns of Lansing, Dryden and Ithaca. The EIS further analyzes the potential environmental impacts of a conceptual future plan involving the Construction of approximately 38 miles of collector sewers and seven pump stations in the Town of Lansing. It is anticipated that these improvements would be owned and maintained by the municipality in which they are located. It is emphasized that sewers associated with the conceptual future plan are not currently proposed and funding has neither been sought nor provided for them. However, to the extent that the potential environmental impacts of the conceptual future plan can be assessed, the EIS does so in order to assess impacts from the proposed and conceptual projects together; and to determine what the boundaries should be for the VCHWTP - IAWWTP service area. If the conceptual sewers are ever proposed in the future, their impacts will be evaluated through a future environmental review process. 3. Procedure On August 18, 1999, the Project Sponsors requested that DEC serve as the Lead Agency for this Project. Notice of the DEC's intent to serve as Lead Agency was circulated to interested and involved agencies by letter dated September 29, 1999. No objections were raised with respect to the DEC's serving as Lead Agency, and on November 1, 1999 the DEC became Lead Agency for the SEQRA review. A draft Scopino Document was prepared setting forth the issues to be addressed in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). On September 6, 2001 DEC held a public meeting at which comments on the draft Scoping Document were received. From August 27, 2001 to September 21, 2001 DEC also accepted written comments on the draft Scoping Document. On June 4, 2002 the DEC adopted a final Scoping Document for the Project. On June 20, 2003 the DEC accepted the DEIS as complete 425 sm Continued, December 17, 2003 and issued it for public comment. DEC held a public hearing on the DEIS on July 31, 2003. The DEC accepted comments on the DEIS until August 11, 2003. The Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) was accepted by DEC on November 13, 2003. 4. Project Need and Benefits • The DEIS and FEIS documents contain an extensive discussion of Project need. The Project is needed in order to eliminate ground and surface water Pollution currently caused by inadequate on -site sewage disposal systems and to protect public health. The proposed Project will eliminate a number of sewage discharges and provide a higher level of sewage treatment than presently occurs within the area proposed to be serviced. More specifically, the proposed benefits are as follows. • Currently, inadequate on -site septic systems are in use within the proposed Town of Lansing Service Area. For example, the Tompkins County Health Department has identified limitations or inadequacies with systems in the Ladoga Park area (including 30 systems that are inundated by Cayuga Lake during high water), the mall near the intersection of Atwater Road and Route 34, the tavern at the corner of Drake Road and Route 34 and at the Lansing Central School District. The Health Department has conducted several surveys of drinking water wells and septic systems in the Town of Lansing and found high rates of well contamination and septic system failure. Elimination of these inadequate septic systems will improve ground and surface water quality, reduce the risk to drinking water supplies, and benefit public health. • Currently, individual SPDES discharge permits are held by residential, commercial, industrial and institutional facilities that fall within the proposed Town of Lansing Service Area. These include the Lansing Central Fire Station, Colonial Cleaners, Hunter Apartments, Lakewatch Inn, New York State Office of Children & Family Services facilities, Cargill, Inc., Woodsedge Apartments, Transonic Systems and UPS. Elimination of the individual sewage discharges at these facilities will improve the water quality of surface waters because, for example, with the exception of the New York State Office of Children & Family Services facilities, the systems for which these permits have been issued do not incorporate phosphorus removal. • The Project will meet the need for additional public sewage capacity in the Town of Lansing. • The Project will occur in an area that is already partially developed, thus promoting infill rather than conversion of open space and agricultural lands. • The sizing of mains, pump stations and other facilities will provide the opportunity for future expansion of public sewer service within the Town of Lansing Planning Area without the need for additional construction, thereby avoiding duplicated construction impacts. • The provision of sewers within the Town of Lansing Service Area and, potentially in the future, the Town of Lansing Planning Area, will allow for controlled groxvth in the Town of Lansing in accordance with that community's planning policies. • The Project will eliminate SPDES permit flow exceedances at the VCHWTP. • The Project will provicle for more public sewer capacity in the Village of Lansing. 427 Continued, December 17, 2003 • By incorporating the Town of Dryden within the proposed future sewer service area, sewer service may in the future be extended to the Town of Dryden. 5. Alternatives Alternatives to the Project were thoroughly analyzed during the planning phases of the Project. This analysis was summarized and supplemented in the DEIS and FEIS documents. Other alternatives were also analyzed in the DEIS and FEIS. The analyses found that: • "hhe use of vacuum sewers (commonly used in areas of relatively flat topography where slopes are not suitable for the use of gravity sewers) for the entire Town of Lansing Service Area was not practical because of higher costs and because the majority of the Service Area has slopes suitable for conventional gravity sewers. • The use of small diameter variable slope sewers with full -size septic tanks to capture solids in the Town of Lansing was rejected because this alternative would have higher long -term costs without having any particular enviromnental benefit. • The construction of several small package wastewater treatment plants or neighborhood subsurface areas in the Town of Lansing as alternatives to use of existing municipal plants were rejected because of the higher likelihood of failure from multiple facilities and because of the lower level of wastewater treatment that would likely be achieved. • Alternative wastewater discharge locations such as sub - surface discharge or land application were rejected because of the amount of land required, operational difficulties, cost considerations and the significant transport infrastructure that would be required. • Discharge into a nearby receiving water body instead of Cayuga Lake is not feasible, given the low summer base flows in tributaries to the Lake such as Salmon Creek and Gulf Creek. • Coposting toilets are not considered by the Lead Agency to be a practical regi monal alternative because of scale considerations, although they are viable for individual use. • "hhe construction of a new municipal wastewater treatment plant was rejected because it would not meet the goal of providing a regional alternative using existing facilities; it would result in an additional wastewater treatment facility requiring proper operation, with a resultant higher risk of malfunction and enviromnental pollution; small municipal plants often have more operational and compliance problems than regional plants; and small municipal plants seldom are "state -of -the -art" due to an inability to spread higher costs over a small tax base. While issues related to VCHWTP and IAWWTP discharges were outside the EIS's scope, the Lead Agency noted that the regional solution is acceptable because phosphorus loadings discharged into the southern end of Cayuga Lake attributable to Town of Lansing flows would be very small (less than '/i pound per day initially and less than' /4 pound per day M 20 years with tertiary phosphorus treatment). The Lead Agency further noted that overall phosphorus loadings to southern Cayuga Lake will decrease in the range of 20 to 31 pounds per day on an average annual basis with the planned phosphorus treatment upgrades at the VCHWTP and IAWWTP, even \vith the added Tov -vn of. ' Lansing flows. 428 Continued, December 17, 2003 • Treatment at an expanded VCHWTP is technically feasible, but would be more expensive and has no particular environmental benefits over the preferred alternative. • Decommissioning of the VCHWTP and treatment of all wastewater at the IA W WTP would have the benefit of reducing the number of operating facilities with associated risk of malfunction. However, it is more costly than the preferred alternative and so was rejected. • Use of the VCHWTP for primary treatment, followed by transmission of wastewater to the IA W WTP for final treatment was rejected because it would be more costly without having any particular environmental benefits. • Larger and smaller sewer service areas were considered in the Town of Lansing. The service area chosen best meets the sewage treatment needs of the Town of Lansing. • Alternative transmission main pipe sizes proposed transmission main pipe size is recognized design standards. In additio ef[iciently upgraded or supplemented in the duplicated construction impacts. were considered. However, the the minimum necessary to meet n, a smaller main could not be future without significant cost and • The DEIS contains an assessment of the use of an alternative transmission main route that would avoid the Esty's Glen and McKinney's Twin Glens Unique Natural Areas (UNAs). Conventional construction of the proposed route through the UNAs would permanently disturb the vegetation that has been re- established on and along the former railroad grade, and a pipe bridge crossing Twin Glens would add an additional man -made feature to the glen. The alternative transmission route would avoid all disruption to these UNAs but would require additional pump stations and would have higher operations costs. With the mitigation identified in Section 6.7 below, either route is viable and acceptable. The Village of Lansing Board and Town of Lansing Board will reach consensus on which route to select and on transmission main cost- sharing issues. • The FEIS contained an analysis of the use of the Norfolk Southern railroad right -of -way for the sewer transmission main. The analysis concluded that this route is not feasible for construction and cost reasons. No comments were received that would alter the Town of Lansing's conclusion that the proposed Project best meets the objectives of the Project Sponsors. 6. Findimis, Basis and Rationale for Decision The following discussion sets forth the findings, basis and rationale for the Town of Lansing's decision, including required mitigation measures. 6.1 Topography Topography in the EIS Study Area ( "the Study Area ") ranges from approximately 400 feet above mean sea level to 1100 feet above mean sea level. Topography generally slopes from east to west towards Cayuga Lake. Steep slopes are found along Cayuga Lake and along stream banks. Potential impacts relate to the potential for erosion and subsequent sedimentation of water bodies during construction, especially on steep slopes. The Town of Lansing finds that mitigation measures shall include the following: Continued, December 17, 2003 a. Adherence to the requirements of a general stormwater permit, and preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan prior to construction. The plan will include erosion control measures designed in accordance with the following doctirnents: New York State Guidelines for Urban Erosion and Sediment Control (April 1997) Ne\v York State General Permit for Stormwater Runoff Discharges, GP -93 -06 (General Permit) Appendices D, E, and F (Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan) b. Work will progress in a systematic fashion with the following phases: land clearing, excavation, installation or construction, backfill and restoration. All Orotund surfaces that will be disturbed during construction will be stabilized and restored. c. Earthwork will be performed with the objective of completing pipe trench excavation and backlilling sequentially. After clearing of vegetation from the earthwork areas, topsoil will be removed and stockpiled for reuse. Topsoil stockpiles will also be subject to erosion control measures. 6.2 Geolo(,jy The Study Area is underlain by sedimentary rocks. Bedrock depths are relatively shallow. Blasting may be required to install sewer lines in some locations. The Town of Lansinv( finds that mitigation measures shall include the following. a. Ripping shall be the preferred method of removing shallow bedrock except where the Project Engineer determines it is not feasible. b. When blasting is found necessary, all blasting operations will adhere to New York State ordinances governing the use of explosives. The State regulations are contained in 12 NYCRR Part 39 and Industrial Code Rule 53, and include such requirements as licensing of operators; magazine (explosive storage) certification, and rules for conducting operations in a safe manner. Proper program guidelines will be established between the State, the Project L=:ngineer, and the blasting contractor prior to undertaking this activity. In addition to obtaining applicable blasting certifications and complying with all blast safety requirements, a blast monitoring program will be implemented. c. All pertinent safety regulations and standards shall be applied as required for safety, security and other related details for any blasting deemed necessary. Applicable safety regulations are: e US Army Corps of Engineers Safety Manual EM 385 -1 -1; • Code of Federal Regulations A.T.F. Title 27; a Institute of Makers of Explosives Safety Library Publications No. 22; • New York State Industrial Code Rule 53. d. Storage of all explosive materials shall be approved by the blasting engineer. Caps or be stored with Class A explosives. Design in accordance with the references above. blasting materials stored on -site will 1 requirements of the blasting engineer. located on the site at a location other detonating devices will not of the powder magazine shall be The security for explosives and )e in accordance with safety 429 i Continued, December 17, 2003 e. Delivery and transportation of explosives from the powder magazines to the blast area will be by vehicles specifically designed for this use by the criteria outlined in the safety requirements. Only authorized persons will transport and handle the explosives as designated by the authority of those licensed for this purpose. At all times federal, state, and local ordinances will be followed concerning the transportation and storage of explosives. f. The designated storage site, explosive transporting vehicles, and areas where explosives are being used shall be clearly marked and will display the required warning signs. A daily tally of all explosives delivered, used and stored will be maintained. g. Prior to blasting, necessary precautions for the protection of persons and adjoining property will be established. Such precautions shall include the following. • Appropriate signs will be erected in the area of blasting activities. • All adjoining property owners will be mailed notification of the anticipated blasting schedule. • Notification of blasting at the site will be published in newspapers prior to the blasting schedule. • A storm alert monitoring device will be used by the blasting contractor to detect any electrical build -up in the atmosphere at the blast area while using electrical caps. • Special care will be taken with detonating cords and connectors to protect from the impact of falling rocks or other impeding objects. • Vehicles equipped with radio transmitters and portable 2 -way radios will not be permitted within 250 feet of blasting operations. 6.3 Soils Impacts to soils include the potential for erosion, the generation of dust during construction and the likelihood that high groundwater will be encountered during construction. The Town of Lansing finds that mitigation measures shall include the following a. The mitigation measures specified in Section 6.1 of these findings will mitigate erosion impacts. b. To mitigate the effects of dust during construction, the following measures are required. • All paved areas must be swept clean on a daily basis. • During periods ol' drought or little rainfall, areas devoid of topsoil will be watered regularly to minimize the amount of dust entering the air. • In periods of extreme rainfall or muddiness, truck washing stations will be established to avoid tracking significant quantities of soil onto area roadways. c. To minimize the effects of high groundwater in areas where trench excavation is required, typical dewatering measures should be utilized to prevent M Continued, December 17, 2003 surface water and/ or ground water from entering excavations. Typical measures shall include, but are not limited to: • Installation of dewatering systems utilizing wells, well points, or similar methods complete with associated pump equipment, standby power and pumps, valves and associated appurtenances. • Maintain the system to control groundwater and maintain relatively dry conditions to excavate and place fill on dry subgrades. • Dispose of water removed through the dewatering process in a manner that avoids endangering public health, property, wetlands, UNAs and portions of work already completed. This will generally involve the use of detention ponds in which sediments may settle prior to discharge. 6_4 Water Resources a. The Project will result in the decommissioning of numerous in- ground sewage disposal systems, including individual and institutional systems. As mentioned above, septic systems in Ladoga Park along the shore of Cayuga Lake regularly flood; resulting in direct sewage discharge into Cayuga Lake. Past Tompkins County 1-lealth Department (TCHD) surveys show that many septic systems within the Town of Lansing Sewer Study Area were in failure or were expected to fail soon. The TCHD has expressed concerns about the four on- site sand filter systems at the Lansing Central School District (design flow of 3,300 gallons per day) that serve the schools and discharge to surface waters that drain to Salmon Creek and Cayuga Lake. The TCHD has also identified limitations or inadequacies with on -site septic systems in the Ladoga Park area. the mall near the intersection of Atwater Road and Route 34, and the tavern at the corner of Drake Road and Route 34. The TCHD has stated that the soils in much of the Town of Lansing Sewer Study Area are marginal to poor for on -site sewage systems. TCHD records show the Town of Lansing Sewer Study Area has a higher per capita replacement rate than the replacement rates in any of the towns in Tompkins County. The TCHD has also found that a significant number of drinking water wells it tested in the hamlet of Ludlowville were contaminated with sewage. The Project will also result in the decommissioning of package treatment plants that have individual SPDES permits. These package plants do not generally provide as high a level of treatment as the VCHWTP and IAWWTP Will provide once their planned phosphorus upgrades are in place, because only one of the package plants provides phosphorus treatment. The Town of Lansing finds the Project will have the impact of eliminating wastewater discharges to Cayuga streams, and groundwater resources, and of reducing t health. The elimination of these discharges will improve water quality, reduce the risk to drinking water supplies, health. significant positive Lake, its tributary he threat to public ground and surface and benefit public lsstles related to IAWW"hP and VCHWTP discharges were outside the scope oi' the EIS because those plants will be operating within their previously established SPDES permit limits. However, the Town of Lansing recognizes that with proposed improvements to these municipal plants, there will be a large net reduction in phosphorus discharge to the southern end of Cayuga Lake from these plants, even with the addition of flows from currently unsewered areas, including the Town of Lansing. 432 Continued, December 17, 2003 b. There are numerous streams located throughout the Project Area. Sewer lines are proposed to cross streams in 43 locations. None of the streams are classified as protected by the DEC in the crossing locations. It is anticipated that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would authorize this Project under Nationwide Permit 12 for utility crossings of wetlands and waters. Under this Nationwide Permit, notification (i.e., a Pre - Construction Notification or PCN) will be made if any of the following occur: • There was mechanized land clearing in a forested wetland. • A Section 10 permit is required (i.e., the project crosses a navigable water). • The utility crossing(s) [cumulatively] impact more than 500 linear feet of waters. • There are permanent above -grade fills for roads that are more than 500 linear feet in length in waters of the United States. • Any permanent above -grade fills for roads are constructed with impervious surfaces. • DEC Protection of Waters permit under 6 NYCRR Section 608 is required. • Stream Disturbance permit is not required because the Project does not impact any streams with classifications of C(t) or higher. However, the Project will need a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate, which is also authorized under 6 NYCRR Part 608, specifically Section 608.9. Any applicant for a federal license or permit to conduct any activity that would result in a discharge into a navigable water must obtain a Section 401 Water Quality Certificate. Therefore, Section 401 Water Quality Certificates are required in association with US Army Corps of Engineers permits, including Nationwide Permits. The DEC has issued blanket, or automatic Section 401 Water Quality Certificates for Nationwide Permit 12 when: • The Project does not involve an Article VII permit under the Public Service Law. • Materials are not sidecast into waters of the United States for more than 30 days. • Materials are not sidecast into any waterbody or stream with measurable flow. • When the project involves less than 1 /101" an acre of permanent discharges and less than 200 linear feet of stream disturbance [cumulative]. Therefore, the need to obtain a blanket versus an individual Section 401 Water Quality Certificate will be dependent upon the length of stream disturbance associated with the utility crossings. The Town of Lansin�� finds that, in addition to compliance with all necessary federal and state permits and requirements, the following mitigation measures will be implemented to protect streams from adverse impacts. NNihenever possible; stream crossings will be constructed during the dry season in order to avoid the potential for significant flows. Trenched stream 433 Continued, December 17, 2003 crossings will be constructed in the "dry" where the water flow is either flamed or pumped across the work area. This will eliminate the great majority of downstream siltation during the pipeline installation. Hay bales and silt fences will be used as specified in the erosion control plan to prevent siltation from upslope areas. Whenever possible, excavation will be done from the banks, keeping equipment out of the streambed. In larger streams, the installation may be a two -step procedure. The water flow may be diverted away from the working side by the use of a cofferdam, then reversed to install the remainder of the pipeline across the stream. Trenching may also be done with a rock saw. This method would also be done as a dry crossing. In addition, the followli-lu specific mitigation measures are required. • All staging areas for stream crossings will be kept at least 100 feet away from the stream. • No refueling, equipment repair or lubricating will be allowed within 100 feet of a stream unless said stream is located immediately adjacent to a road crossing, with limited access, and therefore requires such activity. • Proper spill containment will be used to isolate these activities and minimize the potential for spills in such instances. • Whenever possible, stream crossings will be avoided at a stream bend, in areas of undercut bank-s, or in areas where the bank is unstable. • In areas where long slopes lead to streams, water bars will be installed. Otherwise, silt fences and /or hay bales will be installed. • Tlie necessary grading and brush clearing of stream banks will take place immediately prior to trenching in order to minimize the exposure of bare soil. • Stream bank and flood plain stabilization measures will be immediately implemented upon completion of construction. • In- stream disturbances will be minimized. • All trenching will be performed in such a way so as to prevent the introduction of sediments into streams. • No flow obstructions will be left in the streambed or channel. • The streambed and banl<s will be restored as close to the original contours as possible. • If a stream crossing is located within a wetland, the crossing will be designed to minimize the length of any right -of -way constructed parallel to a stream course within the wetland. Silt fencing and/or haybales will be used to insure that siltation is minimized and retained within the work area. The bank and trench spoil piles will be isolated from the wetland by silt fences. Separation of topsoil and subsoil will be necessary during the bank excavation within the wetlands. Care will be taken to reestablish the stream channel in the original location and condition. • Any stream banks will be restored to the original contour and stabilized. • The conditions at some stream crossings may make trenching difficult and unacceptable from a construction standpoint. In these areas, a directional bore crossing method may be used. The potential impact from directional 434 Continued, December 17, 2003 • boring is the potential of leakage of the cutting and lubricating fluid. The starting and endin; 435 Continued, December 17, 2003 6.6 Wetlands The proposed Project will not affect any known or mapped State or Federally regulated wetlands. Because small, unmapped wetlands are sometimes found to exist in the field; the Town ol� Lansing finds that prior to construction, the proposed construction route will be walked by a wetland scientist to confirm this finding. Should any wetlands be found to exist, a mitigation plan shall be developed. The conceptual future sewer plan in the Lansing Planning Area involves the crossing of the Head Corners Wetland, which is Federally regulated and which is also a designated Tompkins County Unique Natural Area. The Town of Lansing finds that an alternate route and other mitigation measures should be investigated during the environmental review that will be done should this plan be advanced beyond the conceptual stage. The conceptual future plan also locates a sewer line along Benson Road within 100 feet of DEC wetland WG -14. If this plan is advanced beyond the conceptual stage, construction of this sewer line \.Vould require a permit. The Town of Lansing finds that additional mitigation measures should be considered should this plan be advanced beyond the conceptual stage. 6.7 Unique Natural Areas UNAs are sites with outstanding env County Environmental Manaocment Sewer lines will pass through UNAs that the following specific meastu-es to UNAs. ironmental qualities, as defined by the Tompkins Council. There are 42 UNAs in the Project Area. in several locations. The Town of Lansing finds will be implemented to mitigate adverse impacts a. Impacts to UNA 55. Lower Salmon Creek, relate to the need for construction mitigation of short -term impacts related to installation of the sewer main on the bridge so that it may cross this stream. Such mitigation measures are discussed in Findin 6.4. b. Impacts to UNA 63, Shurger Glen, are anticipated to be minimal, as the proposed sewer line route will avoid the wooded portion of the lower glen. i\ /litigation measures are therefore those for soil and erosion control discussed III Finding 6.3. c. lmpacts to UNAs 64 and 89, the Lake Cliffs, relate primarily to the need for soil erosion control. Such mitigation measures are discussed in Finding 6.3. In UNA 89, trenchless technology will be used where appropriate to avoid excavation through identified and surveyed vegetative communities that are l:nown to be or identified as rare or endangered, d. lmpacts to UNA 90. l"Sty's Glen, are limited to the potential for disturbance of the edge of the UNA from construction in the road right -of -way. Mitigation measures are those I -or soil and erosion control discussed in Finding 6.31 e. Impacts to UNA 103; McKinney's Twin Glens and Lake Cliffs, primarily relate to the potential for disturbance of protected species. In these areas a biological survey of the proposed sewer line route will be constructed prior to construction to ensure that no such species will be disturbed. Trenchless technology will be used where appropriate to avoid excavation through identified and surveyed vegetative communities that are identified as rare or endangered. E Impacts to UNA 102; the Renwick Slope, are anticipated to be minimal because the route swill 1oIlow an existing sewer line right -of -way that is W Continued, December 17, 2003 mowed and maintained for that purpose. Mitigation measures are those for soil and erosion control discussed in Finding 6.3. g. With respect to UNAs 53 and 54, no significant impacts are anticipated and therefore no mitigation measures are proposed. h. V/itlh respect to general construction, the following mitigation measures have been identified. • Tlie construction route will be marked in the field and temporary barriers erected to protect adjoining trees and vegetation. • All trees over 12'- cliameter at breast height will be marked; if possible, the route will be adjusted in the field to avoid the destruction of such trees. • Construction equipment and materials may not be staged within the boundaries of UNAs except where no alternative location exists. i. The EIS contained a discussion of the possible use of the former railroad right -of -way, which is on private property, as a recreation trail. Discussions xwith the impacted landowners show they do not favor creation of a public pedestrian right -of -sway. Such a trail would not directly mitigate the environmental effects of the proposed transmission main, although it would increase recreational opportunities. The Town of Lansing finds that conversion of private Finds for recreational trail purposes is a controversial matter with the affected landowners and the location of any future trail will require more public input and discussion before the Village of Lansing Board can make a decision. j. Sewer line routes proposed in the conceptual plans for the Lansing Planning Area will undergo additional environmental review should these plans advance beyond the conceptual stage. In the conceptual plans, sewer line construction is proposed to occur within several UNAs. Construction would occtur along the roadside edges of the Lake Cliffs, the Ludlowville Woods, DEC Wetland WG -14, the Minnegar Brook Woods and the Lower Salmon Creek UNAs. Since construction would occur along the roadside edge of these i areas; no s gnificant disruption or disturbance would be expected, other than short -term disruptions to wildlife from construction associated noise. The Town of Lansing finds no mitigation measures are likely to be necessary should this plan be advanced beyond the conceptual stage, as long as construction is proposed for only roadside edges. UNA 64 is a unit of the area is the potential for slopes. The Town of I Finding 6.3 should be a be advanced beyond the Lake Cliffs UNA. The primary potential impact in this erosion and sedimentation from construction on steep .:arising finds that mitigation measures discussed in )risidered for construction in this area should this plan conceptual stage. As previously discussccL UNA 65 is the Head Corners wetland, a federally re`_1ulated wetland. A potential sewer line is shown to be constructed directly through this UNA; resulting in the potential for short and long -term habitat clisruption and destruction. The Town of Lansing therefore finds that an alternative to this route and other mitigation measures should be explored should this plan be advanced beyond the conceptual stage. 6.8 Climate and Air Resources The Project will have no direct impact on air resources other than the generation of dust dwin <� construction. The Towwn of Lansing finds that the mitigation measures for construction dust generation I'ound in Finding 6.3 are required. 1 Continued, December 17, 2003 6.9 Visual Resources The Project is not anticipated to have any adverse direct impacts on visual resources because the sewer lines will be underground and because the proposed pump station buildings will be small and unobtrusive. The Town of Lansing finds therefore finds that no mitigation measures are required. 6.10 Odors Adverse impacts related to odors are limited to those from improperly operated wastewater pumping stations. mitigation measures are related to proper operation and venting. 11' problems persist. the Town of Lansing finds additional mitigation measures sucli as biofilters, carbon filtration and chemical addition are required. 6.11 Noise The only noise- related impact identified from operations relates to that from emergency generators \when in use at the pump stations. These generators will be enclosed and they will be used infrequently (only when electric supply is disrupted or during infrequent testing periods). The Town of Lansing therefore finds that this impact is not considered siOni 11cant and no mitigation measures are required. Construction equipment and blasting will generate noise during construction. This noise will be generated on a short -term basis and represents a short-term, adverse impact. -hhe Town of Lansing finds that construction equipment shall be properly maintained in order to minimize this impact to the maximum extent practicable. 6.12 Cultural Resources A Stage 1 A Cultural Resources Survey was conducted for areas proposed for construction. The survey identified the possibility of encountering cultural resources in areas that have not been previously disturbed. The Town of Lansing finds that the Project Sponsors will consult with the New York State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) as to the extent and nature of any required 1B Field Investigation and will undertake such a survey in accordance with the direction of SHPO. The Town of Lansing f�uther finds the results of any required 1B testing and any mitigation plan must be considered by the -I o\\ ;ii of Lansing once a preliminary design is completed for the exact sewer routes. 6.13 Land Use and Zoning The Project will have no direct impacts to land use or zoning. The Town of Lansing therefore finds that no mitigation measures are required. 6.14 Transportation The Project will have no direct impacts on transportation resources. During construction there will be short -term disruptions of traffic patterns. The Town of Lansing finds that a Maintenance and Protection of Traffic Plan shall be developed to mitigate adverse transportation impacts during construction. 6.15 Demographics The Project will have no direct impacts on demographics. The Town of Lansing therefore finds that no mitigation measures are required. 437 Continued, December 17, 2003 6.16 Fiscal Impacts The Project will be paid for out of a combination of State Bond Act grants, low interest loans and local matches (which may include bonds). The Town of Lansing finds that no adverse impacts have been identified with respect to Fiscal impacts, and therefore no mitigation measures are required. 6.17 School Districts The Project will have no direct adverse impacts on school districts. The Project will have the positive impact of eliminating on -site wastewater discharges at Lansing Central School District schools. The Town of Lansing finds that no mitigation measures are required as no adverse impacts have been identified. 6.18 Community Services The Project will have no direct impacts on community services. The Town of Lansing therefore finds that no mitioation measures are required. 6.19 Gi-mNith Inducing Impacts The EIS contained an extensive analysis of growth that could be induced in the Towns of 1_ ansing and Dryden and the Village of Lansing as a result of the Project. The assessment covered three scenarios: Scenario 1 (growth at existing rates); Scenario 2 (moderately increased growth); and Scenario 3 (a highly increased rate of growth). The analysis assessed the amount of residential and commercial growth that could occur over a 20 -year period Linder each scenario and calculated impacts to transportation systems, school districts, community services, employment, municipal budgets and the region (form each scenario. The analysis further analyzed impacts to land uses and calculated the amount of vacant and agricultural land that could be converted to developed land Linder each scenario. Specific findings from the analysis include: • With one exception. the IUtln-e residential and commercial growth projections for all Scenarios arc significantly less than the maximum amount of development that could theoretically occur under current zoning. The one exception is for commercial development in the Village of Lansing, where all remaining commercial square footage will be developed before the end of the 20 -year period under even the lowest growth scenario, Scenario 1 (historic growth rates). • Undo Scenarios 2 and 3, the Lansing Central School District would expc;rience enrollment increases in line with historic trends in this school district. Projected increases for the Ithaca City School District and Dryden Central School District under Scenarios 2 and 3 would reverse a trend of declining enrollment- but the number of students added each year is not si`nilicant when compared to existing enrollments and the fact the students would be spread out over all grades. • Impacts on school budgets are relatively small. Growth under Scenario 3 results in annual buduct deficits ranging from 0.10% to 1.06 %. The impact would be even smaller under the other scenarios. • Impacts to municipal budgets under Scenario 3 result in deficits of 0.7% in the Village of Lansing. 5.2% in the Town of Dryden, and 7.2% in the Town of Lansing. Deficits are much smaller under Scenario 2. 439 Continued, December 17, 2003 • Under accepted planning standards, adequate numbers of personnel and vehicles exist for ti relighting and emergency medical services under all Scenarios. The number of police officers who serve the entire County currently falls short of planning standards, but if the officers in police a��encies serving sp�cil'c municipalities and organizations are factored in, there are more than the recommended numbers of officers. To the extent the rlumbec of officers serving the entire County falls below planning standards, this is an existing County -wide issue that is not attributable to the Project. The Project will not make this situation worse to the extent public sewers induce growth that simply displaces growth from one location within the County to another. • Undcr accepted planning standards, more than adequate amounts of park acreage are available to residents within the EIS Study Area under all Scenarios. • Traffic impacts changed very little when Scenario 1 (existing growth rates) is compared to Scenarios 2 and 3. There is very little change in traffic volumes at critical intersections throughout the area examined by the traffic model under all Scenarios. Two intersections are projected to experience significant declines in Level of Service, but such declines are expected even under Scenario 1 and thuS are not attributable to the Project. In addition, one stop si.)n- controlled intersection saw a change in Level of Service as a result of the Project. This intersection changed from an A to a B Level of Service. There is very little change in the overall link volumes in all Scenarios. • Public transportation services are not expected to be significantly impacted because the volume o1' growth attributable to the Project is relatively small. \Vhen considering proposed land use patterns, the relevant municipalities should nonetheless consider, where appropriate, mixed use development patterns that take advantage of or enhance transit connections. • Si0nilicant employment is projected under all Scenarios because of projected commercial development. This increased employment is a positive impact. However, the difference in employment numbers between Scenario 1 (the historical rate of oroxwth) and Scenario 3 is relatively small. • Land projected would result in period than ha impact, given benchmark. to be converted to significantly more occurred over thl that the planning developed status under Scenarios 2 and 3 land conversion over the 20 -year planning past 10 years. This is not a significant period is twice as long as the 10 -year • if development in the LIS Study Area were to favor agricultural lands, as opposed to Other vacant lands, significant conversion of agricultural lands could result 1-1ovwever, it is extremely unlikely that all development would Occur on just agricultural lands. In addition, the Study Area contains relatively little of the total active agricultural lands within the Towns of Lansing and Dryden. Only 7.4% of the Town of Lansing's 12,073 acres of agricultural lands arc in the Study Area; 11.2% of the Town of Dryden's 9.004 acres Of agricultural lands are in the Study Area. To the extent public Se\wel -s will promote in611 and development within the Study Area, the si�()nilicant amount OIL agricultural land located outside the Study Area may feel less development pressure. For all of these reasons, the overall impact to agricultural lands in the Study Area municipalities could be adverse but is not expected to be significant. To the extent the affected municipalities wish to conserve agricultural kind open space lands, they can explore mitigation measures through their local planning and zoning processes. Mitigation measures could include limiting the scope of uses and densities allowed on %M December 17, 2003 • agricultural and open space lands, providing for the transfer of development rights, and providing for clustered subdivisions. • Population and commercial growth patterns in the region could be altered, but such impacts are difficult to quantify because they depend on a myriad of personal and individual business judgments. The levels of population growth Wider Scenarios 2 and are not of the scale likely to result in significant new commercial development in the region. The overall regional impact on agricultural land and open space is small because relatively small amounts of such lands are located in the EIS Study Area when compared to that available in the entire region. 'Fhe Project will have a positive regional impact to the extent it will promote infill development in areas that are already partially developed, thus decreasing development pressures on undeveloped lands outside the Study Area. The Town of Lansing finds, based on the above information, that no significant growth - induced impacts will occur under any Scenario. The analysis will nonetheless be useful to the affected communities as a planning tool. The affected communities will be able to use the results 01' the analysis as they assess future growth in order to determine whether their zoning and planning policies are adequate or require revision. 6.20 Alternatives The To\\ n of Lansing finds. based on the discussion and conclusions in Section 5 above and in this Section 6. that the proposed Project best meets the Sponsor's objectives while minimizing adverse environmental impacts. 6.21 Intermunicipal Wastewater Agreement The Intermunicipal Wastewater Agreement sets out a framework for flow diversions and for coordination of operations between the VCHWTP and IAWWTP. It also contains proposed new service area boundaries for these two plants. Sufficient permitted capacity exists at the IAWWTP to accommodate the flow diversions described i n the EIS. The Mown of Lansing finds, based on the discussion and conclusions in Sections 4 and 5 above and in this Section 6, that implementation of the Intermunicipal Waste\ -vater Agreement and of the new service area boundaries are appropriate. With the mitigation identified in these findings, any remaining environmental impacts will be acceptable and will be outweighed by the.ProjectIs benefits. 7. Certification Based on the foregoing, the Town of Lansing certifies: That it has considered the relevant environmental impacts, facts and conclusions disclosed in the EIS. That it has weighed and balanced the relevant environmental impacts with social, economic and other considerations. That it has provided a rationale for its actions; specifically, it has weighed and balanced the relevant environmental impacts with social, economic and other considerations; and made a determination that the significant benefits that will result from Proposed Actions outweigh the identified adverse environmental impacts given the measures that have been imposed by the Town of Lansing in order to ensure the potentially significant adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated to the maximum extent practicable. That the requirements of 6 N YCRR Part 617 have been met. 441 Continued, December 17, 2003 That consistent with social. economic and other essential considerations from among the reasonable alternatives available, the Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Project is the alternative 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 resolution was duly made by Mrs. Greenly and seconded by Mr. McEver, and the vote was as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Katrina Greenly — aye, Doug McEver - Francis Shattuck — ave. PUBLIC HEARING — ADOPTION OF SEAR FINDINGS STATEMF,NT! Notice oi.' Public Hearin`) having been advertised as required by law, the Public Hearing vvas called to order at 7:15 p.m. All persons desiring to be heard, having been heard, the Public Hearing terminated at 7:18 p.m. and the following resolution was adopted: Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Project Resolution Adopting SEQRA Findings Statement At a RegUlar \ /leeting of the Town Board of the Town of Lansing held in and for the Town of Lansing at the LansinO Town Hall on 17th day of December, 2003, the following members being present: Stephen Farkas, Supervisor; Katrina Greenly, Councilperson: Douglas McEver. Councilperson; and Francis Shattuck, Councilperson; and being absent; Meg Overstrom, Councilperson; and the following members being absent: none: and the following Resolution was duly made by motion of Mr. McEver, and seconded by Mrs. Greenly, and the vote was as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Francis Shattuck — aye_ Katrina Greenly — aye, Douglas McEver - aye, and the following Resolution thcrelbre passed 4 -0: WHEREAS_ the action is the Consideration of Approval of the Statement of Findings for the Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Project (the "Project "). This Project involves the construction of new public sewer lines and pump stations in the Town of Lansing; the construction of a new sewer transmission main in the Town of Lansing and Villages of LansinO and Cayuga Heights; the construction of flow diversions to interconnect the service areas for the Village of Cayuga Heights Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Ithaca Area \Vastewater Treatment Plant; and an Intermunicipal Wastewater Agreement that coorclinates operations between these two Treatment Plants, expands their service areas, and makes their service areas coterminous; and WHEREAS. actions that are currently before the Town Board of the Town of Lansing or that are expected to come before the Town Board of the Town of Lansing include (1) the approval o l' the Interco un i c i pa I Wastewater Agreement, (2) the approval of the construction ul' a new sewer tl'ansmisS1017 main to bring Town of Lansing flows through the Villages of Lansing and Cayuga Heights to the Village of Cayuga Heights Wastewate,- "treatment Plant; and (3) approval of the construction of new public sewer lines and pump stations in the Towne of Lansing; and WHEREAS. this is an Unlisted Action for which the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation has been designated to act as Lead Agency in environmental review; and WHEREAS. the Town Board of the Town of Lansing is an Involved Agency with regard to the appro\ iilS, listed in the second "WI- IEREAS" paragraph above; and 442 Continued, December 17, 2003 WHEREAS. the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, acting as Lead Agency in environmental review for the Project and pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 has: (1) made a positive determination of environmental significance; and (2) overseen the preparation, completion ii-id acceptance ol' a Draft Environmental Impact Statement and a Final Environmental Impact Statement: and (3) issued its own Findings Statement with regard to said Project: and WHEREAS. pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617, the Town Board of the Town of Lansing is required to issue its own Findings Statement with regard to the Project; and WHEREAS. the Town Board of the Town of Lansing, at a public hearing held upon December 17. 2003, and its Regular Meeting held upon December 17, 2003, has reviewed a draft Findings Statement, comments received from members of the public regarding the proposed Project and its potential impacts on the environment, and the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements, and WHEREAS. after a review and discussion of the matter, and upon due deliberation thereupon; the Town Board of the Town of Lansing has hereby RESOLVED. that the Town Board of the Town of Lansing does hereby adopt the attached Findings Statement for the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Ithaca Area Municipal Wastewater Collection Improvement Project. HIGHWAN' SUPERINTENDENT'S MONTHLY REPORT: New Grade - All: Mr. French stated that the new Grade -All was up and running and that the old one is being use as a wood chipper until it is sold. TOWN EN'GINEER'S MONTI -ILY REPORT: Water District Extension: Mr. 1 lcrrick asked the Board to set a Public Hearing for a water district extension for Julie Kraus and Paul Radenhcr.,. 'hhe following resolution was then offered: Consolidated Water District Proposed Extension Kraus /Radenberg — Ladoga Park Lot 27 At a Regular Meeting of the 'Town Board of the Town of Lansing held in and for the Town of Lansing` at the Lansing Town Hall on 17th day of December, 2003, the following members being present: Stephen Farkas, Supervisor; Katrina Greenly, Councilperson:, Douglas MCEVCr. Councilperson; and Francis Shattuck, Councilperson; and the following members being absent: Meg Overstrom, Councilperson; and the following Resolution was duly made by motion of Francis Shattuck and seconded by Douglas Mcl ver, and the vote \\as as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Francis Shattuck — aye, Katrina Greenly — aye, and Douglas McEver - aye, and the following Resolution therefore passed 4 -0: WHEREAS. an application has hccn made by the owners of Lot 27 at Ladoga Park, Julie Kraus and Puul Radenberg, for an extension of the Consolidated Water District to their property, and WHEREAS. the Town Engineer has reviewed all relevant materials and believes that the proposed e.xicnsion is permissible as the property owners will pay for all costs associated with the extcn:�ion; and Cl 443 Continued, December 17, 2003 WHEREAS. a public hearing \\ as determined to be necessary to allow the public and interested members of the public to comment upon such extension; and WHEREAS. alter a review and discussion of the matter, and upon due deliberation thereupon; the 'I'o\vn Board of' the Town of Lansing has hereby RESOLVED. that a public hearing upon the Kraus /Radenberg Consolidated Water District extension be and is hereby set for 7:10 p.m. on January 21, 2004, at which time the public may provide input and comment upon the proposed extension. CODE ENFORCEMENT 0FI1 ICER'S MONTHLY REPORT: Monthly Report: Mr. Platt stated that they \vere down by 4 permits from last year and up in project costs by $ 2')-4.72 1.24. New ZBA Board Member: Mr. Platt stated that the ZBA Board made Dan Konowalow a Board Member earlier toni_i1t. AUDIT APPROVAL: RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. McEver and seconded by Mrs. Greenly: RESOLVED, that the hookl<eeper is hereby authorized and directed to pay the following bilis: Voucher Numbers: 1 ? 2 5 — 1327 Prep�i\ Vouchers 12)25 — 1229 FUND TOTAT. APPROPRIATInrvc General Fund 275566.91 Highway Fund 295076.38 Lansing Li 11 t111 15257.86 Lansing Water Districts 775113.35 Cherry Road Sewer 318.80 Capital Projects — Multi Purpose Excavator 234 000.00 Vote ol'"Down Board ... (Aye) Katrina Greenly, Councilperson Vote o I` "town Board ... (Aye) Doug McEver, Councilperson Vote of "town Board ... (Aye) Francis Shattuck, Councilperson Vote O I' Town Board ... (Aye) Stephen Farkas, Supervisor APPROVE MINUTES, A copy of the minutes oi' November 19`t' and December 3�d, 2003, having been furnished to i he Board Members beforehand, the Supervisor asked for a motion to make corrections or to accept the same as submitted. RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. McEver and seconded by Mr. Shattuck: RESOLVED, that the minutes of November 19th and December 3�d, 2003 are hereby approved as submitted. Carried 444 Continued, December 17, 2003 SELF STORAGE COMPLEX: Mr. Gary Wood, Otis Phillips and Nickolas Bellisario, Jr. approached the Town Board regarding self storage units on North Triphammer Road. The Board was concerned about what the neighbors would think and the visual effect it would have on the area. After a discussion period, the following resolution was made: Proposed Lensing Self Storage Notice of Public Hearing At a Regular Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Lansing held in and for the Town ol' Lansing at the Lansing Town Hall on 17th day of December, 2003, the following members being present: Stephen Farkas, Supervisor; Katrina Greenly, Councilperson; Douglas McEver. Councilperson; and Francis Shattuck, Councilperson; and the following members being absent: Meg Overstrom, Councilperson; and the following RCSOlution was duly made by motion of Francis Shattuck and seconded by Douglas McIver, and the vote was as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Francis Shattuck — aye, Katrina Greenly — aye, and Douglas McEver - aye, and the following Resolution therefore passed 4 -0: WHEREAS. the Town Board has been approached by the owners of property located on Triphammer Road, which property is located approximately 1 mile south of the intersection OI'Triphammer Roacl with Water Wagon Road; and WHEREAS. said owners; Nickolas Bellisario, Jr. and Otis Phillips, and their project engineer, Gary Wood, P. E., have submitted a preliminary proposal for the construction of up to seven self- storage units at the said location; and WHEREAS. before proceeding_ the Town Board desires public input and review of the proposed project, as the proposal requires either a variance or a Special Use Permit, both of which require public hearings: and WHEREAS. after a review and discussion of the matter, and upon due deliberation thereupon, the Town Board of the Town of Lansing has hereby RESOLVED. that a public hearin <( upon the said Self Storage proposal be and is hereby set for 7:15 p.m. on January 21. 2004; at which time the public may provide input and comment upon the said proposal. APPOINT I LOYD FERRIS: Electrical Inspector — Floyd Ferris Permanent Appointment At a Regular Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Lansing held in and for the Town ol' 1_ansing at the Lansing Town Hall on 17th day of December, 2003, the following members being present: Stephen Farkas, Supervisor; Katrina Greenly, Councilperson: Douglas 1\ /IcEvcr. Councilperson; and Francis Shattuck, Councilperson; and the following members being absent: Meg Overstrom, Councilperson; and the following Resolution was duly made by motion of Francis Shattuck and seconded by Douglas Mcl_,ver, and the vote was as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Francis Shattuck — aye, Katrina Greenly — aye, and Douglas McEver - aye, and the following Resolution therefore passecl 4 -0: WHEREAS. the Town Board was advised that the Town Electrical Inspector, Floyd Ferris, who i� employed provisionally, has passed the Electrical Inspectors Examination; and WHEREAS. the Electrical Inspector works under the Supervision of the Town Code Enforcement Officer, Richard Pl,iu; and 445 Continued, December 17, 2003 WHEREAS. Iyichard Platt recommends the permanent appointment of Floyd Ferris to the position of Mown Electrical Inspector; and WHEREAS. after a review and discussion of the matter, and upon due deliberation thereupon, the Town Board of the Town of Lansing has hereby RESOLVED. that Floyd Ferris be and hereby is permanently appointed, effective immediately _ is the Town Electrical Inspector. BOARD N1EN1BER REPORTS: DOUG MCEVER: Floating Classroom: Mr. N1cEver stated that the Floating Classroom was a success this past summer. Archives Grant: Mr. N1lcEver stated that the building could be finished by June 30, 2004 but that the Town has to contribute approximately $ 3,000.00 by January 25, 2004. The total cost will be $ 27.800.00. He also stated that the Town could apply for two grants in one year. He stated that the Town clerk vwill have to be involved in the archive process. Personal Watercraft: After some discussion it was felt that the Town's involved should meet to discuss the law. 1Vlr. Farkas will try to et this put on the next agenda for the next Municipal Officer's Ndeetin�. KATRINA GREENLY: Salt Point: The management - planning group will work with Steve Colt on this project. Librarv: Worl;in(,) on Fundraisers rind doino well. FRANCIS SULNTTUCK: Planning Boar& The Planning Board is in the process of reviewing subdivision rules and regulations from 1991. In the near i'uture, the comprehensive plan will be redone. Hazardous klitigation Plan: The plan will be complete by November of 2004. STEVE FARKAS: Meeting Schedule: Mr. Farkas stated that the year -end meeting will be held on December 30`h at 4:00 p.m. and that the Organizational Meeting will be held on January 2, 2004 at noon. FINANCI:-kL kUDITS: Year 2002 Audit Approval of Records and Funds of the Town Clerk, the Town 1- lil;11way Department, and Town Justice Records At a ReUular Meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Lansing held in and for the Town ol' I.ansing at the 1_.ansing Town Hall on 17th day of December, 2003, the following members being present: Stephen Farkas, Supervisor; Katrina Greenly, Councilperson: Douglas McEver. Councilperson; and Francis Shattuck, Councilperson; and the following members being absent: Meg Overstrom, Councilperson; and the following Resolution was duly made by motion of Francis Shattuck and seconded by Continued, December 17, 2003 Douglas McEver, and the vote was as follows: Stephen Farkas — aye, Francis Shattuck — ayc. Katrina Greenly — aye, and Douglas McEver - aye, and the following Resolution therefore passed 4 -0: WHEREAS. the "Town Board has received the draft and final audit reports for the year ended December 31, 2002 liom the Toxvn independent auditor (Offices of Andrew LaVigne, CPA) for each of the following: (1) the Town Clerk's Office; (2) the Town Highway Department; and (3) the Town Justices; as performed by Jay Engels, CPA; and WHEREAS_. said audits were reviewed and analyzed by the Town Board; and WHEREAS. after a review and discussion of the matter, and upon due deliberation thereupon; the -I own Board of the To\vn of Lansing has hereby RESOLVED. that the said audits be and hereby are approved. EXECUTIVE SESSION: RESOLUTION, offered by Mr. Shattuck and seconded by Mr. McEver: RESOLVED, that the RC(Ullar Meeting be adjourned at 8:28 p.m. to go into Executive Session to discuss a personal matter. Carried. RESOLUTION, offered by Mrs. Greenly and seconded by Mr. McEver: RESOLVED, that the 1' \eCLltive Session be terminated and the Regular Meeting be reconvened at 8:32 p.m. On motion, meeting adjourned at the call of the Supervisor at 8:33 p.m.