No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTB Minutes 2004-11-15 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilperson Will Burbank Councilperson Herbert Engman Councilperson Sandra Gittelman Councilperson Peter Stein ABSENT: None ---------------------------------------------------------- In the Matter of the Proposed Water Improvement in the Town of Ithaca, PUBLIC INTEREST Tompkins County, New York, pursuant to Article 12-C of ORDER AND BOND the Town Law to be known as the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill RESOLUTION Tank and Water Main Project ----------------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, in conjunction with the Towns of Dryden, and Lansing and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing, has determined and agreed to participate in the construction of a water tank and an extension of water mains to be constructed by and operated by the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission ("SCLIWC ') and to contract indebtedness therefor in accordance with Section 15 of the Local Finance Law pursuant to a Supplement to Agreement of Municipal Cooperation for Construction, Financing and Operation of an Intermunicipal Water Supply and Transmission System Relating to 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project dated as of October 1, 2004 (the "Intermunicipal Agreement Supplement '); and WHEREAS, a plan, report and map has been duly prepared in such manner and in such detail as this Board determines to be necessary, relating to the construction of a water tank on Hungerford Hill in the Town of Ithaca and construction of additional water transmission mains in part in connection with such new water tank all to be a part of the SCLIWC water system, and all pursuant to Article S-G of the General Municipal Law and relevant provisions of the Town Law and Village Law, such project to be known and identified as the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project, and hereinafter also referred to as "Improvement ", to provide improved water storage capacity and water transmission capabilities for SCLIWC and the system owned in common by the Towns of Dryden, Ithaca and Lansing and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing (collectively the "Municipalities " and sometimes individually the "Municipality '), such Improvement to be constructed and owned by the Municipalities, and WHEREAS, the proposed SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project consists of the improvements set forth below, and as more particularly shown and described in said map, plan and report presently on file in the Office of the Municipality Clerk; and WHEREAS, the maximum proposed to be expended for the aforesaid improvement is $21200, 000. 00; and 17 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 WHEREAS, the proposed method of financing to be employed for the aforesaid improvement is issuance by the Municipalities of joint and several serial bonds not to exceed $ 1, 500, 000 and payment of the balance of the costs of said improvement by the expenditure of current revenues and surplus funds held by SCLIWC; and WHEREAS, a public hearing for the purpose of considering said plan, report and map, the providing of said SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project, the authorization of serial bonds for payment of part of the costs of the Improvement, the expenditure of current revenues and surplus funds for the balance of the costs of the Improvement, and the amendment of the existing Agreement of Intermunicipal Cooperation between the Municipalities in relation to such Improvement was held on the 18'h day of October, 2004, all in accordance with applicable provisions of General Municipal Law, Local Finance Law, and Town Law, at which time all persons interested in the subject thereof were given an opportunity to be heard; and WHEREAS, the project hereinafter described has been determined to be an Unlisted Action pursuant to the regulations of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation promulgated pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, the implementation of which as proposed, it has been determined will not result in any significant environmental effects; and WHEREAS, all other actions precedent to the financing of the capital project hereinafter described have been performed; and WHEREAS, it is now desired to authorize the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project, the execution of the Intermunicipal Agreement Supplement, and the financing of such capital project; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, conditional upon the within resolution in substantially the same form being adopted, approved and made effective by the other member municipalities of SCLIWC to the extent applicable to such municipalities, as follows: Section 1 . It is hereby determined that it is in the public interest to make the water improvement hereinafter described and such water improvement is hereby authorized. The proposed area in the Town hereby determined to be benefitted by said SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project with respect to which the Town Board is authorized to act is all of the Town of Ithaca outside of the Village of Cayuga Heights. Section 2. The Town of Ithaca hereby authorizes the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project, consisting of construction of a 3, 000. 000 gallon prestressed concrete water storage tank and appurtenant facilities on Hungerford Hill in the Town of Ithaca, construction of 3600 feet of sixteen inch diameter ductile iron pipe and appurtenances running from SCLIWC 's existing transmission main on Ellis Hollow Road east of its intersection with Pine Tree Road easterly along Ellis Hollow Road to its intersection with Hungerford Hill Road then southerly along Hungerford Hill Road and 18 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 then southeasterly across lots to the proposed new storage tank on Hungerford Hill, and construction of a twelve inch diameter ductile iron water distribution main and appurtenances running northerly from the intersection of Ellis Hollow Road and Hungerford Hill Road across lots approximately 1500 feet to the vicinity of the Cornell University Athletic Fields located off of Game Farm Road, all of said actions being authorized pursuant to Articles 12, 12-A, and/or 12-C of the Town Law and Article 5-G of the General Municipal Law. Section 3. The Town of Ithaca hereby authorizes the Supervisor, on behalf of the Town, to execute the Intermunicipal Agreement Supplement pursuant to which the Town authorizes the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project, delegates to SCLIWC the authority to contract for and construct said Project, and agrees to the manner of financing the same as set forth herein. Section 4. The Town of Ithaca, subject to the approval of the voters of the Town of Ithaca if a referendum is requested, hereby authorizes the expenditure of up to $2, 200, 000. 00 for the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project and the payment of all costs incident thereto, including architects fees, consulting fees, attorneys fees, bidding costs and any other related costs, all of said actions being hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Project. " Section 5. There are authorized to be issued in connection with the Project, $ 1, 500, 000 joint serial bonds of the Village of Cayuga Heights, Village of Lansing, Town of Dryden, Town of Ithaca, and Town of Lansing, all of Tompkins County, New York, pursuant to the provisions of Section I of Article VIII of the Constitution of the State of New York as amended and Title IA of the Local Finance Law. Section 6 $2, 200, 000. 00 is estimated as the maximum cost for Project, and the plan for the financing of the Project, which plan is hereby authorized, consists of (a) The issuance of not more than $1, 500, 000 joint and several serial bonds as aforesaid, the amount of which is initially estimated to be allocated and apportioned to each of the municipalities is set forth below; and (b) Payment from the unreserved fund balance of SCLIWC of the balance of the remaining costs of such SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project. Section 7. For the purposes of Section 15. 10 of the Local Finance Law relating to the allocation of joint indebtedness, the amount of joint indebtedness to be apportioned and allocated to each of said Towns and Villages shall be in the same proportion as the consumption of water from the SCLIWC facility in each of the Towns of Dryden, Ithaca, and Lansing and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing shall bear to the total consumption of water from the SCLIWC water distribution facility, which is estimated to be, and for the purposes of determining gross indebtedness of each of said municipalities in their respective debt statements pursuant to Section 15. 10 of the Local Finance Law 19 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 and therefore the amount to be allocated for the purpose of ascertaining each of the municipalities debt contracting powers shall be, as follows: MUNICIPALITY PERCENTAGE OF DEBT ALLOCATED PORTION OF DEBT Town of Dryden 4. 557 $ 68, 655. 00 Town of Ithaca 44. 031 $660, 465. 00 Town of Lansing 18. 186 $272, 790. 00 Village of Lansing 21 . 941 $329, 115. 00 Village of Cayuga Heights 11 . 265 $ 168, 975. 00 Nothing in this section shall be deemed to be in conflict with or to supercede the provisions of this resolution hereinafter set forth relating to the annual apportionment of the amount of principal and interest on the bonds herein authorized to be issued as among said Towns and said Villages, nor the manner of collection and payment of the amounts of annual debt serviced provided to be apportioned annually by said provisions. The Supervisors of said Towns and the Treasurers of said Villages are hereby authorized and directed to act jointly to make application to the State Comptroller as appropriate for the allocation and apportionment of said joint indebtedness in accordance with the provisions of this section and to perform all acts and furnish all information required in connection with such application. Section 8. It is hereby determined that the period of probable usefulness of the aforesaid specific objects or purposes is 40 years, pursuant to Subdivision 1 of Paragraph a of Section 11 . 00 of the Local Finance Law. It is further determined that the maximum maturity of the serial bonds herein authorized will exceed five years. Section 9. The full faith and credit of said Town of Dryden, said Town of Ithaca, said Town of Lansing, said Village of Cayuga Heights, and said Village of Lansing, all of Tompkins County, New York, are hereby jointly pledged for the payment of the principal of and interest on said bonds as the same respectively become due and payable. The principal of and interest on said joint bonds shall be apportioned annually among said Towns and said Villages in accordance with the Intermunicipal Agreement Supplement hereinabove referred to, in the ratio which the consumption of water from the SCLIWC system in each of said municipalities bears to the full consumption from the entire SCLIWC water distribution system, such ratio to be annually determined in accordance with the aforesaid Intermunicipal Agreement Supplement, the share of said principal and interest to be borne by the aforesaid Towns, shall be annually assessed, levied and collected within said Towns as follows: (a) From the several lots and parcels of land in each of the water districts in the Town of Dryden and in the Town of Lansing, in the manner provided by law. (b) From the several lots and parcels in the Town of Ithaca Town-wide water improvement area, in the manner provided bylaw. 20 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 The Village of Cayuga Heights shall annually levy and collect a tax sufficient to pay the share of said principal and interest to be borne by said Village, as the same may become due and payable, and the Village of Lansing shall annually levy and collect a tax sufficient to pay the share of said principal and interest to be borne by said Village, as the same may become due and payable. If not paid from the aforesaid sources, all the taxable real property in said Town of Dryden, and all the taxable real property in said Town of Ithaca, and all the taxable real property in said Town of Lansing and all the taxable real property in said Village of Cayuga Heights, and all the taxable real property in said Village of Lansing shall be jointly subject to the levy of an ad valorem tax, without limitation as to the rate or amount, sufficient to pay the principal of and interest on said bonds as the same become due and payable. 21 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Section 10. Subject to the provisions of the Local Finance Law and this section, the power to authorize the issuance of and to sell joint bond anticipation notes in anticipation of the issuance and sale of the joint serial bonds herein authorized, including renewals of such notes, is hereby delegated to the Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca, the Chief Fiscal Officer of said Town, acting on behalf of the chief fiscal officers of the Towns of Dryden and Lansing and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing. Such joint bond anticipation notes shall be of such terms, form and contents, and shall be sold in such manner as may be prescribed by a bond anticipation note certificate, as authorized by Section 30. 00 of the Local Finance Law, provided, however, that any bond anticipation notes so issued shall be the joint indebtedness of said Towns and said Villages and shall be executed in the names of Town of Dryden, the Town of Ithaca, the Town of Lansing, the Village of Cayuga Heights and the Village of Lansing, and shall be signed by the Supervisor of the Town of Dryden on behalf of said Town and shall have affixed thereto the seal of the Town of Dryden, attested by the Town Clerk of said Town, shall be signed by the Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca on behalf of said Town and shall have affixed thereto the seal of the Town of Ithaca attested by the Town Clerk of said Town said Supervisor, shall be signed by the Supervisor of the Town of Lansing on behalf of said Town and shall have affixed thereto the seal of the Town of Lansing, attested by the Town Clerk of said Town, shall be signed by the Treasurer of the Village of Cayuga Heights on behalf of said Village and shall have affixed thereto the seal of the Village of Cayuga Heights, attested by the Village Clerk of said Village, and shall be signed by the Treasurer of the Village of Lansing on behalf of said Village and shall have affixed thereto the seal of the Village of Lansing, attested by the Village Clerk of said Village. The chief fiscal officer of the Town of Ithaca to whom is hereby delegated the power to authorize the issuance of and to sell such joint bond anticipation notes, shall file an executed copy of each such bond anticipation note certificate with the finance board of each of the aforesaid municipalities prior to the issuance of the bond anticipation note or notes authorized by such certificate. Section 11 . The validity of such joint serial bonds and joint bond anticipation notes may be contested only if 1 . Such joint bonds are authorized for an objector purchase for which said Towns or said Villages are not authorized to expend money, or 2. The provisions of law which should be complied with at the date of publication of this resolution are not substantially complied with, and an action, suit or proceeding contesting such validity is commenced within 20 days after the date ofpublication, or 3. Such joint bonds are authorized in violation of the provision of the Constitution. Section 12. Upon the adoption of this resolution by each of the aforesaid Towns and the aforesaid Villages, and the publication thereof with the notice provided for herein, the Clerks of each such Town and each such Village shall file with the Clerk of each of the other Towns and of the Villages, a certified copy of this resolution and a printer 's affidavit or affidavits , as the case may be, of publication thereof with the required noticed or notices, as the case may be. 22 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Section 13. Pursuant to Section 15. 00(m) of the Local Finance Law, the powers and duties of advertising such joint bonds for sale, conducting the sale and awarding the bonds, are hereby delegated to the Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, who on her own behalf and on behalf of the chief fiscal officers of the Towns of Dryden and Lansing and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing, shall advertise such bonds for sale, conduct the sale, and award the bonds in such manner as she shall deem best for the interests of the aforesaid Towns and Villages, provided, however, that in the exercise of these delegated powers, she shall comply fully with the provisions of the Local Finance Law and any order or rule of the State Comptroller applicable to the sale of municipal bonds. The receipt of said Supervisor shall be a full acquittance to the purchaser of such bonds, who shall not be obliged to see to the application of the purchase money. Section 14. All other matters, except as provided herein relating to such joint bonds, including determining whether to issue such joint serial bonds having substantially level or declining debt service and all matters related thereto, prescribing the method for the recording of ownership of said bonds, appointing the fiscal agent or agents for said bonds, providing for the printing and delivery of said bonds, the date, denominations, maturities and interest payment dates, place or places of payment, shall be determined by said Supervisor on behalf of the chief fiscal officers of the Towns of Dryden, Ithaca, and Lansing, and the Villages of Cayuga Heights and Lansing. It is hereby determined that it is to the financial advantage of the issuers not to impose and collect from registered owners of such serial bonds any charges for mailing, shipping and insuring bonds transferred or exchanged by the fiscal agent, and accordingly, pursuant to paragraph c of Section 70. 00 of the Local Finance Law, no such charges shall be so collected by the fiscal agent. Such bonds shall contain substantially the recital of validity clause provided for in Section 52. 00 of the Local Finance Law and shall otherwise be in such form and contain such recitals in addition to those required by Section 52. 00 of the Local Finance Law, as said Town Supervisor shall determine. Said bonds shall be signed in the name of each Town and Village by the manual signature of each respective chief fiscal officer and a facsimile or original of the corporate seal of each Town and Village shall be imprinted thereon and shall be attested by the manual signatures of each respective Town or Village Clerk. Section 15. Pursuant to Local Finance Law Section 15, the Supervisor of the Town of Ithaca is designated as the chief fiscal officer to maintain the records relating to the joint bonds, the paying agent on the bonds, and the registration agent if she does not appoint such an agent pursuant to the authority granted elsewhere in this resolution. Section 16 Any obligation issued under authority of this resolution shall contain on it 's face a recital in substantially the following form : " This obligation evidences the joint indebtedness of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, New York, the Town of Dryden, Tompkins County, New York, the Town of Lansing, Tompkins County, New York, the Village of Cayuga Heights, Tompkins County, New York, and the Village of Lansing, Tompkins County, New York " . Section 17. This resolution shall constitute a statement of official intent for purposes of Treasury Regulations Section 1 . 150- 1 . Other than as specified in this resolution, no moneys 23 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 are, or are reasonably expected to be, reserved, allocated on a long-term basis, or otherwise set aside with respect to the permanent funding of the object or purpose described herein. Section 18. SCLIWC is hereby authorized to pay, out of unreserved surplus, the costs of the SCLIWC 2004 East Hill Tank and Water Main Project in excess of the bond proceeds authorized by this resolution, provided, however, the maximum cost of said project does not exceed the maximum authorized in this resolution. Section 19. It is hereby determined that the Town 's share of the estimated expense of the aforesaid improvement does not exceed 1/1 0th of I % of the full valuation of the taxable real property in the area of said Town outside of Villages and, therefore, in accordance with the provisions of subdivision 13 of Section 209-q of the Town Law, the permission of the State Comptroller is not required for such improvement. Section 20. Within 10 days after the adoption of this resolution by the Town Board, the Town Clerk shall, as set forth in Section 90 of the Town Law, post and publish a notice which shall set forth the date of the adoption of this resolution and contain a copy of this resolution, or an abstract of this resolution concisely stating the purpose and effect thereof. Such notice shall specify that such resolution was adopted subject to a permissive referendum. Section 21 . If no referendum is requested, or if requested, a referendum is held and the referendum approves the resolution, this resolution, or a summary thereof, shall be published by the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca, together with a notice in substantially the form prescribed, and containing the information required, by Section 81 . 00 of said Local Finance Law, such publication to be in the Ithaca Journal, a newspaper published in the City of Ithaca and having a general circulation within such Town. Section 22. This resolution shall take effect immediately, unless a referendum is requested, in which event it shall take effect, if approved at such referendum, upon such approval. Section 23. Pursuant to subdivision 6(d) of Section 209-q of the Town Law, the Town Clerk is hereby directed and ordered to cause a certified copy of this resolution to be duly recorded within 10 days of the date of adoption in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Tompkins, which when so recorded, shall be presumptive evidence of the regularity of the proceedings and action taken by the Town Board in relation to the aforesaid improvement. Section 24. This resolution is adopted subject to a permissive referendum pursuant to Town Law Article 12, 12-A and/or Article 12-C, and Local Finance Law Section 35. The question of adoption of the foregoing resolution was, upon motion made by Supervisor Valentino, and seconded by Councilperson Gri orov, duly put to a vote on a roll call, which resulted as follows: Supervisor Valentino Voting Ave Councilperson Grigorov Voting Aye Councilperson Lesser Voting Ahe Councilperson Burbank Voting Nav 24 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilperson Engman Voting Nav Councilperson Gittelman Voting A Councilperson Stein Voting Nav The order was thereupon declared duly adopted. Paul Tunison thanked the Town Board for approving this project for the commission , and apologized for not presenting the information the Town Board needed or felt they needed . He will work to get that information together so that as they move forward , everyone feels comfortable with it. Supervisor Valentino thanked Mr. Tunison . Agenda Item No . 10 : Discussion of a Resolution in Support of the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan (Attachment #4 — Letter from E . Marx, Summary of Significant Changes , and Principles , Policies and Action Items) Mr. Edward Marx states that the county is at the point where they are asking each community in the county consider a resolution of support for the Comprehensive Plan . There is a public hearing scheduled for December 7th , and it is expected that the County Legislature will vote on adoption of the Plan on December 21St. The Plan will be distributed to Supervisors and Planners , and will be in the Library and the Town Hall . The substance of the plan is contained in the principles , policies and actions . He thinks the plan has improved since the Spring . Three sections have been added : the implementation section - stating the County' s intent to initiate 61 actions with partners in the communities , with annual status reports on the initiation of the plan ; the future developments scenarios section — illustrates and evaluates how implementing the policies and recommendations of this plan might affect the community as a whole , one scenario focuses on growth and recent trends , the other is based on efficiencies and focusing development around things that we have that can be built upon . Many structures look better in the second scenario than with the first. They also then , did the final aspect of the plan which was to look at Fiscal impacts of the plan if it were implemented . The scenarios were used as a basis for looking at that. This became difficult to do with a high degree of confidence because there are so many variables about the way any municipality or taxing authority would choose to manage its resources that would impact the future . Looking again at the distribution of residential and commercial development as projected under the plan and trend scenarios , looking at where it would occur and again found slight overall fiscal benefit to the plan scenario though it is fairly minor. At least that analysis suggests strongly that there would not be any negative fiscal consequences with developing in accordance with the plan . There is potential to realize some fiscal benefits , village , town and county wide . There would be variations between communities , but almost every community would end up potentially ahead on a fiscal basis as compared with the trend if the plan was implemented with the pattern we talked about. These things do not affect the principles , policies or actions that are recommended but they try to analyze for the public and the communities what some of the impacts could be of implementing the plan . They did not assume aggressive local municipal actions to do the most that they could do , and they feel there are opportunities for any municipality to do much better than what the plan suggests , but that is up to each municipality . 25 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilman Lesser states that Fernando was at the last Transportation Committee meeting and they went over in detail the traffic impacts of each scenario and it was most helpful . They will be using some of those results in their own plans . Mr. Marx states they really see this plan as a tool that we can work with cooperatively between the county, state agencies , and the municipalities . They hope local municipalities will see how it works with what they are doing . For some communities it is a good fit right now, other communities could really benefit a great deal from the plan . It is a continuing process of working together to do the best we can . Agenda Item No . 10 — Tompkins county Comprehensive Plan Mr. Kanter reported that the Planning Board would be discussing the County' s Comprehensive Plan at their December 7 , 2004 meeting . Board members were invited to attend that meeting . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2004-178 : Referring Proposed Draft of Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Board for Recommendation WHEREAS , the Tompkins County Planning Department , with the guidance , advice , and recommendation from the Tompkins County Planning Advisory Board , has developed a Draft Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan that addresses regional and inter-municipal issues that affect the daily lives of Tompkins County residents , such as housing , transportation , jobs , the environment, and neighborhoods and communities , and WHEREAS , the Draft Comprehensive Plan was presented at 17 community groups and advisory board meetings , and 14 open houses and public meetings in all municipalities in the county, for feedback and comments , and WHEREAS , the Tompkins County Legislature is scheduled to consider adoption of the County Comprehensive Plan on December 21 , 2004 , and the Tompkins County Planning Department has requested that the Town of Ithaca Town Board consider passing a resolution supporting the adoption of the County Comprehensive Plan by the Tompkins County Legislature , and WHEREAS , the Town of Ithaca Town Board would like the input of the Town of Ithaca Planning Board regarding the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan prior to considering such a resolution of support , now therefore , BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town of Ithaca Town Board hereby refers the proposed Draft Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan to the Planning Board for a Recommendation . MOVED : Councilman Engman SECONDED : Councilman Burbank 26 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . Agenda Item No . 9 - Discussion of Benchmark's Report and Recommendations Regarding the Lake Source Cooling Monitoring Program (Attachment #5 — Review of Cayuga Lake Water Quality Monitoring ) The Board received copies of Benchmark' s report and recommendations in their packets . Mr. Wertman appeared before the Board to answer any questions . He told the Board the report is basically the presentation he made at the October 18th Town Board Meeting . The only thing that has changed from his presentation has to do with the duration of the continued monitoring . In his presentation , Mr. Wertman suggested continued monitoring at the least through 2005 . Based on some of the Board ' s concerns and in light of the time frame of the phosphorus removal improvements to the wastewater treatment plants felt it would be smarter to request that monitoring continue through 2008 , which is the duration of the permit. All of the other recommendations are as presented at the October board meeting . Councilman Engman , as liaison to the Lake Source Cooling Data Sharing Group , stated he has carefully studied the report and is very impressed with it . He thanked Mr. Kanter for his cooperation and help and voiced his support for the report's recommendations . Councilman Stein questioned Mr. Wertman about Cornell 's request to eliminate monitoring points . He asked Mr. Wertman if Cornell were to get rid of some of the points they now have and keep a subset of those points where they have historical data , then Mr. Wertman 's concern regarding the ability to do time sequencing would no longer be there ? Mr. Wertman explained there are two things we' re trying to accomplish . One is have enough of these comparison points to be able to make a statistically significant comparison and we want to compare those same points they did this time around in the future . The other one is all of the data they collected from 1998 pre Lake Source cooling project and the post lake source cooling project , they've looked at the shelf as being an average of locations 1 and 7 which are on either side of the outfall , 3 , 4 and 5 , and so not having all of those data points you wouldn 't be able to say what that average shelf water quality is in 2004 and 2005 if you don 't collect that data . So you don 't have a comparable data set . Mr. Wertman stated he was trying to help the University and basically say I think you can drop two of these points and- not materially effect their ability to really see what' s going on the shelf, but anything more , you ' ll loose too much . Supervisor Valentino Supervisor Valentino asked Mr. Wertman to expand on his comment on page 12 regarding recommendations that were made by Benchmark in March of 2003 that have not yet been implemented . Mr. Wertman stated that several of the current report' s recommendations were also made in their 2003 report . He was reminding DEC that those recommendations still stand . Supervisor Valentino asked about the importance of gather information about the thermal plume . Mr. Wertman felt it was important enough to recommend and did not think it would be difficult or expensive for the University to collect . 27 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 It's primarily a validation that the model they ran is valid and would not be a long-term or expensive proposition to fulfill . Councilman Lesser asked if the Board would be making a decision regarding what , if any, further role the Town is going to have in the monitoring process . Supervisor Valentino felt this was something the Board should look at and asked Mr. Wertman to put together a proposal . Councilman Burbank asked if there was anything the Town could do , other than accepting the report and conveying it to DEC , to increase the impact of the recommendations ? Mr. Wertman told him a letter from the Town saying we accept the consultant' s recommendations and hope you ' ll consider them in your deliberations relative to the University' s monitoring requests will accompany the report . Councilman Burbank asked what was the time frame for DEC 's decision ? Mr. Wertman told him we don 't have a definitive time frame . They kind of indicated to him they weren 't in a big hurry and he thought DEC wanted to do a very thorough evaluation and basically get comfortable themselves with the conclusions and to what degree monitoring should continue and so forth . He did not think the decision would be made within weeks or even months telling the Board it would be a while before DEC decides what to do . Stein — May I ask you a question about Table 10 . Councilman Stein asked Mr. Wertman if he was correct in his understanding that lake source cooling can 't effect the deep-water locations . Mr. Wertman told him he was correct . Mr. Stein then asked if he would be mistaken in concluding that the increase in chlorophyll in the southern shelf and deep water is not due to lake source cooling . Mr. Wertman told Councilman Stein he thought he was right on the first point, that what' s happening in the deep water isn 't impacted by lake source cooling . But what that does indicate is there is a build up of phosphorus in the greater lake and because you ' re recycling some of that to the . shelf the question becomes is that increase on the shelf happening faster than what' s in the lake and is that because you ' re moving this phosphorus , increasing phosphorus , from the deeper location on to the shelf and what impact does that have on algae growth and water quality on the southern shelf. There are two different dynamics going on . One in the bigger lake and then what's happening on the shelf and what contribution the lake source cooling has on the shelf itself. There were no further questions from the Board . RESOLUTION NO. 2004-179 : ACCEPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY BENCHMARK ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING & SCIENCE REGARDING THE LAKE SOURCE COOLING MONITORING PROGRAM AND FORWARDING THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WHEREAS , the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca (Town Board ) and Cornell University entered into an agreement in which Cornell University would reimburse the Town up to $50 , 000 towards the costs of a consultant chosen by the Town to provide an independent 28 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 review of the impacts of the operation of the Lake Source Cooling system on the water quality of Cayuga Lake ; and WHEREAS , the Town Board entered into a contract with Benchmark Environmental Engineering & Science ( Benchmark) to provide such services to assist the Town in monitoring the impacts of the Lake Source Cooling system on Cayuga Lake ; and WHEREAS , Cornell University , in conjunction with its consultants , Upstate Freshwater Institute , has been collecting samples from eight in-lake monitoring stations and conducting analyses of that data , pursuant to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation ( DEC) SPDES permit that was issued for the Lake Source Cooling system and the In- lake Water Quality Monitoring Plan approved by DEC ; and WHEREAS , Upstate Freshwater Institute recently completed drafts of the following reports regarding Cayuga Lake Water Quality Monitoring relating to the Lake Source Cooling Facility: Summary Report , 1998-2002 (August 11 , 2003) ; A Before-After-Control- Impact Analysis (Statistical Analysis — 4/ 16/04) ; and Annual Report — 2003 (March 30 , 2004) ; and WHEREAS , based on the above-referenced reports , Cornell University in a letter to .DEC dated July 29 , 2004 has requested modification of the in -lake water quality monitoring plan , including the reduction of sampling points from the current eight to two sampling stations ; and WHEREAS , Benchmark has attended recent meetings of the Lake Source Cooling Data Sharing Group , reviewed the above- referenced reports prepared by Upstate Freshwater Institute , prepared its own independent report, entitled " Review of Cayuga Lake Water Quality Monitoring Related to the LSC Facility for 1998 Through 2003" , dated November 2004 , containing observations on the monitoring program and recommendations regarding Cornell University' s requested modification of the in -lake water quality monitoring plan , and discussed its recommendations with the Town Board at meetings on October 18 , 2004 and November 15 , 2004 ; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby accepts the above- referenced report and recommendations by Benchmark Environmental Engineering & Science ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby authorize said report and recommendations to be transmitted to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation as the official position of the Town of Ithaca Town Board regarding Cornell University' s requested modifications in the current Lake Source Cooling monitoring plan . MOVED : Councilman Engman SECONDED : Councilman Stein 29 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . Agenda Item No . 11 - Consider Referral to the Planning Board of Conifer Realty' s Proposal for Rezoning Property off Conifer Drive from Medium Density Residential to Multiple Residential in coniunction with their Proposal to Develop 72-units of Senior Apartments (Attachment #6 — Memo from J . Kanter with attachments ) Jack Fennessey appeared before the Board on behalf of Conifer Realty . I am here tonight to set forth what we are proposing to do with the balance of our property up on Route 70. Conifer Realty, you may recall, acquired about 99 acres of land from the Serachi family some years ago. We 've developed three phases of multi-family housing. This is the first phase, 56 units. Second phase here of 72 units. And the final phase which has just been completed in the past few weeks of 24 units. The balance of the property of 58 acres lies to the north of Linderman Creek, which runs through here like this. We 've divided it into three housing types. One would be what we call patio homes, smaller single-family homes, 1 , 200 — 1 , 500 square feet per unit on smaller lots, attached. They're a more efficient unit and allows you to get some greater green space around them. And then the balance of the property would be a total of 51 detached more traditional single-family homes. The final phase, which is actually what brings us here this evening, is a 7. 3 acre parcel and there we 've proposed to develop that with a multi story 72 unit elderly housing project serving people that are age 55 and over This proposal, the zoning on it has to be changed in order to accommodate what we are proposing. It would be a two-tiered arrangement. 17 of the units would serve elderly households that would be 60% of the median income for the area. Whereas the majority of the apartments, 51 of them, would serve people that are up to 90% of the eligible income for the county. From an income point of view we would be serving elderly households that range between 15, 500 per year all the way up to a household that made $40. 500 so we 're really hitting both ends of the spectrum for elderly. And the analysis that we 've done to day shows that the demand is substantial for elderly housing. We have Ellis Hollow where we have a waiting list. The other two projects here in Ithaca that we think are comparable to ours for elderly don 't have any two-bedroom units. We will be having two- bedroom units, which is a desired feature. So, basically we 're here to seek your recommendation that the Planning Board consider rezoning this area here from it's current zoning to multi-family zoning and we 'll continue to have the balance of the property Councilman Stein — What's its current zoning ? Mr. Kanter — Medium Density Residential Mr. Fennessey — I'm told we 'll have, if we develop this as depicted here, we 'll have a total of 98 single-family homes, between single-family patio homes and single-family detached homes, and the 72 units for the elderly complex here so that would be a total of 170 more dwelling units on that 58 acres parcel. 17l be happy to entertain any questions. Councilman Engman — At total build out what will be the total number of units. 30 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Mr. Fennessey — We 've got 172 here, and we 've got what did 1 say 56, 72, 24, say it will be over 200 units. We 've done a traffic analysis several years ago based on this generalize concept based on this . . . . . . . And again one of the things we 're going to have to do for the Planning Board is to go back and revisit the analysis that we did and see how accurate we 've been to date. Councilman Burbank — We 're changing the zoning essentially from what had been single- family for that portion of it to this chunk that will be a more intense senior citizen housing ? Mr. Fennessey — That's what's been done here. It was all zoned medium density residential historically. We had a zone change here for the first 56 units, then we had a subsequent zone change that incorporated this entire area. Now we 're here again for the third one as we cross over Linderman Creek for this 7. 3 acre parcel here for elderly. Councilman Burbank — The rest of it, however, would be consistent with existing zoning, the remainder of the housing. The other housing, the single family and the patio houses, those would be consistent with our current zoning, is that correct? Mr. Fennessey — Yes. Councilman Burbank — What is going to be the additional, the total added density that would happen with this proposal as opposed to what would be buildable right now. Mr. Fennessey — 1 don 't know the answer to that question . We have laid this out assuming it was all single-family homes, but that doesn 't answer your question. Councilman Burbank — That would be an important thing for the Planning Board. Mr. Kanter — A quick answer, I did some calculations myself because I thought that might come up. Just on that 7. 3 acre parcel for senior apartments, the allowable density under medium density residential, the maximum theoretical would be 3. 5 dwelling units per acre. That's in the subdivision regulations. It's usually not accomplished at that high a density, but that's the theoretical. The 72 units on that 7. 3 acres would be 9. 9 dwelling units per acre so it's about a 2 % time increase in density. The multiple resident zone actually would allow up to 12. 4 dwelling units per acre in our new zoning, but that would be somewhat higher than the proposal that's before us. Councilman Stein — When you say senior housing, what does that mean, that you don 't let people in there who are under 55. Mr. Fennessey — That's correct. You 're required to be age 55 or older unless you 're handicapped. And you also have to meet these income criteria . Kanter — And that would be under a branch of the low income housing tax credit program ? 31 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Mr. Fennessey — Yes. What's different here is we 're a lot more able to serve an elderly household of more income than typically the case when you 're having subsidized housing. So we feel it's a very positive thing because a lot of the elderly are squeezed out because of the Mr. Kanter — One question that came up in my memo to the Planning Board, which I don 't think we had answered, would the senior apartment parcel have to be subdivided off from the remainder of the parcel because of ownership. If the answer is yes then that parcel would become a land locked parcel unless that road were extended and made into a public road because you can 't have a parcel on a public road unless you obtain a variance through town law. Councilman Engman — Why would it be a different ownership ? Mr. Fennessey - Every development that we do stands by itself in terms of how it's financed. It's a separate legal entity. Although we own and manage all of these there are separate legal entities that are involved. Mr. Walker — Technical that big lot is already a sort of land locked parcel already. That parcel, the big parcel, doesn 't have frontage on a public road. You 're precluded from getting a building permit on that parcel until it does have access. Councilman Lesser — since the proposed structures are considerably taller than is allowed without a specific variance under our current zoning, would you be proposing for the Planning Board to use the balloon process to give use a pretty clear idea of what impact, what for us is quite large. Mr. Fennessey — we want to do that for ourselves. We want to know ourselves. We had suggested a three-story building. We could fall within the height restrictions if we used a flat roof, but we think we need to revisit that. The building and the building height. One of the things to do is to have this visualization done through the balloon process. At three stories and two stories. Councilman Lesser — Secondly, since what you 're requesting is compared to the existing zoning a fairly substantial increase in density are ou proposing and concomitant reduction in density reduction in density on subsequent aspects of your development of this large parcel to accommodate it, some sort of super clustering process or are you treating each component of the development entirely separately. Mr. Fennessey — Well, we 've shown here a total of 47 clustered dwellings and in doing that we 're able to achieve a lot more green space than we are with this type of development here. Councilman Lesser — but you 'd probably required to do that anyway given the sensitively of the creek bed there. Mr. Fennessey — We 've laid this out in several fashions. This fashion here, this dark green area, by the way is where the substantial amount of trees right now which we tried to leave in 32 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 there. We also wanted to bring a walking path, a walking path comes along through to the (inaudible) . Have we considered decreasing the density to accommodate the 72 units, no. Mr. Kanter — Basically, Conifer presented a theoretical build out plan based on conventional lot sizes, which is comparable to the 98 lots that are shown here. Some of them are clustered, some of them are conventional size, but it's still equivalent to the remainder of the lands. Councilman Lesser — And finally, as you 've probably seen in Jonathan 's memo to the Board, there 's an issue about the road and the length a road with no secondary emergency access, a number of issues about emergency access. What can you tell us about that, what your interim plans are until such time as the through road might be completed? Mr. Fennessey — In terms of servicing this building here, we have this road in here, which is in there, and we met and talked with one of the assistant fire chiefs, to review what we had in mind, and this 1 believe, if we have our cul-de-sac up here and we have a second means of getting back into the site by that side of the building, by coming through the second here up this drive and into there, that would be the satisfactory solution for this particular development. We had a long-term plan of connecting a road here over into Sky Gardens. Eventually, this road is supposed to go all the way through. Councilman Lesser — For the secondary access will that be plowed in the winter .so that it is indeed useful. Mr. Fennessey — Yes. We 're hopeful that we 'll someday be able to make an arrangement of have this as an emergency means only access to the site. Right now that's not in the cards. Councilman Engman — There was some discussion of the possibility of maybe some shopping, a convenience store, restaurant, Laundromat, etc. It looks like there are going to be several hundred people living there eventually, maybe a thousand people. Is that a realistic proposition if there isn 't access from other people in the area to also shop there. Just to service this one arena that we 're looking at Is that enough people to support that sort of thing. Is that a serious proposition. Mr. Fennessey — If this get all developed and this road gets pushed through, then I think it is very possible. Mr. Kanter — It would also be based on the future development, presumably of something on the Sky Gardens site. Whether it's that condominium development or not, we don 't know. Something most likely will go there and that really would help to push the threshold of a viable, very small scale neighborhood commercial. Councilman Stein — There 's not convenience stores anywhere near that. Mr. Kanter — It seems like this would be developing into an area that really could use something like that. I think that's something the Town Board will have to think about more and whether Conifer would be the one that would be interested in discussing it with us I don 't 33 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 know but it really seems to make a lot of sense that at some point we 're going to need something like that. Councilman Engman — It mentions some wetlands disturbance of cumulatively over half an acre, but it sounds like the only plan is to build ponds to replace those. That to me is not wetland mitigation, that's just adding ponds. Is there any other possibility of building the type of mitigated wetlands like Cornell has done in a couple of places that are truly functioning wetlands and not just ponds ? Mr. Fennessey — I think the size of what we 're talking about is really quite small and the pond would be the most efficient way to do it. If we 're dealing with a much a larger number of acres, we 're not even dealing with an acre, a much larger number of acres then I think something more dramatic could be accomplished. Councilman Engman — Well normally when you have mitigation you have several times the area that is going to be disturbed and if it's well over % an acre that's going to be disturbed then that would mean a couple of acres of mitigation. Just retention ponds for storm water runoff is not a functioning wetland. Pam . concerned about that. Mr. Walker — The one pond, it's labeled a pond I believe right there, that's more of a functional wetland. The back part of it is fairly flat and it fills up for short durations during the storm to mitigate peak runoff, but it's got wetland vegetation in it and it's grown up so it does function as a wetland under smaller storms. Then bigger storms it detain water for a short period of time, but it's always wet. There 's an outlet structure that's slight above grade so there 's a shallow wet area all the time in there. Councilman Engman — Was that put in to mitigate earlier disturbance of other wetland? Mr. Walker - 1 don 't know if there were wetlands in there, but it was part of the stormwater management program. I think it's actually because there were wetlands on that particular part of the site. That was a wet area of the site. It may not have been designated actually a wetland but it was a wetter area. To not loose the wet soils that was built like. that. Councilman Engman — I know the Town Conservation Board is talking about our own wetland preservation ordinance since the Federal government has basically backed off theirs. So I'm a little bit concerned about giving up still more natural wetland without proper mitigation. My final question is on the map we were given, which was very nice and helped me a lot to visualize this, there is shown a pedestrian path going right through both Conifer Subdivision and Sky Gardens. The part that goes through the Conifer Subdivision, is that already a right of way for the Town. Mr. Kanter — The red dashed line is the future roadway, but you actually are very correct that it's also intended to be a pedestrian and bicycle route because that is part of the system that is shown on our Park and Open Space Plan. The idea would be to integrate a bikeway and pedestrian path into that road system when it develops. 34 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilman Engman — Is there room now on that road to have segregated path or would it have to be on the road or sidewalk? Mr. Fennessey — It would be designed in a way that there would be room. Mr. Walker — The existing roadway in is wide enough to have both a path and wide shoulders. Basically there 'd be wide shoulders for the bikeway or there could be some separation. Councilman Engman — So it would not be a separate path. Mr. Walker — Right. Mr. Noteboom — The green areas on the map that are not part of the lots, whose going to own that land? Mr. Fennessey — It will have be a community association. Councilman Burbank — Kind of the timeframe of that process. I know that there is considerable concern in adjacent neighborhoods by the existing levels of traffic already generated by Linderman Creek and a real feeling that has not been comprehensively address and the problem is that we 're doing little pieces of this. No one piece is of a threshold that oh this is going to be dramatically changed, but each one of them on top of each other is adding up. I guess one thing I hope that the Planning Board would really, really look at again is the cumulative effect of traffic and what mitigation factors can be built into this. Mr. Kanter — 1 think John started to mention this, but when Linderman Creek Phases 11 and 111 were proposed before the boards, basically a cumulative traffic study was done to look at this overall future development area as well. So it actually did factor in, the future potential of senior apartments and additional single-family lots. The Planning Board is asking Conifer to revisit that and to update it, but I think the perception from the neighborhood is not necessarily accurate because it has been looked at in a cumulative fashion and I think the Planning Board does tend to do that and they would continue to do it with updates. I think the benefit of having Linderman Creek Phases I, 11, 111 in now that could be used to demonstrate actual numbers of vehicles that are exiting and entering the site to give some better idea of what the senior apartments might also result in, which of course is going to be a slightly different generation factor from the other apartments because of the nature of the population. Councilman Engman — 1 think this is a great project, I like to see the concentrated housing and it sounds like there 's a definite need for this type of senior housing in the town, so I 'd very much like to see this happen. I do hope that when we transmit this to the Planning Board, however, we do ask them to really look very hard at the wetland disturbance and the mitigation of the wetlands lost. Mr. Kanter — We could add it to the resolution. 35 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 TB RESOLUTION NO . 2004-180 : Refer Conifer Realty Proposal for Rezoning for Senior Apartments to Planning Board for a Recommendation WHEREAS , Conifer Realty , LLC has submitted a sketch plan showing the future development of their 57 . 9 +/- acres north of the Linderman Creek Apartments off of Conifer Drive , and the Town of Ithaca Planning Board discussed this sketch plan at their October 19 , 2004 meeting , and WHEREAS , the overall sketch plan includes the possible development of 51 single-family detached homes , 47 clustered patio homes , and 72 rental apartments for seniors (age 55 and over) , and WHEREAS , Conifer Realty , LLC desires to develop the 72-unit senior apartment building as the first phase of this future development, and is requesting the rezoning of approximately 7 . 3 +/- acres from Medium Density Residential ( MDR) to Multiple Residence ( MR) , and WHEREAS , the proposed rezoning and development of 72 units of senior apartments is classified as a Type I action pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617 (SEAR) and the Town of Ithaca Environmental Review Law ( Local Law No . 5 , 1988) , now therefore be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby refers Conifer Realty' s proposal to rezone property off Conifer Drive from Medium Density Residential ( MDR) to Multiple Residence (MR) in conjunction with their proposal to develop 72 units of Senior Apartments to the Planning Board for their recommendation , including particularly the wetlands mitigation aspects , and be it further RESOLVED that the Town Board hereby requests that the Planning Board act as lead agency for purposes of coordinating the environmental review of the project pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617 (SEAR) and the Town of Ithaca Environmental Review Law. MOVED : Councilwoman Grigorov SECONDED : Councilman Lesser VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously. Agenda Item No . 13 — Discussion of Board and Committee Assignments Supervisor Valentino reported having heard from some of the Board members regarding their preferences for committee assignments for 2005 . She asked that anyone wishing changes in their assignments to please let her know. Agenda Item No . 14 — Consider Creation of Board Policy and Protocol Committee 36 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Supervisor Valentino asked the Board to approve her recommendation for creation of a Board Policy and Protocol Committee to put together a written handbook for Board members . The resolution before the Board had the following members : Councilman Engman , Councilwoman Gittelman , Judy Drake , and Tee-Ann Hunter. Councilman Stein questioned the proposed resolution ' s third "whereas" . He stated it struck him as inappropriate that staff should be on a committee that guides board members in making decisions . Councilman Burbank shared some of his concerns and felt the Board , as an elected body , needed to ultimately be taking the responsibility for it' s own procedures . There was general discussion and assurance that the committee would look to the Board for input and would establish procedures to ensure Board involvement and guidance throughout the project . The committee' s role would be to prepare materials for Board approval . Councilman Engman suggested the Board begin the process with the recommended committee members reserving the right to change the committee make-up if things were not working out . Mr. Kanter stated his understanding that the committee' s work may not be limited to the Town Board and may include Planning and Zoning Boards , the interplay between boards , and those boards' dealings with the public . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2004-181 : Approval Creation of Board Policy and Protocol Committee WHEREAS , the Town Board had two working meetings on the Town ' s Mission , during which a recommendation to establish policies and protocol for the Board Members was discussed ; and WHEREAS , the Board has discussed the need to create a Board Policy and Protocol Committee to work on the idea of a manual for the Board that would be presented to them for consideration ; and WHEREAS , the goal of establishing policies and protocol would be that expectations and practices can be clearly articulated to guide Board Members in their actions ; and WHEREAS , the Board Policy and Protocol Committee ' s duties would be to evaluate the need of such manual , what the manual should include and create such document for the Town Board to consider adopting ; now therefore be it RESOLVED , that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the creation of the Board Policy and Protocol Committee ; and be it further RESOLVED , that the Town Board acknowledges the committee appointments made by the Town Supervisor as listed below: Sandra Gittelman , Councilwomen 37 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Herb Engman , Councilman Tee Ann Hunter, Town Clerk Judy Drake, Human Resources Manager, Chairman . MOVED : Supervisor Valentino SECONDED : . Councilwoman Gittelman VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . Agenda item No . 15 - Consider Approval of 2004 Budget Transfers , Amendments and Modifications for the Period June 1 , 2004 to September 30 , 2004 TB RESOLUTION NO . 2004-182 : 2004 Budget Transfers , Amendments and Modifications For The Period June 1 , 2004 to September 30 , 2004 WHEREAS : The Town Supervisor and Town Budget Officer have reviewed all department over and under expended expenditures for the operating period June 1 , 2004 to September 30 , 2004 , and WHEREAS : This review disclosed that certain budgeted expenses require a transfer and or modification of certain expenditures , and WHEREAS : Detailed are those disclosures for this governing Board 's review, discussion and approval , and therefore be it BUDGET JOURNAL Fire Protection Fund Entry No . 1 Debit SF3085 2 % NYS Fire Ins Tax 17363 . 21 Credit SF3410 . 490 City of Ithaca - 2 % Distribution 791 . 79 SF3410 . 493 Village Cayuga Hgts — 2 % Distribution 571 . 42 Entry No . 2 Debit SF1001 Real Property Tax Revenue 21493 . 00 SF1081 In Lieu of Property Taxes 11133 . 70 SF2401 Interest . Earnings 59773 . 27 Credit SF599 Appropriated Fund Balance 91399 . 97 38 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 General Townwide Fund Entry No . 3 Debit A7510 . 401 Dewitt Historical Society 11700 . 00 A1081 In Lieu of Property Taxes 12 , 616 . 41 Credit Al 920 , 401 Tax Assessments & Refunds 59 . 35 A1620 . 200 Bldgs & Grounds - Equipment 382 . 82 A1620 . 243 Bldgs & Grounds - Audio System 11193 . 00 A1620 . 400 Bldgs & Grounds - Contractual 21811 . 62 A1620 . 431 Bldgs & Grounds — Elevator 631 . 06 A7710 . 255 Baldwin/Collee Property Acqusition 31975 . 05 A599 Appropriated Fund Balance 51263 . 51 Entry No. 4 Debit Al 340 , 410 Budget Officer — Conferences 885 . 00 Al 316 , 421 Accounting - Employee Education 75 . 90 Al 316 . 408 Accounting - Postage 176 . 86 Credit Al 316 . 400 Accounting - Contractual 152 . 30 Al 320 , 400 Auditors 953 . 00 Al 340 , 420 Budget Officer — Publications 32 . 46 Entry No . 5 Debit A1680 . 421 Info Technology - Education 88 . 50 A1680 . 492 Info Technology - GIS Support 166 . 25 All 680 .495 Info Technology - Network Support 3 , 113 . 85 All 680 .496 Info Technology - DSL / ISP/ Clarity 72 . 00 Credit A1680 . 401 Info Technology - Maint & Repairs 256 . 00 A1680 . 461 Info Technology - Tools & Supplies 228 . 00 A1680 . 481 Info Technology - Web Services 161 . 78 A1680 . 493 Info Technology - SDG 450 . 00 All 680 . 498 Info Technology - Support Justice Courts 130 . 00 Al 680 . 404 Info Technology — 2515 Large Doc Copier 60 . 08 A599 Appropriated Fund Balance 2 , 154 . 74 General Part Town Fund Entry No . 6 39 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Debit B1680 . 492 Info Technology - GIS Support 966 . 25 B1680 . 493 Info Technology - Bldg & Zoning 849 . 50 B1680 . 495 Info Technology — Network support 325 . 00 Credit B1680 . 404 Info Technology — 2515 Lg Copier 60 . 08 B599 Appropriated Fund Balance 2 . 080 . 67 General Part Town Highway Fund Entry No . 7 Debit DB1680 . 491 Info Technology — Software 11205 . 80 DB1680 . 492 Info Technology — Arcview & Eagle Pt 760 . 00 DB1680 . 493 Info Technology — Highway Helper 1 , 055 . 00 DB599 Appropriated Fund Balance 479 . 20 Credit DB1680 . 495 Info Technology — Network Support 31500 . 00 Water Fund Entry No . 8 Debit F1680 . 495 Info Technology — Network Support 375 . 00 Credit F1680 .404 Info Technology — Lg Copier 63 . 88 F599 Appropriated Fund Balance 311 . 12 Sewer Fund Entry No . 9 Debit G1680 . 495 Info Technology — Network Support 75 . 00 Credit G1680 . 404 Info Technology - Lg Copier 63 . 88 G599 Appropriated Fund Balance 11 . 12 General Townwide Fund Entry No . 10 Debit A1450 .400 Town Clerk — Contractual 17800 . 00 40 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Credit A1450 .403 Town Clerk — Election Inspectors 11800 . 00 General Part Town Fund Entry No . 11 Debit B2110 Estimated Revenue - Zoning Fees 11367 . 20 Credit B8010 . 400 Zoning — Contractual 96 . 40 B8010 . 408 Zoning — Postage 272 . 91 B8010 .415 Zoning — Telephone 33 . 86 B8010 . 440 Zoning — Personal Protection 107 . 60 B8010 . 450 Zoning — Gasoline 112 . 75 B599 Appropriated Fund Balance 743 . 68 General Part Town Highway Fund Entry No . 12 Debit DB5110 . 461 Tools & Supplies 21000 . 00 D135112 . 511 Caldwell Road 39 , 500 . 00 DB5130 . 200 Large Equipment 241000 . 00 DB5140 . 409 Advertising 500 . 00 D135140 .410 Conferences & Travel 500 . 00 DB5142 . 452 Salt 51000 . 00 Credit D135110 .450 Gas , Oil , Diesel , Fuel 10 , 000 . 00 D135112 . 453 Road Repairs 16 , 625 . 00 D135112 . 502 Evergreen Lane 10 , 200 . 00 D135112 . 510 Rich Road 23 , 500 . 00 D135142 . 461 Tools & Supplies 81000 . 00 D135142 . 461 Tools & Supplies 100 . 00 DB599 Appropriated Fund Balance 39075 . 00 General Townwide Fund Entry No. 13 Debit A5010 . 400 Contractual 11000 . 00 A5010 . 411 Conferences & Mileage 356 . 00 A5010 . 440 Safety & Training 367 . 00 A7110 . 404 Plants & Landscaping 11190 . 38 A7110 .410 Conferences & Mileage 500 . 00 A7110 . 420 Dues & Publications 65 . 00 41 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 A7110 . 512 Woolf Lane Park 10 , 000 . 00 Credit Al 620 , 413 Bldgs & Ground 1700 . 00 A5132 . 415 Telephones 11500 . 00 A5132 . 416 Garage Maintenance 21000 . 00 A7110 . 415 Parks — Telephone 525 . 00 A599 Appropriated Fund Balance 71753 . 38 General Part Town Fund Entry No . 14 Debit B8020 . 410 Planning — Work Study Intern 200 . 00 B8020 . 400 Planning — Contractual 313 . 92 B8020 . 410 Planning — Work Study Intern 126 . 13 Credit B8020 . 450 Planning — Gasoline 200 . 00 B8020 . 200 Planning — PEZ Desk Wireless 440 . 05 Headset Sewer Fund Entry No . 15 Debit G599 Appropriated Fund Balance 51484 . 00 Credit G1910 . 400 Liability Insurance 31374 . 00 G9040 . 800 Workers' Compensation 21110 . 00 Water Fund Entry No . 16 Debit F5031 /H Interfund Transfer — Capital Projects 271762 . 00 F599 Appropriated Fund Balance 37238 . 00 Credit F8340 . 101 Highway Labor 301000 . 00 F9030 . 800 Social Security 11000 . 00 Capital Project Fund (West Hill Water Tank) Entry No . 17 Debit H16-8340 . 216 Town Work Force 91536 . 00 42 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Credit H16-9901 . 904 Interfund Transfer- Water Fund 91536 . 00 ( Bostwick Rd Water Tank & Transmission Main ) Entry No. 18 Debit H 17-8340 . 216 Town Work Force 12 , 172 . 00 Credit H17-9901 . 904 InterFund Transfer — Water Fund 121172 . 00 (Coy Glen Pumpstation/Pipeline) Entry No . 19 Debit H18-8340 . 216 Town Work Force 61054 . 00 Credit H18-9901 . 904 Interfund Transfer — Water Fund 61054 . 00 Water Fund Entry No . 20 Debit F599 Appropriated Fund Balance 11200 . 00 Credit F8340 . 400 Contractual — Vehicle Maintenance 400 . 00 F8340 . 450 Fuel 800 . 00 Sewer Fund Entry No . 21 Debit G599 Appropriated Fund Balance 21600 . 00 Credit G8120 . 450 Fuel 27600 . 00 RESOLVED : That this governing Town Board approves , authorizes and directs the Town Supervisor and Town Budget Officer to record these budget changes . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilwoman Gittelman 43 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , -aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously Agenda item No . 16 - Consider Name Change of the Highway Department to the Public Works Department (Attachment #7 — State Comptroller's Opinion 80-251 ) The Board deferred discussion of this item for further review of job descriptions for the Highway Superintendent and Director of Engineering and a complete understanding of any impacts on those positions of a name change . Councilman Engman reviewed the provided materials and noted there was no mention of Parks and Trails in the Highway Superintendent' s duties . Attorney Barney recommended if the Town proceeds with this that they do it by local law and spell out what duties are being transferred to the Public Works Department . Councilman Stein reported discussion of the item at the Public Works Committee and a need to decide whether to do this by resolution of the board or by local law. Supervisor Valentino concurred that this is something to be decided and they would be seeking advise from the attorney regarding the pros and cons of each alternative . Agenda Item No . 17 — Consent Agenca TB RESOLUTION NO , 2004-183 : Consent Agenda Items BE IT RESOLVED , that the governing Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hereby approves and/or adopts the resolutions for Consent Agenda Items as presented . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Stein VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . TB RESOLUTION NO . 2004-183a : Town Board Minutes of September 30th and October 7th 2004 WHEREAS , the Town Clerk has presented the minutes for Town Board Meetings held on September 30 , 2004 , October 7 , 2004 to the governing Town Board for their review and approval of filing ; now therefore be it RESOLVED , the governing Town Board does hereby approve for filing the minutes for the meetings held on September 30 , 2004 , October 7 , 2004 and as presented at the November 15 , 2004 board meeting . 44 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ITHACA TOWN BOARD MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2004 AT 5 : 30 PM 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, NEW YORK 1 . Call to Order 2 . Pledge of Allegiance 3 . Report of Tompkins County Legislature 4 . Report of City of Ithaca Common Council 5 . Report of Fire Commissioners 6 . 6 : 00 p . m . - Persons to be Heard and Board Comments 7 . Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca , Chapter 221 -Sign Law 8 . Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca , Chapter 271 , Amending SLUD # 1 to Allow a Spa Facility at La Tourelle 9 . 6 : 15 p . m . - Discussion of Benchmark's Report and Recommendations Regarding the Lake Source Cooling Monitoring Program 10 . Discussion of a Resolution in Support of the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan 11 . Consider Referral to the Planning Board of Conifer Realty' s Proposal for Rezoning Property off Conifer Drive from Medium Density Residential to Multiple Residential in conjunction with their Proposal to Develop 72-units of Senior Apartments 12 . Consider Adoption of Public Interest Order Authorizing the Construction of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission East Hill Water Tank and Water Mains , the Expenditure of Funds for Such Purpose , the Issuance and Sale of Joint and Several Serial Bonds for a Portion of the Costs of Such Project , and the Execution of an Amendment to the Agreement of Municipal Cooperation Governing Such Water Tanks and Water Mains 13 . Discussion of 2005 Board and Committee Assignments 14 . Consider Creation of Board Policy and Protocol Committee 15 . Consider Approval of 2004 Budget Transfers , Amendments and Modifications for the Period June 1 , 2004 to September 30 , 2004 16 . Consider Name Change of the Highway Department to the Public Works Department 17 . Consent a . Town Board Minutes — September 30 , 2004 & October 7 , 2004 b . Bolton Point Warrants c . Floating holiday 18 . Report of Town Committees a . Agricultural Committee b . Agricultural Land Preservation Advisory Committee c. Capital Projects and Fiscal Planning Committee d . Cayuga Lake Watershed Intermunicipal Organization e . City / Town Trail Committee f. Codes and Ordinances Committee g . Joint Youth Commission h . Lake Source Data Sharing Committee i . Pegasys Oversight Committee j . Personnel Committee k . Public Works Committee I . Recreation and Human Services Committee m . Recreation Partnership n . Records Management Advisory Board o . Safety Committee p . Sewer Joint Committee q . Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission r. Supervisor' s Advisory Committee s . Transportation Committee 19 . Report of Town Officials a . Town Clerk b . Highway Superintendent c . Director of Engineering d . Director of Planning e . Director of Building and Zoning f. Budget Officer g . Manager of Human Resources h . Network/Records Specialist i . Recreation and Youth Coordinator j . Attorney for the Town 20 . Review of Correspondence a . Petition from Clover Ln Residents 21 . Consider Adjournment November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Regular Meeting of the Ithaca Town Board Monday, November 15 , 2004 at 5 : 30 pm 215 North Tioga St, Ithaca , NY 14850 THOSE PRESENT : Supervisor Valentino , Councilwoman Grigorov ; Councilman Lesser, Councilman Burbank , Councilwoman Grigorov, Councilman Engman , Councilman Stein , Councilman Engman STAFF PRESENT : Tee-Ann Hunter, Town Clerk ; Dan Walker, Director of Engineering ; Fred Noteboom , Highway Superintendent ; Jonathan Kanter, Director of Planning ; Al Carvill , Budget Officer; Judy Drake , Human Resources Manager; Andy Frost, Director of Building and Zoning OTHERS PRESENT : John Barney, Attorney for the Town ; Bob Romanowski , Fire Commissioner; Frank Proto , County Legislator; Rich DePaolo , 126 Northview Rd . CALL TO ORDER : Supervisor Valentino called the meeting to order at 5 : 30 p . m . and led the assemblage in the Pledge of Allegiance . ANNOUNCEMENTS Supervisor Valentino told the Board Robin Korherr, the City Common Council Representative, would not be appearing before the board because she has the flu. The breakfast meeting with the President of Cornell has been moved to March 17, 2005 at 9: 00 a . m. AGENDA ADDITION Supervisor Valentino would like to discuss a personnel matter. The Board will need to decide if they want to deal with the matter in open session or executive session . Agenda item No . 5 — Report of Fire Commissioners (Attachment #1 — written report) Bob Romanowski appeared before the Board and read his monthly Fire Commission report. Regarding the Commission ' s recommended strategic planning process , Councilman Burbank asked if that process would be done by committee or would they hire a consultant . Mr. Romanowski explained the Chief is currently out on medical leave , but as soon as he returns there would be consultations between the City and the Town on setting up a committee to start the strategic planning . This will probably include somebody Supervisor Valentino will designate as the Town 's representative and the City will do the same . Money will be requested for the process . As soon as the process is decided upon , Mr. Romanowski will inform the board . Supervisor Valentino and the Board will have input into the process . 1 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Supervisor Valentino explained that under the new fire contract the Town receives a monthly financial report from the City . Calculations are based on the percentage of what the Town owes the City for the month . The City is paid on a monthly basis and the Town sees the breakdown of the total budget , how much is expended , ,and what is left until the end of year. Mr. Romanowski provides the Town with monthly year-to-date expenditure reports . Councilman Burbank asked what the thinking was behind the decision not to fund volunteers . Mr. Romanowski explained the Chief felt he did not have the money to pay career fire fighters overtime to train the volunteers . For bunkers it takes about 110 hours of career fire fighters time to get them trained and make sure that they are up to date on the training . New York State requires someone to have at least 100 hours of training for interior fire fighting . The requirements are being very stringent. Agenda Item No . 7 — Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca . Chapter 221 — Sign Law The Board received a copy of the proposed amendment in their packets . Attorney Barney invited input from the Board on his definition of a political sign . Councilman Burbank asked if one combines a commercial message with a political message , would the definition rule it a commercial message . Attorney Barney told him that was the intention of the law. Councilwoman Gittelman did not understand how worship , ethics , philosophy of life or similar beliefs fell under political . Attorney Barney told her he had somewhat the same reservations . He sited as an example , abortion , is it a political issue , ethical issue , certainly it' s a free speech issue . The object of the proposed legislation is to enumerate where the free speech protection applies . Councilwoman Grigorov asked if there would be a time limit on any of these types of signs . Mr. Barney told her the proposed amendment moves the political poster from a temporary sign to a permanent sign . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 174: Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca Chapter 221 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca regulating signs changing the classification of exempt political signs from temporary signs to Permanent signs BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hold a public hearing at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, on the 13th day of December 2004, at 6: 15 p. m. for the purpose of considering a proposed local law amending Chapter 221 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca regulating signs, which amendment would remove the thirty- day limitation on the duration of time exempt political signs may remain on a person 's property; and it is further 2 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 RESOLVED, that at such time and place all persons interested in such local law may be heard concerning the same; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing in the Ithaca Journal published in the City of Ithaca, Ithaca, New York, and to post a copy of same on the signboard of the Town of Ithaca, said publication and posting to occur not less than ten days before the day designated above for the public hearing. MOVED: Councilman Burbank SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Lesser, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye. Carried unanimously. Agenda Item No . 8 - Consider Setting a Public Hearing to Amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca , Chapter 271 , Amending SLUD #1 to Allow a Spa Facility at La Tourelle (Attachment #2 - memo from M . Smith and site plan ) Mr. Kanter explained this item went to the Planning Board recently and the Planning Board looked at the site plan for the addition and recommended that the Town Board consider adopting the amendment . The only change in the SLUD would be the addition of the SPA facility as a permitted use . Attorney Barney drafted a local law, which went to the Planning Board . The Planning Board gave a positive recommendation on the proposed amendment . The only action required is to set a public hearing . Councilman Lesser was interested in the level of use and the proportion of patrons that are likely to come from the hotel versus those who will come for the spa only. He noted the site plan has 60 lockers and 10 employees . Councilman Lesser stated he had to assume there' s a fairly high level of use anticipated and wondered if that was a correct assumption and what the level of traffic the project would generate . Wally Wiggins , La Tourelle Mr. Wiggins explained there would be five treatment rooms . The reason they have suggested that number of lockers is to accommodate the people waiting to be treated , the people being treated , and people who stay for kind of a let down after they are treated . It isn 't anticipated that there will be 60 people in treatment . The maximum number of people there for treatment would be 30 . There are five rooms and there could be two people in each room . Mr. Wiggins felt the total number, including staff and everybody else , would be about 30 . Mr. Barney asked why then have 60 lockers ? Mr. Wiggins replied that if you didn 't put them in to begin with and then needed them you couldn 't fit them in . There isn 't a need for this number unless there are members who come and keep a locker. 3 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilman Lesser asked Mr. Wiggins if he was anticipating a membership arrangement . Mr. Wiggins responded local people would buy a membership to be able to use the facilities including the small exercise room , steam room , sauna without actually using the massage treatments . The hotel will have a total of 55 rooms ; there are 35 rooms there now, they are adding 19 rooms . Councilman Burbank asked Mr. Kanter to explain the process for the project. Mr. Kanter explained the Planning Board looked at the preliminary site plan . This project is a little unusual process-wise in that normally zoning changes come to the Town Board first, but this is so much site plan oriented . The details of the addition are primarily permitted by the Special Land Use District . The additional rooms fall within the parameters of the current SLUD , the exercise room is within the definition of hotel facilities . It was really just the spa facility itself that did not conform to the zoning . So the Planning Board looked at the details , the parking , the traffic . Mr. Kanter thought it would be helpful for the Town Board to have the minutes from the Planning Board meeting . . The Board asked that they receive a copy of those minutes . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 175: Resolution setting a public hearing to consider a local law to amend chapter 271 of the code of the Town of Ithaca entitled "Zoning: Special Land Use Districts " to allow a spa facility at La Tourelle BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca hold a public hearing at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Ithaca, New York, on the 13th day of December 2004 at 6:30 p. m. for the purpose of considering a proposed local law amending Chapter 271 of the code of the Town of Ithaca, Section 271 -3, to permit a spa facility in the La Tourel/e Planned Development Zone (formally a Special Land Use District) and making certain other amendments to update the regulations in said Planned Development Zone; and it is further RESOLVED, that at such time and place all persons interested in such local law may be heard concerning the same; and it is further RESOLVED, that the Town Clerk of the Town of Ithaca is hereby authorized and directed to publish a notice of such public hearing in the Ithaca Journal published in the City of Ithaca, Ithaca, New York, and to post a copy of same on the signboard of the Town of Ithaca, said publication and posting to occur not less than ten days before the day designated above for the public hearing. MOVED: Councilwoman Gittelman SECONDED: Councilwoman Grigorov VOTE: Supervisor Valentino, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye; Councilman Lesser, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilwoman Gittelman, aye. Carried unanimously. 4 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Agenda Item No . 3 — Report of Tompkins County Legislature Frank Proto , Tompkins County Legislator, appeared before the board . Mr. Proto reported as a member of the Water Resources Council telling the Board he was chair of a subcommittee on Storm Water Regulations . The Committee's charge is to come up with a draft of a sample set of regulations for use by municipalities . For the sake of continuity it was thought that they come up with one set and get them out to the various towns and villages . The Committee' s plan is to have the draft done by December and have them out to municipalities by the end of December. Councilwoman Gittelman asked Mr. Proto if this was an effort to coordinate all the stormwater facilities . Mr. Proto responded that each municipality can develop their own . A densely populated town might find that some regulations need to be very tight . A less populated town may be more forgiving . This is not the same as with the recreational . watercraft, but there are parts that probably should be developed along a consistent line . The municipalities will have to piece together what applies to them . Councilwoman Grigorov responded that she was more concerned about the crossover from one municipality to the other. Mr. Proto felt shared borders would drive the discussion . Supervisor Valentino stated that the Water Resources Council looks at the whole community in the bigger picture and makes recommendations . They are very helpful in working with the town to ensure the town meets its deadlines to cover the mandates . Mr. Proto stated the Council does not have the staff to help the municipalities develop their own regulations , but they can act as a resource . He invited the board to sit in on the county budget vote tomorrow night. He informed the board that they require apprenticeship programs for certain contracts in the county ; and that they will set a public hearing to set the draft comprehensive plan for the county . Supervisor Valentino commented that there is a resolution before the Town Board to send the County Comprehensive Plan to the planning board for its recommendation . Jonathan Kanter commented that Edward Marx is coming before the Town Board tonight to talk about it. Mr. Proto asked that if the Town is considering applying for another Archives grant , they shortened the deadline and there are fewer monies available . He also notee that the Universal Fund Charge on your telephone bills is monies that the FCC has allowed phone companies to collect to make internet access available for numerous public functions . The county collects several million dollars yearly for this fee , and the county gets back about $26 , 000 until about two years ago . Libraries had difficulty getting the money . He is bringing a resolution to the County Board to raise people ' s awareness on this issue . Other revenue sources are being looked into . Councilwoman Grigorov asked where the money was going . Mr. Proto exclaimed it was sitting at the telephone companies . He would like to question the FCC as to who earns the interest on the money . The Times reported IBM has been accessing the money and using it 5 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 to help school systems in California over purchase the type of equipment needed to access the internet. He felt it was robbery because the schools that really need it are not receiving it . The FCC distributes the money . The library needs to go through 17 steps in order to receive back $ 5000 . it is sent to the FCC for approval and there is a lot of administration with it . The phone companies collect it on behalf of the FCC . Frontier just tacked on another $0 . 99 fee and after investigating it , Mr. Proto found out it was just because they can and it was the answer he received when he questioned it. TCAT negotiations are moving towards the January 1st deadline to get everyone on -line . A number of the applications have been signed . The big question is dealing with the two unions . TCAT does not deal with the unions . The unions and drivers are through Cornell and the City of Ithaca . TCAT does not have a union . The legislature wants to make sure there is no glitch in the service come January 1st . The two negotiators have been decent to work with . He is hopeful to have it wrapped up by the end of the year. The empire zones will be coming up again . The 911 project will be starting up after the budget season . Mr. Proto asked if the board wanted any messages sent to the legislation . Councilman Lesser suggested that the County consider meeting more of the Sheriff's request for additional officers . He knows Mr. Proto is a big supporter, but wanted to state for the record that there were a number of functions that the Sheriff serves . He did not think it was a secret to anybody that compliance with traffic regulations has been declining over time and it is probably because people realize that the chances of actually getting apprehended for something are close to zero . The Town has attempted to have additional coverage by paying overtime to the Sheriff' s department . It is hard to get a steady , regular program because there . are not enough deputy sheriffs or they already have too much overtime . Mr. Proto responded that the legislature has been told that there are two officers to cover the county on most occasions . He appreciates the concern . Supervisor Valentino felt it is becoming a � bigger and bigger problem . It is getting close to a crisis stage in the County and something needs to be done about it. Persons to be Heard and Board Comments Councilman Engman thought that there was going to be a meeting with Town Board Members and the City of Ithaca regarding the use of the City facilities for the youth project. He did not know the status of the proposed meeting . Supervisor Valentino responded Robin Koherr was going to be in contact with her to set up that meeting . Agenda Item No . 12 - Consider Adoption of Public Interest Order Authorizing the Construction of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission East Hill Water Tank and Water Mains , the Expenditure of Funds for Such Purpose , the Issuance and Sale of Joint and Several Serial Bonds for a Portion of the Costs of Such Project, and the Execution of an Amendment to the Agreement of Municipal Cooperation Governing Such Water Tanks and Water Mains (Attachment #3 — " East Hill Tank Proposal " , 6 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Paul Tunison , Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission Mr. Tunison explained that a presentation was given last week to some members of the board . The tank on East Hill was first proposed in 1974 when the commission system was first designed. The purpose of the tank, as being proposed now, to improve hydraulic efficiency of the Commission 's system and also to add storage on the southern end of the Commission 's system. This is not related, but the Commission 's office addition project was also part of those original 1974 plans, but that was eliminated also to keep the costs of the initial project down. We are now moving ahead with that and / just want to add that both of these projects have been on the Commission 's capital project list for many years. The Commission now desires to move a head with it. This would be a commission tank. It would be operated by the Bolton Point water system and it is a benefit not just to the Town of Ithaca, but to also the four other member municipalities. Councilman Stein asked Mr. Tunison to explain hydraulic efficiency and if what the power costs for operating the system . Mr. Tunison responded that was part of it , but it was also for maintaining an even pressure in the commission ' s transmission line . It would also help in reducing costs . Mr. Tunison - One point that was brought out at the meeting last Tuesday that really wasn 't emphasized at the October 18th meeting is that another benefit this tank will provide the commission is that it currently has one storage tank off its main transmission system, which is a million and a half gallon tank located on the corner of Triphammer and Burdick Hill Road. This tank was constructed when the rest of the Commissions facilities were constructed over 28 years ago and it has never been repainted and it is need of painting and that really should be done in the next couple of years. There was an original proposal to build a companion tank next to or near the Burdick Hill Tank and after that tank was constructed, the current Burdick Hill Tank could be taken off line and painted. The problem with that scenario is that constructing extra storage on that portion of the Commission 's transmission system is much less desirable than adding storage on the downstream part of this system or downstream from the old crest booster station, which the proposed East Hill Tank would be and this East Hill Tank could be used as a tank for storage that would allow the Burdick Hill Tank to be taken off line for painting. Supervisor Valentino — That would be 30 days, right, that it would have to go down ? Mr. Tunison — Yes. Also another topic that was discussed was why build a 3 million gallon tank now when you could really get by with a one and half million gallon tank. The Town 's engineering department has estimated the cost of the transmission main extension and the construction of a 3 million gallon tank at 52. 2 million. They have also estimated the savings of the project cost could only be reduced by 5500, 000 by reducing the volume of the tank 7 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 from 3 million to one and a half million and when the need for adding that additional million and a half gallons in the future was realized would then cost a $ 1 million in today's dollars to add that million and a half gallons at that time. So there is an efficiency or a cost savings in construction for building the entire 3 million gallons at this time. The Commission is proposing to bond $ 1 . 5 million of the total $2. 2 million construction costs and at the meeting last Tuesday it was discussed how this would affect the water rate and I mentioned at that time that the bonding with the principle interest repay the bond could be $ 100, 000 per year, but the Commission 's rate increase that was approved by the five member municipalities for 2005 that will cover repaying the principle interest on that one and a half million dollar bond. So that should not have any future affect on the water rate. Other things may come up that will affect it, but this particular project shouldn 't. Councilman Burbank — I thought that it would in fact increase the per household costs. Mr. Tunison — Right. We mentioned that the Commission water rate for each cent in the Commission 's water rate raises $ 10, 000 in revenue. At ten cents per thousand gallons, the average or minimum bill would increase $ 1 per quarter based on that. one of the reasons the Commission asked approval to raise the water rate this year was to support capital projects coming up in 2005 and that increase in the water rate to support that if it was carried over in to the next year would support repayment of the bond principle interest on the one and a half million dollars. Councilman Burbank — So we have already anticipated this in the new water rate is what you are saying. We have already anticipated the costs of this project in the new water rate. Mr. Tunison — We have anticipated the costs of several capital projects, this the building addition, and others that the Commission has on its list and the water rate was increased $0. 17 per thousand gallons from 2004 to 2005 to support those and if that rate is kept where it is, that money would be available through the water rate in proceeding years to retire the debt to the tank. Also there were discussions about any benefit that this tank might provide the City of Ithaca and Cornell University and shouldn 't those two entities or water systems also contribute to the cost of the tank. As far as the City of Ithaca is concerned, the benefit that the City would receive from this would only be complementary whether the City eventually partnered with the Commission for water supply or they went off on their own and found another source of water or built a treatment plant, the only benefit they could potentially receive from this tank was that in the case of an emergency there would be storage off a transmission line close to their treatment facility that could potentially supply them with water during that emergency and that would essentially just make it easier for the Commission to operate its system to supply to the City in the case of an emergency. The Commission has supplied water to the City of Ithaca system during emergencies and the City of Ithaca has similarly supplied areas of the Commission service area during emergencies. So there is really no true benefit or long lasting or on-going benefit to the City of Ithaca system. 8 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 We also talked about benefits that Cornell University water system might receive from this and to a limited extent. There will be limited benefits to Cornell University with this East Hill Tank, but these are mostly residual benefits. We mentioned that the Cornell facilities along Route 366 in the Apple Orchard area they will receive increased pressure and increased fire flow when this tank is constructed, but they will only be receiving that benefit because the hydraulic efficiency and fortitude of the Town of Ithaca 's distribution system in this area will be increased by this tank. So it is actually fortifying the Town of Ithaca system that supplies this area of Cornell. The other benefit that Cornell can receive is that they have a supply of water to the north campus area off the Commission 's transmission system and this is only activate during periods of high use. As I mentioned at the other meeting is that typically first thing in the morning when the cafeterias are going and the students are taking showers, but it is also available there for fire flow, which will supplement their supply of water. And the addition of this tank off a transmission line would stabilize and increase the pressure that is available to that take off point for Cornell from the Commission 's transmission line and is also a potential for a larger volume of water in case of a fire flow, but Cornell University is satisfied with the way the system operates as is. So they are not pushing the commission to construct this tank and give them a benefit in this area . Councilman Engman — They don 't problems in periods of high flows when everyone is taking a shower? Is that what you are saying ? Mr. Tunison — Some water does come from the Commission transmission main during those periods. I think it is about 40, 000 gallons per day, but the way the system currently operates without the East Hill Tank is adequate to meet their need. Then lastly, I discussed at the previous two meetings is that there would be some cost savings associated with having this tank off the Commission 's transmission system. At the last meeting I was asked to identify those and I have those calculations and I just want to mention again is that you cannot look at these cost savings alone as justifying the costs of this project, but it will save money. One we have mentioned before is that by having a stable head or pressure in the Commission 's transmission main with the East Hill Tank, the oak crest pumps which supplies water to the five municipalities from the Commission 's system will now operate at maximum efficiency where right now there depending on how many tanks are being filled at a particular time, it can range anywhere from a maximum efficiency down to a 30% efficiency. It is almost impossible to exactly calculate what the increased efficiency would be because of all the different hydraulic combinations in the system, with just a 10% increase in efficiency would save the Commission $4000 per year. Again it is a small amount, but it is significant for the Commission. More pumping will be able to be performed during off-peak electrical use. Councilman Lesser — Percent or percentage points I think is the questions. Mr. Tunison — Percent. So say if we are operating now at an average of 50% efficiency and that was increased to 60% efficient that would be the savings of $4, 000. Councilman Lesser — Ten percentage points. 9 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Mr. Tunison — 65% of the water is currently pumped during off-peak electrical use periods, which is substantially or somewhat cheaper than on-peak period and my calculations believe that 83% of the water could be pumped off-peak with the addition of this tank is that we have more storage out there that we can pump to during those periods. The 3 millions gallons in addition to the million and a half gallons that is currently stored in the Commission 's Burdick Hill Tank and that could save . . . I 've calculated it to be $ 14, 500 savings by shifting more of the pumping to off-peak periods. Then during somewhat related to that, during periods of high-demand for water, which we will be seeing more frequently as normally occur during summer or dry summers and we will be seeing more frequently in selling 2005 from Town of Ithaca 's . . . all of the Town of Ithaca 's West Hill is supplied by the Commission 's system. By having this East Hill Storage Tank, we will be able to hopefully for an extended period into the future continue to operate only one pump at each of the Commission 's three facilities during on-peak electrical use hours. And what this does is, is saves on the demand costs that NYSEG charges and if we are able to keep from having to do that, this is not a current costs savings, but it would be an avoided cost savings of approximately $ 10, 000 per year. So again, each of these are somewhat minimal in the overall realm of the cost of the project and the Commission 's total bill, but they are an added benefit. And lastly, the Commission 's Oakcrest Pump Station, that currently qualifies by the means that we operate it for what NYSEG calls its high-low factor benefit. And what that is, is that it has to do with how much power kilowatts we use on peak and how much of the pumping we can actually. . . electrical use from pumping is actually occurring during off-peak periods the Commission saves 20% off its electric bill and that 20% currently works out to about $4000 per year. And if we have to run two pumps on-peak with the increase demand then that 20% goes away. There have been times in the past, in 1999, 2000, and 2002 drought even with less than the current demand that we have and not even considering the supply of water to West Hill, during those periods we had to run two pumps at each of the Commission 's facilities to meet the needs. So it is a reality that has happened in the past. One final operational advantage is that up until two years ago, we were able to operate or write-off the storage in the Burdick Hill Storage Tank from Friday evening to Saturday morning and from Saturday evening to Sunday morning, but beginning two years the increase of demand in the system there is not enough storage to do that so we have had one of our electrical technicians come in from 10 o 'clock Friday evening til 2 o 'clock Saturday morning and from 10 o 'clock Saturday evening til 2 o 'clock Sunday morning to operate the plant for those four hour periods just to carry us over to the next Saturday and Sunday shift. This takes him away from his normal electrical/mechanical duties because he takes Friday off each week. And with having this extra storage in the system, we would be able to then ride out those periods from Friday into Saturday and Saturday to Sunday and he would be back to doing the job that he was hired for. 10 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Councilman Engman asked if the current system was sufficient for quantity and pressure for irrigating the Cornell Athletic fields once completed . Mr. Tunison said that it is sufficient . Mr. Walker added a problem with the athletic fields is that there currently is not a water main to serve them . Councilman Stein asked what would happen if the Commission were required to paint the Burdick Hill Tank in the next two years and asked if the tank just cannot be painted . Mr. Tunison responded that the Commission could not say no to the regulatory agencies and they couldn 't let it not happen . The Commission would need to come back to the municipalities in that situation to build a companion Burdick Hill Tank so that it could be taken off-line . Councilman Stein was amazed that the tank could not be painted without building another tank . Mr. Tunison responded that was correct. Councilman Stein asked if the tank could be bi-passed and have pumps running all the time . At a previous meeting , Councilman Stein thought Mr. Tunison had said it would be difficult but it could be done by bi-passing that tank . Mr. Tunison explained that in order to set the system up to operate that way, they would be pumping from the plant through the Oakcrest pumps with no storage in between and then on to fill the six base tanks in the member municipalities . It could be set up to work in an emergency situation . Councilman Stein stated that it could be painted then . As near as he could tell , the Burdick Hill painting of the tank was the strongest argument for the project. He was asking himself if there was another way the tank could be painted other than building a new tank . Mr. Walker explained that they would need to run three pumps at the water plant 24- hours per day, plus two-three pumps would be running at Oakcrest . Right now, the plant is staffed 18-hours per day . There would need to be staff at the plant 24-hours per day for 30 days plus the pumps would be stressed and there would be a good chance that a pump and motor would need to be replaced with that kind of stress . Also , there is not redundancy . It can be done , but it is not a smart thing to do . Councilman Stein stated that they were talking about a period of 30 days . Supervisor Valentino responded that was correct and in that 30-day period if one other thing happened such as a fire or a water main break , then they would be in an extremely serious situation . The Commission had spent of a lot of time studying the project . Consultants had been hired to look at the whole system and all recommendations recommend the extra storage tank be built . The City reminded Supervisor Valentino how important the tank would be to the hydraulics and the security to the whole system . Many experts have told the Commission that this project needs to be done . There is no doubt that the tank is going to need to be taken off-line in the next two years for preventive maintenance . Supervisor Valentino felt that if they did not go through with the project , they would be jeopardizing all the residents in the five municipalities that are serviced by this facility . Supervisor Valentino reminded the board that the four other municipalities and the Commission have recommended and passed the project . The other partners realize that the main benefit is going to be to the Town of Ithaca , 11 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 but it will help the whole system . All partners are willing to put up the money to move forward with the project . Councilwoman Gittelman asked if the tank would be available when other tanks needed maintenance . Mr. Walker responded the Town has painted 5 or 6 tanks of the past few years that had not been painted in 20 years . The difference in the Town 's tanks is that they serve a much smaller individual service area . They needed to run pumps continuously at that time period , but it was only a matter of 5 % of the whole system . The Burdick Hill Tank is the heart of the system . They have been building a model of the whole system . Mr. Walker had the model re-run with the East Hill tank and without the East Hill Tank taking into consideration the new demands of West Hill . In order to optimize the system and maintain the tanks at the proper levels , they need the East Hill Tank . The pumps have enough capacity to pump the water needed during the day, but during peak periods of time because the line is so long there 's resistance in the pipes and they cannot get the needed water to where it needs to be . The pumps cannot keep up with holding all the tanks at proper elevation . The system was giving warnings and the system was shut down because it wouldn 't work . With the East Hill Tank in , it does work . Mr. Walker stated they can operate , but they would be operating in an emergency situation continuously and it is not acceptable . Councilman Stein expressed his unhappiness with the discussion . This was the third discussion he listened to regarding the tank and the strongest argument is the repainting of the Burdick Hill Tank did not come up in the first two discussions and never before did he hear the statement made by Mr. Walker and Supervisor Valentino that there were reports that indicate that this thing is an absolute necessity. To him , the arguments seem to appear later in the argument and it makes him feel uncomfortable to be presented arguments that keep changing and raising an intensity for making this expenditure . He stated he had nothing against the tank , but he would have preferred to have heard the arguments made earlier and would have liked to read the statements that have been made that say it is a necessity . Mr. Tunison stated that the O ' Brien and Geere report reiterates the same information that was given to the board . The Commission knows the value of the tank and its benefits . Supervisor Valentino mentioned that in support of the Commissions proposal , but there was nothing different in the consultant' s report. Supervisor Valentino apologized for not making a better presentation at the first meeting . It was a given to the parties involved that is was such an important project and she thinks they failed to do a good job with presenting the most important part of the project at the other meetings . She hoped it was not being inferred that the information was being made up . It is an attempt to get something the community needs . Councilman Engman asked what the growth inducing components of a new tank were . Mr. Tunison responded the project was only proposing a storage tank off the Commission ' s system to help it operate more efficiently and provide a safety factor for the storage . The only additional usage at this point, and proposed for the future , is to allow Cornell to have water 12 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 service for their athletic fields . The proposed tank is a storage tank and not a distribution tank . Councilman Engman noticed the resolution stated the project was subject to a permissive referendum if it were requested . He asked someone to. explain the permissive referendum process . Attorney Barney explained that certain actions when taken by the Town Board with capital water and/or sewer improvements are done pursuant to a section of Town Law which authorizes a referendum on it if requested by a petition signed by 5 % of the voters who voted in the last gubernatorial election . As part of the resolution , it needs to be recited that it is subject to a permissive referendum . An abstract of resolution also needs to published within ten days of its adoption with another notice attached to it saying that it is subject to permissive referendum . There is a 30-day period from the date of adoption of the resolution where someone can bring in a petition and request the referendum . Councilman Lesser thanked Mr. Tunison for the additional detail he provided to the board . He found it very helpful . Councilman Lesser discussed the issue with Councilman Stein and felt a little of his frustration , but he was convinced that the Burdick Hill Tank needed to be painted and undertaking that process without supplementary storage capacity would be a risky matter. Councilman Lesser asked if the $500 , 000 savings Mr. Tunison referred to was because the cost of piping was a substantial amount of the current estimated $2 . 2 million . Mr. Tunison responded that regardless of the size of the tank that was constructed , the pipeline would have to be the same size . The cost difference was only in the construction of the tank . Councilman Lesser mentioned that Mr. Tunison explained an alternative approach that he did not favor that involved putting another 1 . 5 million gallon tank adjacent to the existing tank . He asked if there was a possible third location with greater efficiency rather than have all the capacity located on East Hill . Mr. Tunison responded the location has been looked at for several years because it is potentially available and the elevation is in the vicinity of the Commission ' s current transmission main . Having it at another point along the transmission main wouldn 't really give any more benefit to it . This has been looked at as the ideal location and elevation . Councilman Lesser thought the decision was really two-fold , the critical need for redundancy and capacity and the second the additional efficient received from building the capacity on East Hill rather than Triphammer Road . Mr. Tunison add that the added storage in the system is more beneficial at the East Hill location . The storage at Burdick Hill still needs to be pumped by the Oakcrest Pump Station . Councilman Lesser asked if it was really worth the additional money to save what appears to be marginal amounts of electricity and a couple hours a week of plant time to put in all the pipes and capacity on East Hill , Mr. Tunison feels that the storage on East Hill as a safety factor and being to supply the other tanks off the transmission system in the case of an emergency are more beneficial than cost savings from electricity and painting the Burdick Hill Tank . 13 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Mr. Walker added that a sister tank at Burdick Hill would not make the system work . The storage was needed on East Hill to feed the Town and the Town of Dryden distribution system . If the Town does not have the tank on East Hill , the Town will be building the tank by itself because it is needed to get water to West Hill . Councilman Lesser found it a little perplexing that all of a sudden the costs of servicing West Hill , which was built primarily as a cost saving matter, is costing $2 . 2 million more . Mr. Walker responded that it is not just West Hill , but it is South Hill too . The Town cannot keep serving Ithaca College and South Hill effectively with the tank . The Town is not able to keep the Danby Road tank full if Ithaca College turns their pumps on . Mr. Walker explained that this has evolved over a ten-year period . There is a ton of engineering work and operational information , but it might not have been communicated very well to the board . The engineering and operations committee at the Commission has met for 10 years talking about this issue . Mr. Walker has the modeling that says they cannot effectively service that they have now. Supervisor Valentino added that when they built West Hill , it was a given for them that the East Hill Tank would be part of the system because it was also needed for other things . Councilman Stein made a motion to post-pone the decision for one month . He was still unhappy that the argument had not been laid out in front of him in a conclusive form in the same way that others were convinced it was the right thing to do . He wanted the argument presented in writing . Councilman Engman seconded the motion made by Councilman Stein . Supervisor Valentino explained that the SCLIWC has been providing high quality water for 28 years to the community . The Commission has worked as a group in a very cooperative way that any Intermunicipal organization could and is a model for how Intermunicipal cooperation should work . Many people spend a great deal of time making sure they are doing the best job they can for the community . Four of the Town ' s partner' s have looked at and voted in favor of the project because of its long-term importance . It was voted in good faith knowing that the Town of Ithaca receives the biggest benefit of the project. She would hate to see the Town not accept the Commission ' s recommendations and the engineering recommendations received and delay the project and have the Town of Ithaca be the entity delaying the project . Supervisor Valentino pleaded to the board to vote in favor of the project. Councilman Engman thought the people might be upset about the project since it had not gone through a board committee . A good case was made about the way to go , but no board member had seen the information . Mr. Walker added that the Commission is recommending . Supervisor Valentino explained that there is not a committee on the water projects because the committee is the Commission and the Commission has studied the project over time . There are two representatives on the Commission . The Commission is made up of five partners with varying amount of ownership . Each municipality has two representatives and everyone votes and researches projects as equals . Projects come to the board from a big committee as recommendation and the Town does not have a committee that would in any way be able to replace the amount of work and energy put into the Commission . Councilman 14 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Engman reiterated that an Intermunicipal Commission could not dictate what the Town of Ithaca Board does . The Town Board has to make its own decisions and the best way for the decision to be made is to have a Town committee look at the recommendation from the Intermunicipal body and give a recommendation to the Town Board . Councilman Lesser asked for the consequences of waiting an additional month to vote on the project . Mr. Tunison responded the project was slated to begin the spring . Attorney Barney thought the board should keep in mind that whenever the decision is made , 30 days has to be added to it for the permissive referendum and then there is the time needed for the bonding . Mr. Walker mentioned that the project was discussed at Public Works Committee and he thought that the committee supported the project . He was not asked for more detail than what was given at the Public Works Committee . Supervisor Valentino , Councilwoman Gittelman and Councilman Stein are members of the Public Works Committee . Councilwoman Gittelman added she thought that she understood what was said and would not vote to post-pone the project because she feels that one of the places where the Town really needs to be on top on the game is with water. Water is a most important factor and she recalled that Mr. Walker commented that if they build on Holliford Hill that gravity would be able to serve other tanks in an emergency. She would like to see us talk to Cornell about some help . Supervisor Valentino responded that the Town is talking to Cornell . Councilman Stein stated that he was not part of the consensus at the Public Works meeting . The painting of the Burdick Hill tank did not come up at that meeting , and he was not convinced . He would like to hear the compelling reasons to build this tank . Supervisor Valentino responds that there is no report . Mr. Walker states that there is the original 1974 transmission report , which shows the system extending all the way around to West Hill , which is what is built today . That report shows a tank on East Hill essential to operate that system . Councilman Stein states that if it' s 30 years later, it couldn 't have been that essential . Mr. Walker states that they did not initially build the whole system around . He will bring copies . The report showed that they needed a tank on East Hill and a transmission main which is what we have now. Supervisor Valentino states that it is time to call the question . Councilwoman Grigorov calls the question on the motion to delay for one month . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2004- 176: Resolution to postpone consideration of the Public Interest Order and Resolution authorizing the construction of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission East Hill Water Tank and Water Mains BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca postpone consideration of the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission East Hill water tank and water mains until the December 13th, 2004 Regular Town Board meeting. MOVED: Councilman Stein 15 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 SECONDED: Councilman Burbank VOTE: Councilman Burbank, aye; Councilman Stein, aye; Councilman Engman, aye; Councilwoman Grigorov, nay, Councilman Lesser, nay; Councilwoman Gittelman, nay; Supervisor Valentino, nay. The motion was declared to not be carried. Supervisor Valentino. moves and Councilwoman Grigorov seconds the Public Interest Order. Councilman Lesser asks how much the total will be for the project . Attorney Barney responds that all municipalities are liable for the full amount of the debt , but it is apportioned based on use of water. The revenue to pay this bond is anticipated to come out of the water revenue . The users of the water system will pay a slightly higher rate to pay the debt service . Supervisor Valentino comments that customer payments are divided into two parts . One part goes to Bolton Point and the other pays for the Town ' s internal system . Councilman Lesser asks how much the Town of Ithaca will be bonded and how much more the interest will be . Attorney Barney responds that it will probably be somewhat less than half a million . Supervisor Valentino states that the Town won 't know until it' s bonded . Councilman Lesser states it will be 100 % . Attorney Barney states that the Town ' s portion will be 44 % of that . Councilman Lesser states that it will be over a million dollars that the rate payers must pay. Supervisor Valentino states that the good thing is that Bolton Point hasn 't imposed debt on anyone for a long time and there is 700 , 000 in reserve money to reduce the cost of this . Most water systems are carrying much higher debt service loads . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2004477: PUBLIC INTEREST ORDER AND RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOUTHERN CAYUGA LAKE INTERMUNICIPAL COMMISSION EAST HILL WATER TANK AND WATER MAINS AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF FUNDS FOR SUCH PURPOSE AUTHORIZING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF JOINT AND SEVERAL SERIAL BONDS FOR A PORTION OF THE COSTS OF SUCH PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT OF MUNICIPAL COOPERATION GOVERNING SUCH WATER TANK AND WATER MAINS. At a meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca, Tompkins County, held at the Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, in the City of Ithaca, New York, on the 15th day of November, 2004, at 5 : 30 o 'clock p. m. prevailing time. PRESENT.- Supervisor Catherine Valentino Councilperson Carolyn Grigorov Councilperson William Lesser 16 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Stein VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . TB RESOLUTION NO. 2004-183b : Bolton Points Abstract. WHEREAS , the following numbered vouchers for the Southern Cayuga Lake Intermunicipal Water Commission have been presented to the governing Town Board for approval of payment ; and WHEREAS , the said vouchers have been audited for payment by the said Town Board ; now, therefore , be it RESOLVED , that the governing Town Board hereby authorizes the payment of the said vouchers . Voucher Numbers : 572 , 634-6431 647-716 Check Numbers : 7659-7660 , 7722-7730 , 7736-7805 Operating Fund $ 110 , 570 . 18 1998 SCADA Capital Project $ 21746 . 43 2002 Office Space Addition $ 255 , 528 . 69 TOTAL $ 368q845 . 30 MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Stein VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov, aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . TB RESOLUTION NO , 2004-183c : Approval of Floating Holiday for 2005 . WHEREAS , there is an annual poll conducted of all town employees to determine their preference for the next year' s floating holiday; and 45 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 WHEREAS , the majority of the combined employees of Town Hall , Highway, and SCLIWC have indicated , Friday , July 1 , 2005 as their preference for the floating holiday ; now, therefore , be it RESOLVED , the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca does hereby approve the Floating Holiday for 2005 as Friday, July 1 , 2005 as requested by the majority of the employees . MOVED : Councilman Lesser SECONDED : Councilman Stein VOTE : Supervisor Valentino , aye ; Councilwoman Grigorov , aye ; Councilman Lesser, aye ; Councilman Stein , aye ; Councilman Burbank , aye ; Councilman Engman , aye ; Councilwoman Gittelman , aye . Carried unanimously . Agenda item No . 18 — Reports of Town Committees Joint Sewer Committee Supervisor Valentino reported that the phosphorus removal project seems to moving along much faster now. Agenda Item No . 19 — Report of Town of Officials (Attachment #8 — monthly reports) Town Clerk Ms . Hunter reported that the elections went smoothly. The Town had one machine that broke , but a replacement was gotten to the district in a timely fashion . However, the Town has one machine that will need servicing by someone other than the machine custodians . The Town may need to purchase a replacement machine . The Town has received the okay from the County Board of Elections to collect the voting machines from the polling places . To Do List Ms . Hunter brought up Councilman Engman ' s suggestion of a To-Do List. The Board agreed it would be their responsibility to flag any items they felt should be on the To-Do List. The item from the evening ' s meeting identified for inclusion on the list was : Discussion with City regarding recreation facilities . Attorney for the Town Mr. Barney reported that the Town , some 25 years ago , was named as a defendant in a lawsuit involving requirements that a road be constructed adjacent to the water treatment plant . The lawsuit has been quiescent for 25 years until a few months ago when it sprung back to life . Attorney Barney has made a motion on behalf of three defendants , the Southern Cayuga Lake Water Commission , the Town , and the Village of Lansing to have the issue dismissed because of its age . The motion was argued on Friday and Attorney Barney was awaiting a decision . 46 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting Approved December 13, 2004 Executive Session On motion by Supervisor Valentino , seconded by Councilman Lesser, the Board moved into executive session at 9 : 00 p . m . On motion by Councilman Burbank , seconded by Councilman Lesser, the Board returned to regular session at 9 : 05 p . m . Adjournment On motion by Councilman Lesser the meeting was adjourned at 9 : 06 p . m . Respectfully submitted , Tee-Ann Hunter Town Clerk Next meeting December 13, 2004. 47 TOWN OF ITHACA TOWN BOARD SIGN - IN SHEET DATE : Monday , November 15 , 2004 (PLEASE PRINT TO ENSURE ACCURACY IN OFFICIAL MINUTES) PLEASE PRINT NAME PLEASE PRINT AD ORES S / AFFILIATION / aLV,J o� LT6t�cs�r c.� �o�u . i�u � • .• , ---- -- November 15 , 2004 . Town Board.' - Mtg . : - ATTACHMENT # 1 ILI /,2oc.4E..S S -- 7'11Z ZFN,4c.of Al ee. _,: - B�D� .� _ . , mss 1,ci1v4i,1 z c p Sy T46 f?Ayarl , iQb C011H0 ,00 Zr 15 X01711 AJ9Z /k4:$-0X Z4 .�dU��•, � ✓E �v 7�a sw 4 c? A. V0k0.v rg464 _ l-�?4AICXA/G r"ooe T 7715ir� 011,,CF r- /4e P/9 I-10T 111-4flz 7;fE _ dV,44 ooccae,0, ir/ot 1;c,,VP C ;0 1A11=4 0,01E . 7";64 TWsolr , c�5 _ A4Z 4XT26� ,4Y ,D/S .0090,:9WW liU 1ilc15. Z�Ec:lsl'oA 45 � o �tl3t�r OIRCG% S74 �fIA10s AA,) IILIC �56D �`'1�,u/o�cv� 73 _4g S f_ ,UAIIdo7F / z iN� p o�oY�y, 1 Ms ,aVIOAX0 UW 7U.r� 7 4Z4 v IpVC&ej 7' Dr c /'ev T T ca r- /1/d SIP5 &Zge T ��%� �v i /S ��G ���'� � �� l�.r.�� ��� dliYLL .8� �� --,q.7i2•Wi�G�j /N 7 i�4 45*0414 G - 444 lopfllAla 77 4 FeEk-141 ' lS 7;(447 C',;>A o& ,#,j oz r%JS 40," Cn5S 4JIL4 J vE 7f ��D. �IN1d std 71& TaWd) o oc ,ZrWC4 *NP r q4 Aaoeoiie A 7;2046 '40lec4 OA JS, ,�°L,�oa/�J�i�Q/� /T�S , ,vn >�e do�spiToc/s Tife 9. November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 2 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD MEMBERS FROM: MICHAEL SMITH, ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER , 16 DATE: NOVEMBER 3 , 2004 RE: LA TOURELLE COUNTRY INN — SPA FACILITY AMENDING SLUD # 1 In 1984, the Special Land Use District No. 1 (Planned Development Zone No. 1 ) was created along with a site plan approval for the La Tourelle Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road. As approved, the Planned Development Zone No. 1 (PDZ #1 ) allows any uses permitted in a Residential District R- 15 (Medium Density Residential Zone), plus it allows the existing ( 1984) restaurant, the barn apartments, and a hotel or inn containing no more than 80 units for guests along with the following facilities : tennis courts , swimming pools, cabanas or similar structures related to tennis courts or swimming, ponds or other body of water, and restaurant or other food service establishment. The applicant has recently submitted plans to the Town for construction of a three level addition on the west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new guest rooms, a spa facility, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional parking, new landscaping, and new stormwater facilities . The proposed addition is located within a portion of the footprint shown on the 1984 plans for future expansion of the Inn. This proposal appears to meet all the requirements of the PDZ # 1 except for the spa facility, which was not specifically identified as a permitted use. An amendment to the PDZ #1 is being requested from the Town of Ithaca Town Board to allow the spa use, following a recommendation from the Planning Board, The Town of Ithaca Planning Board on November 2, 2004 granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval for the proposed project and recommended to the Town Board that a local law be enacted to allow the spa facility. The Town Board is being asked at the November 15ffi meeting to consider setting a Public Hearing for the December 13 , 2004 Town Board meeting, to amend the Code of the Town of Ithaca, Chapter 271 , to allow a spa facility in the Special Land Use District No. 1 . Enclosed are copies of the preliminary site plan, the floor plan for the spa facility, a narrative from the applicant describing the project, and a draft of the proposed local law. Please call or email me at msmith @town. ithaca.ny.us if you have any questions . Enclosures i i � ;j • i i i (,lFf S EP 2 . 1 2004 ` Attachment to Town of Ithaca Environmental Review/Site Plan App qv T(D WN"06iFF-H AQ YAn1r"iC' py ,r 50 Describe project briefly. The LaTourelle hotel project consisting of 8o-84 hotel rooms was approved by the Planning Board in 1984. The first phase of construction consisting of 35 rooms with a banquet facility was completed in that year. During the past 20 years LaTourelle has positioned itself in the Ithaca community as an upscale boutique hotel located on a 20-acre tract of land. The applicant proposes to construct a two story building with basement within the footprint approved by the Town Board in 1984• Recently the Tompkins County Tourism Council identified a need for an esthetic/therapeutic spa facility in the greater Ithaca area. In response to that need, the applicant is proposing to include such a facility as part of the proposed expansion of the inn. The spa will be located in the partially below ground level at the same elevation as the existing hotel facility. There will be two floors above the spa which will contain a total of 19 hotel rooms. The building will be connected to the existing hotel facility by a connector lobby which will provide such handicapped access as may be required. The roof line of the new addition will be maintained at the same level as the existing west wing of the hotel to which the new addition will be attached as above described. Except for the window configuration which will take advantage of the view to the north, the new south elevation will be almost identical to the existing east elevation which faces Route 96B. A new landscaping plan will enhance the attractiveness of the parking area which will be expanded to accommodate the need for an additional 19 rooms and spa facility. The applicant is dedicated to maintaining LaTourelle as one of the premier small hotels in Upstate NewYork which will serve the community to a greater extent by providing the spa facility. s i RA Ut SEP 2 1 2�4 Short Environmental Assessment Form Paragraph 5 Supplement R �nr �r O�of I G E G �Nc G Lai The spa facility will be available to both the guests at LaTourelle and those members of the community who choose to use the facility. It will have access directly from the hotel as well as from the hotel parking lot. The facility will contain five massage rooms, a facial room, and a manicure/pedicure room. It will also have a small retail shop to sell the spa therapeutic and aesthetic products and a resting lounge to accommodate guests before and after the spa experience. There will be mens and women locker rooms which will each provide a sauna and steam bath facility. The proposed hours are 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. The staff will consist of a manager, assistant manager, 2 receptionists and 7- 10 licensed professionals for the massage rooms, facial room and manicure/pedicure room, An exercise room will be available on the second floor (floor above spa) for hotel guests and spa guests, r TOWN OF ITHACA LOCAL LAW NO, OF THE YEAR 2004 A LOCAL LAW AMENDING CHAPTER 271 OF THE CODE OF THE TOWN OF ITHACA ENTITLED. "ZONING: SPECIAL LAND USE DISTRICTS" TO ALLOW A SPA FACILITY AT LA TOURELLE Be it enacted by the Town Board of the Town of Ithaca as follows : Section 1 . Section 271 -3 of the Code of the Town of Ithaca, entitled "§ 271-3. Special Land Use District No. 1 (Wiggins)," is hereby amended as follows: ( 1 ) § 271 -3 . B (3 )(a), and § 271 -3 . B (4) are amended by deleting the phrase "Residential District R45 " and inserting instead the phrase "Medium Density Residential Zone." (2) § 271 -1 (B)(3 ) is amended by adding a new subparagraph (d) reading as follows: "(d) A spa facility, attached to a hotel or motel, as defined and limited in subparagraph § 270-3 . (B)(5)(a)[6] below. " (3) § 271 -3 . (B) (5) (a) is amended by adding a new subparagraph [6] reading as follows : "[6] Spa facility of not more than 5, 000 square feet of total interior floor area, open to hotel guests and the general public, consisting of (A) Spaces for one or more of the following activities : massages, facials, manicures, pedicures, hair care, and tanning; (B) Related lounges, locker rooms, showers, saunas, steam baths; and wading pool; (C) Shop (not more than 100 square feet in size) for the sale of spa therapeutic and aesthetic products; and (D) Other facilities related to the spa activities authorized above. " (4) § 271 -3 . (B) (5) (f) is deleted and a new § 271 -3 . (B) (5) (f) is added reading as follows : "(f) No noise originating on the property contained in this Special Land Use District (referred to in the Town of Ithaca Code now as a Planned Development Zone) shall exceed the limits. set forth in 1 Town of Ithaca . Code § 270- 155 or in Town of Ithaca Code Chapter 184, whichever is more restrictive. " Section 2. If any provision of this law is found invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions of this local law which shall remain in full force and effect. Section 31 This local law shall take effect upon publication of the local law or an abstract of same in the official newspaper of the Town, or upon its filing with the New York Secretary of State; whichever is the last to occur. 2 its � IOWA a I I T is c c gg u T + I cc w w z w 1.� Z N O H- °-: O 0 W YORK STATE ROUTE 98B DANBY ROAD cow r 1 ' / 1 ' Iparr R III' 1 ' / _. . ' i vo//- 11 1 �� / a~ i I11� k ,k+ tftxr � 1•' I r ' n i / i , 4� l J I I I / / / �/ / � / a (• ' � alt°`s � �"� J S / / - - I I / / / / // / ill y, -.y. � ♦ ,hC15, �' / qq� 00 \ \ \\ \ \\ �\ \I 11 1 1\ \ \ \ \ 1 1 11 W2t��,�Z \\ — 7 \ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11111 \ �:` � J/J l 1 1 ,., � /<'1 \ . ��• � IIIIf d ZY \ -ate 1 1 I I \ \ \ r ♦ li ISP ' I pp �� -`� � � � 1100 � _• i • 1 -� \ \ \ � mil` ` � � ` -1.. t I � • • � _ _ /• 1 _ �..• YYYYYY /r \ \ �. /-rL♦ - _ - - _�_� _��J - r /All- "1095 It It J 1 '� '�\ !1 7;1.{r+. i(�• . +"+:%•'•�,�,�.;,,+ 1 l 111 l \ � ti, \ � I •iti? 'i.: iii.�. �+ .��:i;li•`•°�.c;al'i? J I 1 ! / 7 �i 1 '''7a �ii'Jft'P:..Y:•. ,h.r,r,:,_•..:•� / ! 1 1j1 \ .r ... .�,a:f:`:•i'.i,'x'1'w"�il-'. •:3 n1.:.A"' J 1 'lot 3 ;•,• . .^•;i7:{;'Y'• i. :i:j:.'!�; 1111 I w I Z 0 os><+ 9l ro00u cywa osn Q uojTJPP 'uui A4u-noo altamos laj CD Q d O J LL • �4 � �� �� 1 09BYt AN YotlHll '1331!16 tlDf11.tl0 N11lON 9�Z S�3LH011tl S31tlI00SStl ONINM00 WtlIT1IM 5 fit • m 0 oily pn4mo0 pus souaagluo0 al s$BWV U Ll go I a I O 8 O o I l® C:1 C3 pa a o 0 m LL a r - - - - -I c leoluelpow I m L - - - - ,fiat at-,w 1 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 3 East Hill Tank Proposal • A tank on East Hill connected to the Commission' s transmission main was included in the original 1974 system design to improve the hydraulics of the transmission system and provide storage on the transmission system. The tank was eliminated from the construction plans due to the total high cost of the project. • Although not related, the Office Addition Project, which is currently underway, was also included in the original plans, but was eliminated to reduce total project costs . Both projects have been on the Commission ' s capital project list for a long time . • A tank on the Commission ' s transmission system is an asset to the Commission ' s system and would be operated by Bolton Point. The tank will benefit all five member municipalities . • The Commission ' s 1 . 5 million gallon Burdick Hill storage tank has not been painted since it was constructed over 28 years ago . This tank has to be painted within the next two years, and this cannot be completed until there is additional storage in the Commission ' s system. A companion tank to the Burdick Hill tank has been proposed to allow the tank to be off line for a month while it is painted, but this is not where additional storage in the Commission' s system is needed. It is more valuable to have storage on the transmission system downstream of the Commission' s Oakcrest pump station. • Total project cost has been estimated at $2,200, 000 for a 3 ,000,000 million gallon tank. Only $ 500,000 in savings would be released if the volume of the tank were reduced to 1 , 500,000 million gallons . It would cost approximately $ 1 ,000,000 in today ' s dollars to add another 1 , 500, 000 gallon tank in the future . • The Commission is proposing to bond $ 1 , 5000, 000 of the cost of the tank project. The 2005 water rate approved by the member municipalities will cover the interest and principal payments on the bonding for the tank. • Any benefit from the tank realized by the City of Ithaca would only be residual . Whether or not the City partnered with the Commission, the water in this tank would only provide some benefit to the City in the event of an emergency in their system. • The benefits to Cornell University would also only be residual . Cornell facilities along Route 366 in the Apple Orchard area will realize increased pressure and fire flow, but this will only be a result of improving the hydraulics of the Town of Ithaca water distribution system in that area. There will be consistent pressure and increased flow available to Cornell ' s connection to the Commission' s transmission line for their North Campus area. This would also be a residual benefit and Cornell is satisfied with the system as is . • Decreased electrical costs and avoided electrical costs will be realized by the Commission with this tank on the system . The pumps at the Commission ' s Oakcrest pump station will operated' near maximum efficiency at all times and pump cycling will be reduced which will decrease wear on the pumps . More pumping will be able to be performed during off-peak electrical use periods, which could save the Commission up to $ 1 Lf , V00 annually . During periods of high demand for water, which will become more prevalent when the Commission begins supplying water to all of West Hill in the Town of Ithaca, the additional storage in this tank will help prevent operating two pumps at the Commission' s facilities during on-peak periods, which could save the Commission $ t 0 y H c J annually . November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 4 DEP N NING l Strt th , rk 4 , O Edward C. Marx, AICP Telephone (607) 274-5560 Commissioner of Planning ` �} * Fax (607) 274-5578 October 28, 2004 Hon. Catherine Valentino, Supervisor Town of Ithaca 215 N. Tioga Street Ithaca, NY 14850 Dear Supervisor Valentino: As we move toward the Tompkins County Legislature' s vote to adopt the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan, currently scheduled for December 21 '% I would like to update you on the status of the Comprehensive Plan and ask that your Board consider passing a resolution of support for the Comprehensive Plan. Such a resolution would indicate to the County Legislature that the municipalities of Tompkins County support a coordinated approach to making decisions about the future of the County. I have enclosed a sample resolution of support for your review. I have also enclosed a summary that highlights the most significant changes to the first draft of the Comprehensive Plan published in April. A document detailing all the changes to the Plan is available at <http://www.tompldns-co.org/planning/compplan>. Following last night' s public. meeting, we will also be making minor changes to the draft Comprehensive Plan and refining the fiscal impact analysis. A final draft of the Comprehensive Plan that includes all of these changes will be distributed to you the week of November 22nd, If it would be helpful, a Tompkins County Planning Department staff member can meet with you in November or December to discuss the Comprehensive Plan and answer questions your Board might have. If you would like to schedule such a meeting, please contact the Tompkins County Planning Department by phone (274- 5560) or email (planning(@tompkins-co.org). Sincerely, k�c Edward C. Marx, AICP Commissioner of Planning cc: Municipal Clerk Encl. SAMPLE RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT RESOLUTION # : Support for Adoption of Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Planning Department, with guidance, advice, and recommendation from the Tompkins County Planning Advisory Board, has developed a Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan that addresses regional and intermunicipal issues that affect the daily lives of Tompkins County residents, such as housing, transportation, jobs, the environment, and neighborhoods and communities, and WHEREAS, the Draft Comprehensive Plan was presented at 17 community groups and advisory board meetings, and 14 open houses and public meetings in all municipalities in the county, for feedback and comments, and WHEREAS, an over-arching principle of the Draft County Comprehensive Plan is that Tompkins County will work proactively with towns, villages, the City of Ithaca, and State and Federal agencies to cooperatively address regional issues, and WHEREAS, the County recognizes that while New York State clearly places land use authority in the hands of its towns, villages, and cities, it also specifically recognizes that intermunicipal planning is needed to cooperatively address regional issues and encourages the development of county comprehensive plans to address development and preservation issues that transcend local political boundaries, and WHEREAS, the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan provides a strategic framework for addressing issues of mutual concern to municipalities throughout the County, now therefore be it RESOLVED, That [insert name of municipality] supports the adoption of the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan by the Tompkins County Legislature. Major Changes Page 1 of 2 Summary of Significant Changes Draft County Comprehensive Plan October 2004 In April 2004, the Draft Comprehensive Plan was printed, distributed, and posted on the County Planning Department 's website in order to elicit public input. Staff presented the key elements and findings of the plan at 17 community group and advisory board meetings, and 14 open houses and public meetings in all municipalities in the county. Informational displays were set-up at 19 locations, including libraries, banks, senior centers, and community halls. All comments were gathered and reviewed, and during the summer and fall of 2004, staff worked with the Tompkins County Planning Advisory Board to revise the text, tables, and maps in the Plan based on public comments and feedback. Below is a summary of significant changes made to the County Comprehensive Plan as a result of the public input process. Introduction and Overview To clarify why the Plan focuses on the issues included, information was added describing how the elements of the plan were selected and identifying noteworthy issues that were not included in the 2004 County Comprehensive Plan To address the need to better highlight the importance of local institutions of higher education and Cayuga Lake in our community, large text boxes were added entitled The Quintessential College Town and Cayuga Lake: Shaping Our Community, Housing, Transportation, and Jobs To better explain the state of housing in our community, a new section was added describing the age and condition of the existing housing stock in Tompkins County. More detailed census data related to non-student housing and income was also added. To reduce the use of planning jargon and clarify the meaning, wording changes were made to the principle, and several policies and action items, in the transportation section. A new action item was added to develop a countywide comprehensive park and ride plan. To better acknowledge the important role of tourism in the county' s economy, a new paragraph discussing tourism was added. A new policy was added to encourage the procurement of goods and services from local farms, businesses, and service providers. A corresponding new action item was added to develop a strategy to promote local use and consumption of locally produced goods. A new action item was added to encourage the formation, retention, and expansion of manufacturing and high tech businesses. To better reflect the broad nature of the topic, the title of the Rural Economy section was changed to Rural Resources, and the policy was expanded to focus on a diversified rural economy centered around the working rural landscapes of farms and forests, and the livelihoods of those who depend upon them. Also, an introductory paragraph was added to clarify why rural resources had its own section, beyond the general issues identified for both rural and urban areas in the Jobs and Business section. The discussion of agricultural resources was consolidated by moving information and policies on farming and agricultural soils from the Finite Resources section to the Rural Resources section. Additionally, the discussion on farming, loss of farmland, and the agricultural economy was strengthened, and the agricultural resources focus areas and future agriculture protection efforts were more clearly described. Also, information was added to the map of agricultural resources focus areas http ://www.tompkins-co. org/planning/compplan/summaryofsignifchanges.htm 10/28/04 Major Changes Page 2 of 2 to include locally identified important agricultural areas, as identified in plans produced by the Towns of Danby and Ithaca. Environment To better focus on the frequently identified key natural resource of water, the Finite Resources section was reorganized and the title was changed to Water Resources. The principle was revised, to highlight the importance of water resources in providing drinking water, recreational opportunities, and environmental benefits. A new action item was added to prepare a Cayuga Lake water quality and quantity monitoring plan. -1h natural features principle was expanded to clarify that the natural features that define our community form the foundation of our local and regional ecological systems. To address the key role played by the four state parks in the county, a new paragraph was added identifying issues and concerns associated with those parks. Neighborhoods and Communities A paragraph was added discussing the impact of the built environment on residents ' sense of community identity and personal well-being. Based on work done by Planning staff over the summer of 2004 to identify future development scenarios, an action item was added to work with municipalities to develop land use scenarios consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and with local land use plans and policies. Added a paragraph discussing one way in which the County is currently working to promote efficient use of funds through reducing energy costs for County facilities. Added new information on how comprehensive planning can help ensure that infrastructure investments are made in an efficient and thoughtful manner. Correspondingly, action items were added to explore the feasibility of developing an official county map, and to conduct regular meetings with officials from adjacent counties to focus on ways to reduce overall costs to taxpayers . http ://www.tompkins-co. org/planning/compplan/summaryofsignifchanges.htm 10/28/04 Major Changes Page 2 of 2 to include locally identified important agricultural areas, as identified in plans produced by the Towns of Danby and Ithaca. _Environment To better focus on the frequently identified key natural resource of water, the Finite Resources section was reorganized and the title was changed to Water Resources. The principle was revised, to highlight the importance of water resources in providing drinking water, recreational opportunities, and environmental benefits. A new action item was added to prepare a Cayuga Lake water quality and quantity monitoring plan. The natural features principle was expanded to clarify that the natural features that define our community form the foundation of our local and regional ecological systems. To address the key role played by the four state parks in the county, a new paragraph was added identifying issues and concerns associated with those parks. Neighborhoods and Communities A paragraph was added discussing the impact of the built environment on residents ' sense of community identity and personal well-being. Based on work done by Planning staff over the summer of 2004 to identify future development scenarios, an action item was added to work with municipalities to develop land use scenarios consistent with the County Comprehensive Plan and with local land use plans and policies. Added a paragraph discussing one way in which the County is currently working to promote efficient use of funds through reducing energy costs for County facilities. Added new information on how comprehensive planning can help ensure that infrastructure investments are made in an efficient and thoughtful manner. Correspondingly, action items were added to explore the feasibility of developing an official county map, and to conduct regular meetings with officials from adjacent counties to focus on ways to reduce overall costs to taxpayers. http ://www.tompkins-co.org/planning/compplan/summaryofsignifchanges.htm 10/28/04 0 Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan PLANNING FOR OUR FUTURE . . . �i 1 f �•= 19f7 PRINCIPLES, POLICIES, AND ACTION ITEMS November 15, 2004 The Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan is organized around ten basic principles. These principles incorporate elements of the Vital Communities Initiative, adhere to the values expressed in the County' s mission statement, and reflect the wisdom gathered from many community opinions. Corresponding to the principles are various working policies of Tompkins County government that can be applied to meet many of the community goals expressed in this plan. The accompanying action items represent those activities that should be undertaken, or at least begun, during the first five years after adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. The adopted version of the Comprehensive Plan will identify those organizations responsible for each action item. • A principle is a comprehensive and fundamental doctrine, or assumption. ♦ A policy is a definite course or method of action to guide and determine present and future decisionmaking. A policy reflects a high-level overall plan embracing general goals and acceptable procedures. ♦ An action item is a specific activity that an individual or organization is committed to undertake. I. Regional Cooperation PRINCIPLE — Tompkins County will work proactively with towns, villages, the City of Ithaca, adjoining counties, and state and federal agencies to cooperatively address regional issues, such as natural resources, public infrastructure, and consumer, employment, and housing markets. HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION AND JOBS II. Housing Choices PRINCIPLE — Housing in Tompkins County should be affordable and appealing to all residents, regardless of their income or whether they rent or own their homes. POLICIES ■ Provide for a variety of quality living experiences, including rural, suburban, hamlet, village, and urban. • Protect consumers ' housing options throughout the county by providing a mix of choices of location, accessibility, housing types, and neighborhood character. • Provide and encourage more quality rental and owner-occupied affordable housing options for very low-, low-, and moderate-income residents. ' Promote increased owner-occupied housing in the county. • Maintain an adequate supply of affordable housing options for people with special needs, including seniors who wish to remain in their homes and persons requiring healthcare, custodial care, or supportive services. • Promote housing opportunities for locally-employed persons who would prefer to live in Tompkins County. County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 ACTION ITEMS 1 . Produce a three- to five-year affordable housing needs assessment to use as a basis to guide development of appropriate subsidized rental and ownership housing to meet local needs. 2 . Conduct a survey of in-commuters to determine the reasons they live outside of Tompkins County. 3 . Develop or identify model provisions for land development regulations that encourage affordable housing. 4. Provide education and training programs for elected officials, board members, community leaders, developers and builders, and the general public on the need for and benefits of affordable-housing development. 5 . Identify subsidized affordable housing units and determine when subsidies expire and if the units are likely to remain affordable. Establish a program to monitor the status of those units to anticipate impending deficiencies. 6. Build a new Community Residence — Single Room Occupancy mental health facility. 7. Develop plans to meet the housing needs of segments of the population that require supportive services, including seniors, independent (or at-risk) youth, and the homeless. III, Transportation Choices PRINCIPLE — The efficiency of the highway system should be enhanced and use of public transit, walking, and bicycling should be increased. POLICIES • Enhance the design function and safety of the existing road network while making investments in technology and design that increase its operating efficiency. • Make selective additions or modifications to the highway network to address capacity limitations that cannot otherwise be addressed. • Coordinate land use and infrastructure planning to meet the needs of drivers, pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and community residents. • Enhance and promote the use of bicycles and walking as viable forms of transportation by supporting the provision of safe public facilities, including multi-use trails, bicycle routes, bicycle lanes, and sidewalks. • Enhance transportation options and provide facilities that allow passengers to transfer easily and safely from one mode of transportation to another (e.g., biking to bus service). • Provide affordable and accessible public transportation to important destinations, hamlets and villages, the Ithaca urban area, and points outside the county. • Promote a transportation system that supports nodal, compact development patterns and reduces negative environmental impacts. ACTION ITEMS 8 . Develop a bicycle suitability map for Tompkins County. 9. Identify infill opportunities at nodes along transit lines. 10. Develop a countywide State Route 13 Corridor Management Plan. 11 . Complete a traffic signal upgrade and intersection evaluation program. 12 . Develop a centralized, uniform accident reporting system. 13 . Work with municipalities to assess transportation infrastructure needs, including roadways, transit, bicycles, and pedestrians, to support local planning efforts. 14. Facilitate municipal review of local development regulations to address future performance of the transportation system. 15 . Implement recommendations in the Freight Transportation Study to minimize negative aspects of freight transportation, while increasing safety. 16. Develop a countywide comprehensive park and ride plan. Page 2 of 7 County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 IV. Jobs and Business PRINCIPLE — The local economy should be enhanced by building on important community assets, such as a highly educated workforce, an entrepreneurial spirit, dynamic academic institutions, and a high quality of life. POLICIES • Provide a setting where businesses, particularly locally owned ones, can flourish by enhancing the county ' s natural resources, arts and culture, lively urban core, and vital neighborhoods . • Support economic development that provides quality employment opportunities to local residents, good wages and benefits, and affordable goods and services. • Encourage the procurement of goods and services from local farms, businesses, and service providers. • Support tourism in the area by encouraging local institutions, businesses, and facilities to better plan, coordinate, and expand tourism-related activities locally and regionally. . Enhance transportation options, including freight and air service, to support business development, while preserving the integrity of existing communities. • Work closely with the local institutions of higher learning to enhance those institutions ' significant and integral contributions to the local economy and community life. ACTION ITEMS 17 . Complete and implement the workforce development plan, striving to meet the needs of the unemployed and underemployed through job creation activities, and the needs of employers through employment and training programs. 18 . Enhance the ability to analyze costs and benefits of projects as well as improve post-project job data collection to determine whether the public purpose of projects is realized. 19. Continue to lobby for State Empire Zone status and explore regional partnerships to share underutilized economic development resources. 20 . Continue to explore ways to improve the cost and convenience of air service for county employers, visitors and local residents . 21 . Utilize Cornell University's resources to greater advantage, including: work with Cornell to improve technology transfer, and study feasibility of a business attraction initiative using specific Cornell research and development programs as the key element. 22 . Promote and assist in the development of the county' s tourism attractions, including cultural, natural, and commercial attractions 23 . Develop a strategy to promote local use and consumption of locally produced goods. 24. Encourage the formation, retention, and expansion of manufacturing and high tech businesses . V. Rural Resources PRINCIPLE — A diversified rural economy centered around the working rural landscapes of farms and forests, and the livelihoods of those who depend upon them, should be preserved and enhanced. POLICIES • Enhance the viability of existing farming operations and agricultural businesses, and encourage new ones to be formed. • Support sustainable formal and informal resource-based, economic development activities, such as forest management, timber harvesting, and agri-tourism, which support a rural way of life. • Sustain and enhance the agricultural activities and working farms within the Agricultural Resources Focus Areas identified in the Plan, and within locally designated important agricultural areas. Page 3 of 7 County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 • Encourage development that is designed to preserve open space and valuable agricultural and forest land. • Protect prime agricultural land for agricultural use. • Support community and economic development efforts that enhance the incomes of, or provide services primarily to, rural residents . ACTION ITEMS 25 . Determine the feasibility of a rural micro-enterprise program, including adding a component to the County ' s Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund. 26. Update the Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan with a particular focus on promoting the viability and profitability of agriculture within the county. 27. Establish a program to protect and manage land for agricultural and forestry use in the focus areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan using tools appropriate to the functions of those resources. 28 . Develop or identify model performance standards to preserve agriculture and forest land. THE ENVIRONMENT VI. Water Resources PRINCIPLE —Water resources provide drinking water, recreational opportunities, and environmental benefits, and should be protected and used appropriately. POLICIES • Promote appropriate development of waterfront lands for water-dependent or water-enhanced uses, including enhancing public access to Cayuga Lake. • Protect water quality and quantity in the county' s streams, lakes, and groundwater. • Protect drinking water supplies from contamination. • Protect stream corridors, wetlands, and land areas that are seasonally inundated by water. ACTION ITEMS 29. Complete watershed assessments for the Fall Creek and Six Mile Creek drinking water sources. 30. Continue to conduct aquifer studies. 31 . Initiate inspection and maintenance requirements for individual on-site wastewater treatment systems. 32. Update the county flood hazard mitigation program to incorporate watershed-based approaches to reducing the risk of flood damages. 33 . Update floodplain maps. 34. Develop or identify model stream buffer ordinances. 35 . Develop a system to provide for regular maintenance of existing drainage systems and use of appropriate road ditching techniques on County-maintained roads, and encourage the use of such techniques on other roads in the county. 36. Develop boat docking, boat service areas, and waterfront commercial district on, and in the vicinity of, Inlet Island in the City of Ithaca. 37. Redevelop the NYSDOT Maintenance Facility site with water-dependent and/or water-enhanced projects to provide economic benefits to the City and the County and provide public access to the water' s edge. 38 . Dredge Cayuga Inlet and find an appropriate method for disposal of dredge spoil material, for example, using dredged material to create new, functioning wetlands at the south end of Cayuga Lake. 39. Prepare a Cayuga Lake water quality and quantity monitoring plan. Page 4 of 7 County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 VII. Natural Features PRINCIPLE —Natural features that define our community, and form the foundation of our local and regional ecological systems, should be preserved and enhanced. POLICIES • Preserve the natural features, ecosystems, and forest lands within the Natural Resources Focus Areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan. • Preserve and protect scenic views, areas of natural beauty, and the rural character of Tompkins County. a Protect the ecological, economic, and recreational functions and beauty of Cayuga Lake. • Preserve and enhance existing parks, hiking trails, active and passive recreation facilities, and historic resources, and foster the creation of new recreational amenities. ACTION ITEMS 40 . Establish an open-space program to protect or preserve natural resources and recreational amenities in the focus areas identified in the Comprehensive Plan using tools appropriate to the functions of those resources . 41 . Define stream corridor buffers for the major tributaries to Cayuga Lake and encourage use of appropriate measures to preserve the designated stream corridors. 42. Develop and disseminate educational information tailored to each Natural Features Focus Area and each Agricultural Resources Focus Area. 43 . Conduct a Scenic Resources Inventory and prepare a Scenic Resources Preservation Plan. 44. Develop or identify model performance standards to preserve natural resources. 45 . Develop or obtain a system to track land use changes and preservation efforts. 46. Complete the Cayuga Waterfront Trail and the Black Diamond Trail. NEIGHBORHOODS & COMMUNITIES VIII. Strong Communities PRINCIPLE — Tompkins County residents should be safe, healthy, and comfortable with the aesthetics of their communities, and have daily opportunities to interact with neighbors and community members to build strong, cohesive communities . POLICIES • Facilitate the creation and maintenance of a safe, appealing, and efficient multi-purpose network for walking and enhance the pedestrian environment through appropriate design. • Locate County government facilities and encourage other community facilities to be located within population centers, particularly those facilities that provide opportunities for social interaction, group activities, community events, and meeting spaces. • Encourage the development of diverse communities that provide a mix of uses, a variety of employment options, social and recreational opportunities, and an assortment of amenities within walking distance of residential development. Enhance the quality of communities by improving the character of the built environment, including visually appealing architectural elements and streetscapes that encourage pedestrian travel, facilitate community interaction, and promote public safety. • Preserve and enhance the distinct identities and historic character of existing neighborhoods and structures, and encourage the development of new neighborhoods that possess their own special Page 5 of 7 County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 sense of place, through attractive design of public places; proximity to schools, parks and other services; and community festivals and events. • Improve transportation options for people who need access to employment, schools, shopping, health facilities, and community services. ACTION ITEMS 47 . Advance implementation of a countywide multiuse trail network. 48 . Conduct pedestrian level-of-service and walkability studies in neighborhoods, villages, and hamlets throughout the county. 49. Provide pedestrian connections between the waterfront and downtown through urban creek corridors. IX. Centers of Development PRINCIPLE —The development patterns reflected in the existing villages, hamlets, and the City of Ithaca' s downtown area and neighborhoods should be promoted as key components of the built environment that greatly contribute to the vitality of the local economy and community life. POLICIES • Strengthen and enhance the City of Ithaca' s downtown area as the urban center of the county. • Strengthen and enhance the villages and hamlets of the county as vital service and community centers. • Increase the amount and density of housing and business space in the central business districts throughout the county. ■ Promote greater density by encouraging development of existing "gaps" left by abandoned buildings and vacant parcels. • Concentrate appropriate commercial, industrial, and retail development onto relatively small amounts of land, in close proximity to housing and consumers, in existing areas of concentrated development. ACTION ITEMS 50. Work with municipalities to identify and map areas appropriate for infill development. 51 . Develop or identify model development design standards that address how to maintain a distinct edge between the urban/village areas and the rural countryside. 52. Evaluate and modify the following programs for consistency with and furtherance of the nodal development patterns: review of development proposals under General Municipal Law 239, Economic Development Revolving Loan Fund, Agricultural Districts, and advisory boards ' work programs . 53 . Work with municipalities to develop land use scenarios consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and with local land use plans and policies. X. Efficient Use of Public Funds PRINCIPLE — The effectiveness of taxpayer dollars should be maximized by investing government funds in public infrastructure and facilities in the most efficient manner possible . POLICIES • Maintain County facilities to protect the public ' s investment, to effectively serve residents, and to provide an efficient working environment for employees now and in the future. ■ Optimize the value of community investments in water treatment and distribution facilities and in sewer collection and treatment facilities by encouraging higher density in areas served by these facilities . Page 6 of 7 County Comprehensive Plan Final Plan Review — Fall 2004 • Save public costs by encouraging new development to locate in places contiguous to existing development where sewer, water, roads, and other infrastructure already exist, or are planned as part of a comprehensive plan to accommodate projected growth. • Consider intermunicipal alternatives when addressing issues related to water supply and wastewater disposal. ACTION ITEMS 54. Develop or identify model land development regulations and design standards that support denser development in areas with water and sewer services (including residential, infill, and mixed-use) and limited development in areas without such services. 55 . Review responsibility for highway management and maintenance based on the function of the highways . 56. Evaluate a downtown office plan for future County facility needs. 57. Determine the location of future County Health Department facility and the future use of Biggs B building. 58 . Implement the countywide Public Safety Communications System project. 599 Evaluate the need to renovate or expand the County Public Safety Building to meet projected needs. 60. Conduct regular meetings with officials from adjacent counties to focus on ways to reduce overall costs to taxpayers. 61 . Explore the feasibility of developing an Official County Map . For more information about this effort, please visit our website at www.tompkins-co.org/planning/compplan Tompkins County Planning Department 274-5560 ♦ planning @tompkins-co.org Page 7 of 7 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 5 REVIEW OF CAYU GA LAKE WATER QUALITY MONITORING RELATED TO THE LSC FACILITY FOR 1998 THROUGH 2003 LSC FACILITY ITHACA, NEW YORK November 2004 0036- 001 - 100 Prepared for : x Y j ' {jyr. YO i VV fif Prepared by: CC mB L"d' 1 E ?* CaINEE I NC. SCIENCE , PLL. 0 726 EXCHANGE STREET, SUITE 624 , BUFFALO, NY 14210 REVIEW OF CAYUGA LAKE WATER QUALITY MONITORING LSC FACILITY Table of Contents l . 0 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 . 1 Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] 1 . 2 Purpose and Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 10 OVERVIEW OF LSC MONITORING PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . 1 General Description of LSC Monitoring Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . 2 Physical/Chemical Discharoe Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 . 3 Ambient Lake Water Quality Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . 3 . 1 Biological Monitoring Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3 . 0 ASSESSMENT OF LSC MONITORING RESULTS FOR 1998 THROUGH 2002 AND2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 . 1 Sunvnary of Results Through 2003 and Key Findings by Cornell & UFI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 . 1 . 1 Pre - Operation Period ( 1998 through dune 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 . 1 . 2 2000- 2003 Operating Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 . 2 Sunvnary of the Statistical Data Anal ysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 . 3 Independent Assessment of Results- To- Date and Related Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 . 3 . 1 General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 . 3 . 2 Key Independent Findings and Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4 . 0 RECO ;<9 ;19ENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4 . 1 Outfall Monitorin2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l2 4 . 2 Ambient Lake Water Quality Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4 . 2 . 1 Thermal iMonitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4 ? . 2 _-ambient Monitoring Parameters and Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . 12 4 . 2. 3 BACI Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 i 0036-001 - 100 ` F: ABrnehmark \(:hrms \] thaea (7'; A21)114 Report \LSC November 21 )( 14 Rep )n .dnc REVIEW OF CAYUGA LADE WATER QUALITY MONITORING LSC FACILITY Table of Contents TABLES Table 6 Average Values of TP and SRP in t]-1e LSC Effluent and on the Shelf Table 10 Summer Average Chlorophyfl - a Concentrations M FIGURES Figure 7 a LSC Sampling Sites , Southern End of Cayuga Lake Figure 1 b LSC Sampling Sites , Cayuga Lake Figure 2 . 3 . 2 - 23E Approximate Extent of Selected Thermal Plumes in august Figure 2 . 3 . 2- 231 approximate Extent of Selected Theirnal Plumes in Winter APPENDICES Appendix A LSC SPDES Permit (NY- 0244741 ) Appendix B Glossan- of Technical Terms plus List of Acrom-ms /Abbre--iaUOns Appendix C 6NYCRR Part 704: Criteria Go-\-erning Thermal Discharges 9 ) 0036-001 - 100 P: \Benchmark \Clients \ lthaea (7l \ 2104 RrPurt \LSC Noi,cmber 2( 1( 14 Rrrori .duc ^" ^ : e• 1 . 0 INTRODUCTION 101 Background Cornell Uniwersit- o'a/ns and operates a Lake Source Cooling (LSC) facility, on the southeastern shore of Cavuga Lake . The LSC facihn° pumps cool -water (41 °F) from a depth of approximately 250 feet in Cayuga Lake through heat exchangers , .\a-here it cools (but does not contact) recirculating chilled water to the Cornell central campus cooling system . The 'warmed lake water is returned to the shal] o.\a/ southern shelf of the Lake via a 75- foot long diffuser at the end of a 500- foot long outfall pipe . A comprehensi-\- e Environmental Impact Statement ()' IS) was completed for the project in 1997 . The EIS assessed critical environmental impacts of the LSC facilin- on the Cayuga Lake ecosVstem and developed mitigation measures to minimize the anticipated impacts . On '-larch 1 . 1998, the Neva, York State Department of Environmental Consen> ation (NYSDEC) issued a State Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) permit for the LSC facility . The SPDES permit for the LSC facility, requires extensive monitoring of. physical, chemical. and biological parameters in the LSC discharge ; and ambient aa7ater quality, in the Lake both prior to and folloaa-ing LSC start - up . The permit '\alas renew7ed by NYSDEC on March 1 , 2003 " a copi7 of which is included in Appendi_x A . The current (i . e . , renewed) SPDES permit is substantially the same as the previous permits . except that the expiration date is extended to :March 1 , 2008 . The current permit effectively- extends the ambient in -lake and other monitoring requirements for that period of time. Construction of the LSC facihta% aa7as substantially completed and began operation in ) ula 2000. Cornell and their consultants , the Upstate Fresh \Dater. Institute (UFI) , haave been monitoring the ambient Lake -\vater quality- since 1998 and the LSC discharge since start- up in accordance '\'\with the SPDES permit . Ionitoring results to date are summarized by Cornell and UFI and presented with their interpretation in six annual reports entitled " Cayuga Lake Water Qualin- Aonitoring, 131:Nc'JatA* 0036-001 - 100 l C.` ,, , ,,,: ., d , : . ,. L nt,nu w ,� <. fiF Related to the LSC Facility : 1998. 1999 ; 2000; 2001 , 2002 and 200 .) The entire text and data appendices of these reports are available on the Cornell Unix- ersit web site (-\N-va-": . utilit:ies . cornell . edu /LSC) . 1 . 2 Purpose and Scope Benchmark Environmental Engineering & Science . PLLC (Benchmark) was contracted bey the To,\a-, n of Ithaca to perform an independent re'\-ie \a- of the potential impacts of the LSC operation on Cavuga Lake water quality . Benchmark previoush- prepared a report titled , "Rey- ' eNk7 of Cavuga Lake \\parer Quahn 1X9onitoring Related TO the LSC Facility : 2000. 2001 & 2002 (partial) , ' ' (Benchmark, March 2003) xa%113th provided a summar17 of the LSC monitoring program . analyzed LSC Annual Report data published by Connell / UI71 through 2001 and partial data provided for 2002, and presented specific recommendations for continued monitoring. This report reviews and analyses the " Cayuga Lake Water Quality 'Monitoring Related to the LSC Facility : Surnmary Report. 1998 — 2002" (UFI , -'august 2003) and the _-'annual Report data published by Cornell / UFI for 2003 . This report also revieNk7s and analyses the statistical analysis of the impact of the LSC on Cayuga Lake w-ater quality prepared by UFI and presented in a draft report titled "A Before —After- Control- Impact Analysis for Cornell University ' s Lake Source Cooling Facility " (LFI , draft April 2004) and provides specific recommendations for continued monitoring. A Glossary of Technical Terms frequently used throughout this report is attached as AppendiN B . J 0036-001 - 100 /arc. 2 . 0 OVERVIEW OF LSC MONITORING PROGRAM 2 . 1 General Description of LSC Monitoring Program Historically . the LSC 'Momtoring Program has consisted of three components : LSC non - contact cooling water effluent physical / chemical monitoring Ambient 1_ake Ne72ter quality monitoring LSC influent biological monitoring Brief descriptions of each of these components are provided below- . 2 . 2 Physical / Chemical Discharge Monitoring The State Pollutant Discharge Eliminatvon S�, stem (SPDES) Permir (NY - 0244 % 41 ) requires the LSC non - contact cooling water effluent to be monitored at the outfall for the follow-ing: • DISSO]N'ed oxy en (DO) Flow- rate ■ pH Temperature • Total phosphorus (TP) Soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) Flow-; pH , and temperature have daily average and / or daily masimurn limitations . LSC effluent Discharge Monitoring Reports are submitted monthly to the NYSDEC and the Tow-n . 2 . 3 Ambient Lake Water Quality Monitoring UF1 monitors a total of nine sites in the lake as shown on Figures la and 1b . SL1 of the sites are at depths of 5 meters or less in the southern end of the lake . Sites 1 and % bound the LSC discharge on the north and south , respectively . Two deep - water sites are included , one at the LSC intake location , the other off Taughannock 0036- 007 - 100 Point (S)re 8) . A Temperature sensor is located at the "pile cluster" at a depth of about 2 meters . The SPDES Permit (INY - 0244 741 ) requires seasonal monitoring (i . e . .April l - October 31 ) of in - lake or ambient \vOTer quahTV " to demonstrate that levels of total phosphorus and chloropb.yll-a and clarity in the southern lake segment bane not significantly changed in comparison to pre- discharge years. " _Ambient SRP monitoring is also being conducted and reported to the NYSDEC . Monitoring is to be performed at least na7] ce a month in - lake . from at least nano separate locations on the southern shelf. In - lake temperature monitoring is to be year round to "assure ambient temperature is unaffected". annual reports of the ambient monitoring must be submitted to the NYSDEC by April l of the following rear. The outfall diffuser must be engineered to meet the applicable requirements of 6NYCRR Part 704 (see AppendiN B) , Criteria Governing Thermal Discharges . applicable requirements include : av oiding large dai7 - to- day- temperature fluctuations due to heat of artif cial origin ; and not raising '\a-ater temperature at the surface of a lake by more than 3 °F. CumulaTive trending of al] data points is required over the permit life . "StatisticaDy significant changes tail] trigger outfall reevaluation. " "l f reevaluation of the outfall is required . Cornell has si-N months to determine causes and present methods for ceasing further lake detriment and for restoring problems created bv the LSC outfall . Possible alternatives Nk7ould include. but not be limited to , moving the outfall to a location `o-\- er the shelf of the southern end of the lake, or treatment for phosphorus _ " In addition to the parameters required by the SPDES permit, UFI monitors turbidirv. chloride. fecal coliform, and the nitrogen series as a more comprehensive assessment of total water quality in the southern portion of the lake . BENCHMARK 036-009 - 9 00 0 2 . 3 . 1 Biological Monitoring Requirements Biomonitoring of the entrainment of .� ]);ri.� �rrlic�a (a crustacean) and fish '%as required for a minimum of three rears after the LSC became operational . The lake 'water intake is located 250 feet below- the surface and is fitted 'Ith a 'wedge wire screen 'Ith 2 mm openings . This effectively limits the size of organisms that can be entrained by the system . BiomorMoring w-as performed from sampling pipes w6thin the plant to determine the number and r`-pe of fish and / or other biological organisms entrained by the LSC . Since this report focuses primarily on potential 'water qualin- impacts of the LSC on the southern end CaA7uga Lake ; the results of biomomtoring are not discussed in great detail in this report . 0036- 001 - 100 5 BENCHMARK 3 . 0 ASSESSMENT OF LSC MONITORING RESULTS FOR 1998 THROUGH 2002 AND 2003 3 . 1 Summary of Results Through 2003 and Key Findings by Cornell & UF1 The results of the monitoring program and their interpretation by Cornell Universiry and the Upstate Fresh.a-ater Institute have been published annualh7 since i 1998 in documents entitled : " Cayuga Lake V% ater Quabrrn 'Monitoring, Related to the LSC Facibry . " Those results and / or the interpretation of those results by Cornell / UFI than -we consider important or potentially at issue are summarized below- . 3 . 1. 1 Pre - Operation Period (1998 through dune 2000) Note,worthv obsen7arions by Cornell / UFI from the Pre- Operation Period include : 1 .) "Sire 2 was enl coed in all three . forms o f pho.pboiws ftotal pbo.!phoms (TI-)),. iota% dissolved phaphoiws (TDP), and soluble reactive pbo.phoiws (SRP)), total dissolved in.iroSen OU ) and ammonia (T 1�'1 l,),. and had higher turbid 0 ! (T,,) compared to Me other monitored siles. " 2 .) "Subslanlial .patial vanations were ohsemed wilbin the soutbem end of the lake ('shelf; exclusive of size 2) for moss paramelerr. . . :: 3 .) ' average concentrations of TP, T DP, SR]', and T-JNIT14 were higher in the ea.rtem portion (riles 9 and %), compared to olber .riles (4 and 5) in 1he soulhtry end of the lake. " j 4.) "Chloroplyll conceniralions. on a monilo1znd pelzod average basis, wets relalivel), similar amss lbe .patial bounds of sampling. though subslantial .palial vai abili07 was , observed on individual days. " 5 .) "Temperatures were ivlalively unifolm over the monitored bounds of the upper walerr of the lake dining the pei ' d of measummews. ecepl n earl)) Oclober i 6 .) Seccbi dirk-. lran.parency (SD) Z'S not a useful tool for measui nd claiz.� ! of the soutbem Shelf due to 1be shallowness of Me wafer. f JAI:t; 0036- 001 - 100 6 t." ,. , , , , 1 .) Turbidio! (l,) it a viable sumgoale measure of elalio . 8.) T„ and TP are .9Slemalical61 flawed lrophic indicalorr (i. e. .. indicalorr of the biological produclivitj- of the lake) on the south shelf due to the presence of nonph)doplanklon palyicles such as cla)I: minerals and yuarl Mal are received the lake as iwnoff firm Me watershed and calcium carbonate (CaCO3) that if produced iniernally bj the lake. 3 . 1 . 2 2000 -2003 Operating Period Note-,-ortliv observations by Cornell / UFl during the Operating Period r of 2000 through 2003 include : 1 .) The I.SC effluent TP concenlralion i.r less loan the conceniralion of TP in the .youth shelf waters (12. 2 ,u`lL versus 19. O nol4,. as summarised in Table 6. 2 .) The I_SC effluenl SRP concenlralion it srealer than the concenlralion of SRP 1* 11 the south shelf waters (4 . 6 pot L verrus 1 . 8 Po/4. as summaiz ed in Table 6. 3 .) The average TP concenlralions and T,; measurements on the south she were .similar,for 1998 and 2000 lhrouoh 2002 and dislinctl) : lower in 1999 and 2003. 4 .) The actual percenlage o f the total pho.phorous loading to the south she f o f the lake bj Me LSC it less than the percentage o f the lolal pho.phorus Ioadingn pio�jected in Me Drafl Environmeniallmpacl Slalemenl (3. 2% actual verrus 4. 8% predicted). 5 .) The soutbcaslern samplinb .riles (1 , 2, 3; and %) have shown higher TP and 7;, Man sampling silr�r north and west of Me sire (4 and 3). 6 .) Chloroph yll--a (Chl) concenlralions were higher in the deeper po��ion.v of the lak=e than lhe), were in the shallow soulhelow end. 7 .) Relalivel)t high TP concenlrations and reduclions in claioi.o! (high Tn) in the south shelf have been attributed to sediment and pailiculale.r in slmv water mno ff. t 8.) The ralios of paiiiculate pha.pho1ws (PP) to Chl have been higher on the south shelf Man in deeper areas o f the lake. The ratio o f PP to Chl was often above the range o f valuer commonl) r associaled with plyloplanklon biomass. 9 .) No con.picuous chances in water yualitj! have been observed on the shelf .since the LSC startup. 0036-009 - 100 i _ BENCHMARK 3 . 2 Summary, of the Statistical Data Analysis UFl prepared "A Before-after- Control - Impact _-analysis for Cornell University- ' s Lake Source Cooling Facilin" (BAC > ) (UFI , draft April 2004) that provided a stausucal analysis of the in - lake monitoring data from 1998 through 2003 . The primary objective of the report ya-as to determine whether the levels of Chl; Ti:, . < and T„ have shoNxin statistically significant changes in the southern poruon of Cayuga Lake due to start- up and operation of the LSC . Based on the results of the BACI , no significant increases in Chl. TP . and T„ have been detected in the lake posr - start- up through the 2003 - monitoring year . 3 . 3 Independent Assessment of Results -To - Date and Related Issues 3 . 3 . 1 General This independent assessment of the data - and findings - to- date attempts to address the following primary questions : ■ Are key findings and conclusions presented by UFl / Cornell substantiated by the data and sound scientific principles % ■ Are the data and / or statistical methods being used by UFl / Cornell adequate and / or appropriate to make a determination , as required in the SPDES permit, as to whether the LSC facility has or may adversely impact Na7ater quality in the southern end of Cai-tuga Lake ■ Are the monitoring requirements and conditions contained in the current SPDES permit for the LSC facility- adequate and / or appropriate to make a determination , as required in the SPDES permit; as to whether the LSC facilityy has or may adversely- impact water qualiny in the southern end of Cayuga Lake 0036- 001 - 100 #'�ifi �C23 YAI }i L yi,FAtvkfvi. F,- Ia3; tllIfa 3 .3 . 2 Key Independent Findings and Conclusions l .) Conformance With Permit Monitoring Requirements - The monitoring performed to date by UFl / Cornell in connection %vith the LSC facihn- is eNtensi-\- e . The monitoring has been performed and presented in a professional manner and in general accordance \kIth the terms and conditions of the SPDES permit . 2 .) Conformance With Effluent Discharge Limitations - The LSC effluent appears to be in consistent conformance ,\a1th the SPDES Permit discharge limitations . 3 .) Conformance With Biological Monitoring Special Conditions - With the addition of the wedge xvffi e intake screens , the potential for entrainment or impingement of fish and biota into the LSC is greatly, diminished . Biological monitoring results to date do not appear to indicate any significant entrainment . Furthermore . no significant entrainment or impingement is to be expected ; proi-ided that the intake screens are properly maintained . 4 .) Measurement of Lake Clarity We concur NaIth UFl / Cornell that the Secchi disk is a systematicafly fla,\ved measure of clariry for much of the southern portion of Cayuga Lake because of its shaflowness . \N%e further agree that turbidity (T„) represents a reasonable alternative for measurement of lake clarity- . 5 .) Chlorophyll a Trends- While the increases in chloroph �-ll - a concentrations on the southern shelf of the lake are not statisricafl�- significant fofloN\' ng LSC start- up , the average summer Chl concentrations appear to be trending higher over the study interval ( see Table 10) , 6 .) LSC Flow Contributions — LSC flows to the south shelf can exceed 60 percent of the total inflow- to the shelf i w n ) uly / august '\khi e operating at 50 percent capacirn . 7 .) Phosphorus Loads - The EIS predicted that the LSC discharge would increase the total phosphorus load to the southern end of Cayuga Lake by 3 to % % per month . As stated b�7 Cornell / UFl the al)erade percentage contribution from the LSC has been approximatelc 3% for the penzod of Mq)i throe,,ah October: Hotilener, a closer look at the months of juli; August and September show the LSC contributed as high as 5. 1 % of the monthly total phosphorus load during that period ta;hen cooling demands are higher and tributary inputs are 1ora7er. Considering 0036-001 - 100 9 ` r: > , , . :,, filly! a1: Y 11. 11 that the LSC is currently onh7 operating at approximately 40% of permitted capacity, the phosphorus load from the LSC would be expected to increase over time as load on the plant and associated ,flows increase. This is potentially significant considering the small yolurne and correspondingly short hN-draulic retention time on the southern shelf of the lake (i . e . approximately 16 days under average annual floe- and approximately 32 days under average August / September flow conditions) and the fact that 40`io of the total phosphorus in the LSC effluent is in the soluble reacti-ve form . ,which is immediately available for algae grow-th . Irrespective of the percentage contribution of phosphorus to the southern end of fl-ie lake from the LSC . it is the concentration of b]' 0 - 2-\7 phosphorus coupled with other environmental conditions (e . g. amount and intensir- of sunlight. water temperature) that will determine plant and algae producvon and related 'water duality impacts in the lake . 8 .) Phosphorus Loads — As the phosphorus loadings from the Ithaca Area and Cayuga Heights Wasteweater Treatment Plants decrease . the LSC is expected to contribute a greater percentage of P loading to the shelf, especially from ) uhl through September when the system cooling requirements are greater. 9 .) SRP from LSC and Chlorophyll Spikes — Are the relatively high soluble reactive phosphorus concentrations in the LSC effluent contributing to chlorophvfl spikes detected during the summer months In the " Cayuga Lake Water Qualiry ]Monitoring, Related to the LSC Facility : Summar- Report, 1998- 2002; " UFI indicated that TP and Chl concentrations tended TO increase during periods of low contributor- flow% into the south shelf. It is during this period that the flow% from the LSC can exceed 60 percent of the total inflow- into the south shelf. This could potentially cause increased Chl concentrations since SRP concentrations are higher in the LSC effluent than the south shelf waters and SRP is a form of phosphorus that is immediately available to support the growth of phyrtoplankton . Higher SRP concentrations in the south shelf means that more phosphorus is immediately available for gro,\x/-th potentially leading to increased phytoplankton production . 10.) Natural Variability — Natural variability of lake water quality- renders trending analysis difficult . 11 .) Definition of Impact Area & Determination of Thermal Impacts . For purposes of presentation and statistical comparison to " control" locations in the Lake. UFI / Cornell selected Sites 1 and % as bracketing the area of the lake impacted b�7 the LSC discharge . Site 1 is located. approximately 1200 feet northwest of the end of the LSC discharge 0036-001 - 100 q l0 45.iSk11 F.N i. X' diffuser. Site % is located approximately 800 feet south - south-west of the end of the LSC discharge diffuser. These sampling locations (see attached Figure 9 a) may be appropriate for monitoring chemical parameters related to larger area impacts . However, these locations are too far aWay from the diffuser to discern any localized or transient temperature impacts from the LSC discharge based upon the monthly measurement at a 2- meter depth at these locations . Similarly, the cluster pile; 'where the recording thermister is located , is o'- er 3 ,000 feet east of the end of the LSC outfall diffuser . Based upon the plume modeling performed in the EIS the outfall plume is toward the north (see attached Figures 232 - 23E and 2 . 3 . 2- 2 ') 1) . The cluster pile location is appropriate for measuring the temperature on the shelf but cannot monitor the predicted thermal impact plume from the LSC discharge . Furthen-nore , neither these data nor an- other data have been presented by UFI / Cornell to validate that actual thermal impacts from the LSC are consistent with the EIS modeled impact.. As such, UFI/Cornell have nor demonstrated r47hether or not the LSC discharge violates 6NYCRR Part 704 Criteria Governing Thermal Discharges (see Appendix Q and/or special conditions of the SPDES Permit regarding thermal impacts to the lake. 0036- 001 - 100 9 4 . 0 RECOMMENDATIONS Based upon our independent assessment of the data collected to date . \a,e recommend the following: 4 . 1 Outfall Monitoring LSC outfall monitoring should continue as required in the existing SPDES permit for the duration of the permit period . 4 . 2 Ambient Lake Water Quality Monitoring Seasonal monitoring (i . e . April 1 - October 31 ) of in - lake NN-ater qualin should be continued substantially- unchanged on the southern shelf for the duration of the current permit period to conclusively demonstrate that the discharge from the LSC has not significantly impacted 'a- ater quality, in the southern lake segment . 4 . 2. 1 Thermal Monitoring A short- term thermal evaluation of the LSC outfall should be undertaken to Validate the EIS modeling and demonstrate I\vhether or not the LSC discharge violates 6 NYCRR Part 704 Criteria Governing Thermal Discharges in the immediate Vicinin- of the diffuser. Similarly . the recording thermister should be moved to within the thermal plume of the LSC to monitor longer-term and potential seasonal then» al impacts . This was reconvwnded Benchmark in the March 2003 report; but has not been implen;ewed yet. 4 . 2 .2 Ambient Monitoring Parameters and Locations Secchi disk measurements should be discontinued . Similarly, the value of continued turbidity measurements is also questionable as this is more a measure of inorganic particulate than of algae productivin- . Monitoring of Site 2 could be discontinued as non -representatv\ye of the overA shelf. Monitoring of Site 6 could also be discontinued , since this site is not 0036-001 - 100 1 � �; 1.3rt-. (:;f3s �.�: located on the shelf. 'Monitoring of all other lake sites on the shelf (i . e . , Sites 1 , 3, 4 , 5 . % & 8) should continue for at least the duration of the current SPDES permit. 4 . 2 . 3 BACI Assessment The BACl assessment should be performed for soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) based upon the 1998 through 2003 data to determine whether increases in SRP concentrarion have occurred on the south shelf and if these increases are statisvcafly simnificant . UFl has stated that seasonal variavons in TP and T„ concentrations do not reflect the trophic state of the south shelf (UFI , ,'august 2003) and that "inorganic particles (primarily clay minerals , quartz , and calcium carbonate) ; rather than phvtoplankton , are the primary regulators of clarirv , represent most of the PP , and are responsible for the higher T,,, loNver SD , and higher TP on the shelf compared to deeper portions of the lake" (UFl , august 2003) . Since TP and T„ have been show-n to be flawed indicators of the trophic state on the south shelf due to non - phvtoplankton particulate phosphorus from runoff; a BACl assessment should be performed for Chl and SRP onh- , after the 2005 monitoring. 0036-001 - 100 3 ltsxcrssAx 7 C " , " ,,, . TABLES 13t^�c�ti*� �rYt, 0036-001 - 100 f TP ( tug/ L) SRP ( ug/ L ) Year LSC Shelf LSC Shelf Effluent Effluent 20C)O 1 %'. 0 16. 4 1 . 0 2001 1 1 20U% 12. 2.Ci. ' 4 . 0 r' . 1 .Z003 12. i 1 4 . C) 2 . 0 Table 6 : Av erase = alues 111 TP and " RP in tht LSC effluent and on the shelf. Chlorophyll a (ug/ L) Year Deep -Water Southern Locations Shelf 1cc �; 4. 8 5 .2. 4 . 6 4 . '. 20n�' 2001 4 . 5 4. 4 200 5 . 6 a ' Table 10: Summer (lone - September) average chlorciph ,ll a concentrations for the upper waters of Ca;yuge Lake. Sources : "Cayuga Lake '%ater Quality Monitorine . Related io the LSC Facility : Summary Report . 1998 - 2002 " (UFI . August 2003 ) and '`Cayuga Lake Water Quality Monitorine . Related to the LSC Facility : 2003 " (UFI . March 2004 ) FIGURES 0036- 001 - 100 � 8 km4( 8) - ' south shelf 4— Wind 00 ' S 6 - - - ® S11 100 m f� !,j, main lake LSC Intake N P4 0 km I 70 m approximate (D( 6 ) , , - depth LSC contours 40 m , � � - discharge ' 6 m Cayuga - ' MI) Heights 4m - ~ - .(D( 3 ) P2 WWTP (D (4 ) "Pile cluster - ! Site Kerr (D ( 2) 0 ( 7 ) ■ T921 Ithaca Area 8 - main lake reference WV1ri-P LSC - intake location 1 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 7 - south shelf 2 - Ithaca WWTP plume Cayuga Inlet Fall Creek Figure la. Sampling sites, setting, approximate bathymetry, for LSC monitoring program, southern end of Cayuga Lake. Sites sampled during 1994 — 1996 study (P2, P4 and S11 ; Stearns and Wheler 1997) are included for reference. d 4S Taughannaic O Point v Cn J LSC Intake 0 Un, I O Figure Ib. Sampling sites for LSC monitoring program, within the context of the entire Cayuga Lake basin. st . PROPOSED INTAKE 1 , W IsfBEPS Iti.DCATE 71"PER,ATORE g` PIPELINE ' Mi, ASM OR BCLVW A.MBICW, —�' � TFwPfRATUPE. � c. tURLt7 PRt�fECTiCINE. +L�SLIVE )- SIUPUFiEs',i GEOIA Y' OF Ga'JGA LAY£ IN To+ l REGION OF :fH E r- O;'7TALL 7NCRLFORE.. PL'UmE FRCiJECTKINS ARE SCHE w%^ REP'P.ESENiATIONS ON:;?. ACTUAL 4 CONOr;IOIaS ML CHWtIX E:AS[D Or." CLIRRENT FLOW AND DIRECTION LAKE LEVU. AN jgTpAr- pON or THE PLUr1E wmk THE SHORUJNE. l \ DELTA F — 0 ( - 0 . 47) N, uka \ } ) AFTA or iI.Mf s..v,,., DELTA T �+ slccTsa HIEF a t � Eknsinw+ '' PROPOSED OUTFAL L PIPEUNE « 500 Fl . '� yi L�rtid I i yt P � 40 3 x DELTA 7 _. t . '' LSC OLiTFALL (SEE INSEs) 8-E). ., � to DELTA T �c yr, Km van, {� g IN" El C) AREA C ISiC7 7Q oUTFAL r. O 71000 METERS 7 i V, APPROXIMATE SCALE n ^i CORNEL:L UNr ti TZ am&Wh,] 1, u, ITHACA, NEW YORK JfAE Haclrw E sclE um LAKE SOURCE COOLING PROjEGT v ZDO"` 'M FIGURE 22.2-23E DATE; 3197 X06 No.; 43187ZA APPROmMATE DCTENT OF SELECTED DDS THERMAL PLUMES IN AUGUST 577 A= PROPOSED INTAKE ^. 1 . NUMBERS NGATE FAlPETLITt{RE PIPELINE Mi: kABOVE OR BELOW AAaStD? ;e f T UPERATURE. � :. CORYiX PRCJECTKIres AS:�lYE A 57uf �f7ED v^EOYf'R ' O£ CAY LAKE IN THE REGION or THE L� LAKE E 1 OU'7ALl TIIMEI-Dd2: PLUME S PROJECTIDNS ARE SCHEMATIC \ REPRESENTATIONS ONLT. ACTiiAL CONOIifONti WILE. CHANGE gA rp >, ON C'UPREHS rLOW AND £NRE."r*N• LAKE LEVEL, ANo IWMA noN Or •-` 1H£ PLUM£ wlTh TH£ s4orkv"NE, l�1 ` DELTA T K ` \ S +D. a'F) P e �L Y fryer � t\ Akin Of UK'C t 1 for M wEF PROPOSED OUT ALL ` .f t.o PIPELINE - 500 CLOW i 5t, P2 DELTA T Q4 +0:5 'C i (+O,O'F) x' LSC OUTIALt -` DELTA (SEE INSE ) + 3 .0 "C ' +$ i 6 l$ 3c? �' Pemr nam gym) INSET OF AREF IOc � 7G 0° ITEM 0 7 ,000 METERS 4 i � APPROXIMATE SCALE V ( �Cr4f CORNELL UNNERSI'IY n' fT1•L4CA, NEW YORK &M*0NM94AL B4r4 LAKE SOURCE COOLING PRCWECT « FIGURE 2.3.2-231 GATE, 3/97 JO APPROXIMATE DaENT OF SELECTED fiElS THERMAL. PL.UME'S IN WINTER APPENDIX A LSC SPDES Permit (NY-0244741) 0036-001 - 100 ti N. < , 31 . .s t" yi NEW YORK STATE OEPARTia9'-ENT OF ENARI2OhEMEtwtTi4t. CONSERVATION State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) NOTICE I RENEWAL APPLICATION / PERMIT ,' '. Please read ALL instructions on the back before cSTpLefing this a ication form. Please TYPE or PRINT clearly in ink. n I., 05N Permittee Contact !dame, Title, Address Facility and SPOES Permit Information t CORNELL UNIVERSITY Name: LAKE SOURCE COOLING PLANT PATRICK MCNALLY Ind. Code: 9999 County: TOMPKINS HUMPHREYS SERVICE BLDG DEC No.: 7 _ 5099 _ 00009 / 00001 IT14ACA: NY 14853 SPDE No,: NY 024 4741 Expiration Date: 03 / 01 / 2003 Application Due By: 09 / 02 / 2002 Are these name(s) & address(es) correct? if not, please write corrections above. The State Poiiutant Discharge Elimination Systam Permit for the facility referenced above aspires on the dato indic ted . You are required by law to file a complete renewal application at least. 180 days prior to expiration of your current permit. Mote the ".Application flue y" date above; CAUTION: This short application form and attached questionnaire are the only forms acceptable for permit renewal. Sign Part 2 below and mail only this form and the completed questionnaire using the enclosed envelope. Effective .April 1, 1994 fire Department no tonger assesses SPDES application fees, If there are changes to your discharge, or to operations affecting the discharge, then in addition to this renewal application, you must also submit a separate permit modification application to the Regional Permit Administrator for the DEC region in which the facility is located, as required by your current permit. See the reverse side of this page for instructions on filing a modification request. PART Z , ,RENEWA L APPLIC°Ai`1t01�1 . w CERTIFICATION: I hereby affirm that under penalty of perjury that the Information provided on this form and all attachments submitted herewith is true to the best of my knowledge and belief. False statements made herein are punishable as a Class A misdemeanor pursuant to section 210.45 of the Penal Law. Name of person signing application (see Instructions on back) Titre a slgnatu pate r ^ 3 r PANT 3 '\z.> PERMIT 10w'ttis line . - ` Qftieial . tlse Effective Efate: r d Expiration !}ate: ty I ka i NYCDEC - Division of Environm9tai Permits 8 address: Bureau of EnAronmentat Analysis Permit Ad istrator 1625 Broadway, Albany, NY 12233-1750 14 / lei signature bate This permit together with the previous valid permit for this facility Issued I I ' and subsequent modifications constitute authorization to discharge wastewater in accordance with all terms, conditions and limitations specified in the previously issued valid permit, modifications thereof or issued as part of this permit, including any special or general conditions attached hereto, clothing In this permit shall be deemed to waive the Department's authority to initiate a modification of this permit on the grounds specified in 6NYCRR §621 ,14, 6NYCRR §754.4 or 6NYCRR §757. 1 existing at the time this permit is issued or which arise thereafter, Attachments: General Conditions dated � l 91-20-5a (7,99) NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION AM Please enter the DEC Number - _ IQ= ' numbers from your current permit; . SPDES Number. NY t �— } ' 4// SPDES RENEWAL APPLICATION QUESTIONNAIRE THIS PAGE MUST BE COMPLETED AND RETURNED WITH YOUR COMPLETED APPLICATION Please TYPE or PRINT neatly using adequate pressure to make ALL copies legible. Keep the GOLD copy far your records. 1 . Has the SPDES permit for your facility been modified in the past 5 years t4 YES 0 NO 2. Dischargers who use, manufacture, stare, handle or discharge toxic or hazardous pollutants are subject to Industrial Best Management Practices (BMP) plait requirements for toxic or hazardous substances. A BMP plan prevents or minimizes the potential forrelease of pollutants to receiving waters from such ancillary industrial activities, including material storage areas ; plant site runoff; in-plant transfer, process and material storage areas; loading and unloading operations, and sludge and waste disposal areas. Does your facility conduct ancillary activities as described above, which are not covered by BMP requirements in your current permit? ❑ YES NO Please indicate which of the following best describes the situation at your facility: None of the concerns on the "Self Evaluation List" seem to apply to my facility at this time and I will not be applying for a modification of the SPDES permit in the foreseeable future. Yes, some of the items on the "Self Evaluation List" have led me to believe my permit needs to be modified . I already have a complete modification application pending with the Department. El Yes, some of the items on the "Self Evaluation List" have led me to believe that the SPDES permit for this facility may need to be Modified. I have requested the appropriate forms by phone OR I have completed and attached the "Request For SPDES Application Farms!' (included in this renewal package) to allow me to submit a permittee" I nitiated Modification application. Q The items on the ,"Self Evaluation List" have left me unable to conclude whether my permit needs to be modified at this time . I am reporting the following general concerns about my permit: DISTRIBUTION: regional Water Engineer Central Office (BWP) Regional Permit Administrator Applicant i minormodmpd (12198) SPDES Permit No. : NY 024 4. 741 Part IN , Page 1 of Effective Date of Modification 12 / 31 / 2002 ISCHARGE NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS ' (a) Except as provided in (c), (f) and (g) of these Discharge Notification Act requirements , the permittee shall install and maintain identification signs at all outfalls to surface waters listed in this permit. Such signs shall be installed within 90 days of the Effective Date of this Modification . ( b) Subsequent modifications to or renewal of this permit does not reset or revise the deadline set forth in (a) above , unless a new deadline is set explicitly by such permit modification or renewal (c) The Discharge Notification Requirements described herein do not apply to outfalls from which the discharge is composed exclusively of storm water, or discharges to ground water. (d) The sign(s) shall be conspicuous, legible and in as close proximity to the point of discharge as is reasonably possible while ensuring the maximum visibility from the surface water and shore. The signs shall be installed in such a manner to pose minimal hazard to navigation, bathing or other water related activities . If the public has access to the water from the land in the vicinity of the outfall , an identical sign shall be posted to be visible from the direction approaching the surface water, The signs shall have minimum dimensions of eighteen inches by twenty four inches ( 18" x 24") and shall have white letters on a green background and contain the following information : N .Y.S. PERMITTED DISCHARGE POINT SPDES PERMIT No. : NY OUTFALL No. For information about this permitted discharge contact: Permittee Name: Permittee Contact: Permittee Phone. OR : NYSDEC Division of Water Regional Office Address : NYSDEC Division of Water Regional Phone: (e) For each discharge required to have a sign in accordance with a), the permittee shall , concurrent with the installation of the sign , provide a repository of copies of the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMRs) , as required by the RECORDING, REPORTING AND ADDITIONAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS page of this permit. This repository shall be open to the public, at a minimum, during normal daytime business hours. The repository may be at the business office repository of the permittee or at an off-premises location of its choice (such location shall be the village , town, city or county clerk's office, the local library or other location as approved by the Department ). In accordance with the RECORDING, REPORTING AND ADDITIONAL MONITORING REQUIREMENTS page of your permit, each DMR shall be maintained on record for a period of three years . (continued ) SPDES Permit No. , NY 024 4741 Part III , Page 2 of 2 If, upon November 1 , 1997, the permittee has installed signs that include the information required by 17-0815-a(2)(a) of the ECL, but do not meet the specifications listed above, the permittee may continue to use the existing signs for a period of up to five years, after which the signs shall comply with the specifications listed above. (g) All requirements of the Discharge Notification Act, including public repository requirements, are waived for any outfall meeting any of the following circumstances, provided Department notification is made in accordance with (h): (i) such sign would be inconsistent with any other state or federal statute; (ii) the Discharge Notification Requirements contained herein would require that such sign could only be located in an area that is damaged by ice or flooding due to a one-year storm or storms of less severity ; (iii) instances in which the outfall to the receiving water is located on private or government property which is restricted to the public through fencing , patrolling , or other control mechanisms. Property which is posted only , without additional control mechanisms, does not qualify for this provision ; (iv) instances where the outfall pipe or channel discharges to another outfall pipe or channel , before discharge to a receiving water; or (v) instances in which the discharge from the outfall is located In the receiving water, two-hundred or more feet from the shoreline of the receiving water. (h ) If the permittee believes that any outfall which discharges wastewater from the permitted facility meets any of the waiver criteria listed in (g) above, notification (form enclosed) must be made to the Department's Bureau of Water Permits, Central Office , of such fact, and , provided there is no abjection by the Department, a sign and DMR repository for the involved outfall(s) are not required . This notification must include the facility's name, address , telephone number, contact, permit number, outfall number(s), and reason why such outfall(s) is waived from the requirements of discharge notification. The Department may evaluate the applicability of a waiver at any time, and take appropriate measures to assure that the ECL and associated regulations are complied with. ( i) The permittee shall periodically inspect the outfall identification signs in order to ensure that they are maintained, are still visible and contain information that is current and factually correct. NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION STATE POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (SPDES) DISCHARGE PERMIT GENERAL CONDITIONS (PART 11) SECTION PAGE(s) 1 . General Provisions 4 1 -2 2, Special Reporting Requirements for Existing Manufacturing , Commercial, Mining and Silvicultural Dischargers 0 2 36 Exclusions 2 4. Modification, Suspension, Revocation 0 2-3 5, Reporting Noncompliance , , , , , , , , , , , , 4 0 - 34 6. Inspection and Entry , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 4 76 Transfer of Permit 4 8, Permit Renewal 4-5 9, Special Provisions - New or Modified Disposal Systems 5 10, Monitoring, Recording, and Reporting 5-8 t 10. 1 General 5-6 . . . . . . . . . . 10.2 Signatories and Certification 6-7 10.3 Recording of Monitoring Activities and Results 7 10A Test and Analytical Procedures s , , , , , , , , , , , , , 7-8 11 , Disposal System Operation and Quality Control , 8. 10 11A General 8 11 .2 Bypass 8-9 113 Upset 9. 10 11 .4 Special Condition-Disposal Systems with Septic Tanks 10 11 . 5 Sludge Disposal , , , , , , , , , , 0 10 12, Conditions Applicable to a Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) 11 -12 12. 1 General , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 10- 11 12.2 National Pretreatment Standards. Prohibited Discharges , . 11 -12 91 -20- 1 (11 !90) 1 . GENERAL PROVISIONS a . This permit, or a true copy, shall be kept readily available for reference at the wastewater treatment facility, b. A determination has been made on the basis of a submitted application, plans, or other available information, that compliance with the specified permit provisions will reasonably protect classified water use and assure compliance with applicable water quality standards . Satisfaction of permit provisions notwithstanding , if operation pursuant to the permit causes or contributes to a condition in contravention of State water quality standards, or if the Department determines, on the basis of notice provided by the permittee and any related investigation , inspection or sampling, that a modification of the permit is necessary to prevent impairment of the best use of the waters or to assure maintenance of water quality standards or compliance with other provisions of ECL Article 17 , or the Act, the Department may require such a modification and may require abatement action to be taken by the permittee and may also prohibit the noticed act until the permit has been modified. c. All discharges authorized by this permit shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit. Facility expansion or other modifications, production increases, product changes , product process modifications, and wastewater collection , treatment and disposal system changes which will result in new or increased discharges of pollutants into the waters of the state must be reported by submission of a new SPDES application , in which case the permit may be modified accordingly. The discharge of any pollutant, not identified and authorized , or the discharge of any pollutant more frequently than, or at a level in excess of, that identified and authorized by this permit shall constitute a violation of the terms and conditions of this permit. Facility modifications, process modifications , or production decreases which result in decreased discharges of pollutants must be reported by submission of written notice to the permit-issuing authority, in which case the permit-issuing authority may require the permittee to submit a new SPDES application . d. The provisions of this permit are severable, and if any provision of this permit, or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstance, is held invalid , the application of such provision to other cir- cumstances, and the remainder of this permit, shall not be affected thereby. e. If the discharge(s) permitted herein originate within the jurisdiction of an interstate water pollution control agency, then the permitted discharge(s) must also comply with any applicable effluent standards or water quality standards promulgated by that interstate agency. f. The permittee must comply with all terms and conditions of this permit. Any permit noncompliance constitutes a violation of the Environmental Conservation Law and the Clean Water Act and is grounds for: enforcement action ; for permit suspension , revocation and modification; and for denial of a permit renewal application. g. Where the permittee becomes aware that it failed to submit any relevant facts in a permit application, or submitted incorrect information in a permit application or in any report to the Department, the permittee shall promptly submit such facts or information. h. It shall not be a defense for a permittee in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions of this permit. 1. The permittee shall comply with effluent standards or prohibitions established under section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for toxic pollutants within the time provided in the regulations that establish these standards or prohibitions, even if the permit has not yet been modified to incorporate the requirement. j. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who violates a permit condition implementing sections 301 , 302 , 306, 3071 308 , 318, or 405 of the Clean Water Act is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $25,000 per day of such violations . Any person who willfully or negligently violates permit conditions implementing sections 301 , 302 , 306 , 307, or 308 of the Clean Water Act is subject to a fine of not less than $5,000 nor more than $50,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment for not more than three years, or both. k. The filing of a request by the permittee for a permit modification, revocation, transfer, or a notification of planned changes or anticipated noncompliance , does not stay any permit condition. 1. The permittee shall furnish to the Department, within a reasonable time, any information which the Department may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, suspending, or revoking this permit, or to determine compliance with this permit. The permittee shall also furnish to the Department, upon request, copies of records required to be kept by this permit. - Page 1 - m. Nothing in this permit relieves the permittee from a requirement to obtain other permits required by law, including, but not limited to: ( 1 ) an air contamination source permit/certification under 6NYCRR Part 201 ; (2) a waste transporter permit under 6NYCRR Part 364; or (3) a radioactive waste discharge permit under 6NYCRR Part 380, 2. SPECIAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR EXISTING MANUFACTURING , COMMERCIAL MINING , AND SILVICULTURAL DISCHARGERS All existing manufacturing, commercial, mining and silvicultural dischargers must notify the Department as soon as they know or have reason to believe: a. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in the discharge , on a routine or frequent basis , of any toxic pollutant which is not specifically controlled In the permit, pursuant to General Provision 1 © herein . For the purposes of this section, recurrent accidental or unintentional spills or releases shalt be considered to be a discharge on a frequent basis. b. That any activity has occurred or will occur which would result in any discharge , on a non-routine or Infrequent basis, of a toxic pollutant which is not limited in the permit, if that discharge will exceed the highest of the following "notification levels": ( 1 ) 500 microgramsAiter; (2) 1 . 0 milligramAiter for antimony; (3) five times the maximum concentration value reported for that pollutant in the permit application in accordance with 40 CFR § 122. 21 (g)(7); or (4) the level established by the Department in accordance with 40 CFR § 122.44(01 c. That they have begun or expect to begin to use, or manufacture as an intermediate or final product or by- product, any toxic pollutant which was not reported in the permit application under 40 CFR § 122.21 (g)(9) and which is being or may be discharged to waters of the state. 3. EXCLUSIONS a . The issuance of this permit by the Department and the receipt thereof by the Applicant does not supersede, revoke or rescind an order or modification thereof on consent or determination by the Commissioner issued heretofore by the Department or any of the terms, conditions or requirements contained in such order or modification thereof unless specifically intended by said order. b. The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to private property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations; nor does it obviate the necessity of obtaining the assent of any other jurisdiction as required by law for the discharge authorized. c. This permit does not authorize or approve the construction of any onshore or offshore physical structures or facilities or the undertaking of any work in any navigable waters. d. Oil and hazardous substance liability: The imposition of responsibilities upon, or the institution of any legal action against the permittee under Section 311 of the Clean Water Act shall be In conformance with regulations promulgated pursuant to Section 311 governing the applicability of Section 311 of the Clean Water Act to discharges from facilities with NPDES permits. 4. MODIFICATION. SUSPENSION , REVOCATION a. If the permittee fails or refuses to comply with any requirement in this permit, such noncompliance shall constitute a violation of the permit for which the Commissioner may modify, suspend , or revoke the permit after notice and opportunity for hearing and take direct enforcement action pursuant to law. When , at any time during or prior to a period for compliance, the permittee announces or otherwise lets it be known, or the Commissioner on reasonable cause determines, that the permittee will not make the requisite efforts to achieve compliance with an interim or final requirement, the Commissioner may modify, suspend or revoke the permit and take direct enforcement action pursuant to law, without waiting for expiration of the period for compliance with such requirements. - Page 2 b. After notice and opportunity for a hearing , the Department may modify, suspend or revoke this permit in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the following: ( 1 ) violation of any provision of this permit; or (2) obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or failure to disclose fully all relevant facts at any time; or materially false or inaccurate statements or information in the application or the permit, or (3) a change in any physical circumstances , requirements or criteria applicable to discharges, including, but not limited to: (1) standards for construction or operation of the discharging facility; (ii) the characteristics of the waters into which such discharge is made; (iii) the water quality criteria applicable to such is made; (iv) the classification of such waters; or (v) effluent limitations or other requirements applicable pursuant to the Act or State Law. (4) a determination that the permitted activity endangers human health or the environment and can only be regulated to acceptable levels by permit modification , a suspension, or revocation. (5) violation of any order of the Commissioner or provision of ECL or regulation promulgated thereunder, which is related to the permitted activity. (6) Newly discovered material information or material change in environmental conditions , relevant technology or applicable law or regulations since the issuance of this permit. c. If any applicable toxic effluent standard or prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is promulgated under section 307(a) of the Clean Water Act for a toxic pollutant and that a standard or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation on the pollutant in the permit, the Department shall institute proceedings to modify the permit in order to achieve conformance with the toxic effluent standard or prohibition and in conformance with ECL 17-0809. 5. REPORTING NONCOMPLIANCE a . Anticipated noncompliance. The permittee shall give advance notice to the Department of any planned changes in the permitted facility or activity which may result in noncompliance with permit requirements. b. Twenty-four hour reporting . The permittee shall report any noncompliance which may endanger health or the environment. Any information shall be provided orally within 24 hours from the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances . A written noncompliance report shall also be provided within five (5) days of the time the permittee becomes aware of the circumstances. The written noncompliance report shall contain a description of the noncompliance and its cause ; the period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times, and if the noncompliance has not been corrected , the anticipated time it is expected to continue; and steps taken or planned to reduce, eliminate, and prevent the noncompliance and its reoccurrence. (1 ) The following shall be included as information which must be reported within 24 hours under paragraph (b) above: (1) any unanticipated bypass which violates any effluent limitation in the permit; (ii) any upset which violates any effluent limitation in the permit; (iii) violation of a maximum daily discharge limitation for any of the pollutants listed by the Department in the permit to be reported within 24 hours. (iv) any unusual situation, caused by a deviation from normal operation or experience (e.g. upsets, bypasses, inoperative treatment process units, spills or illegal chemical discharges or releases to the collection system) which create a potentially hazardous condition. (v) any dry weather overflow(s). (2) The Department may waive the written report on a case-by-case basis if the oral report has been received within 24 hours. - Page 3 - (3) Reports required by this section shall be filed with the Department's regional office having jurisdiction over the permitted facility. During weekends, oral noncompliance reports, required by this paragraph, may be made at (518) 457-73624 c. Other noncompliance. The permittee shalt report all instances of noncompliance not otherwise required to be reported under this section or other sections of this permit, with each submitted copy of its Discharge Monitoring Reports until such noncompliance ceases. Such noncompliance reports shall contain the information listed in paragraph (b) of this section. d. Duty to mitigate. The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize or prevent any discharge in violation of this permit which has a reasonable likelihood of adversely affecting human health or the environments 6. INSPECTION AND ENTRY The permittee shall allow the Commissioner of the Department, the EPA Regional Administrator, the County Health Department, or their authorized representatives, upon the presentation of credentials and other documents as may be required by law, to; a. enter upon the permittee's premises where a regulated facility or activity is located or conducted , or where records must be kept under the conditions of this permit; b* have access to and copy, at reasonable times, any records that must be kept under the conditions of this permit, including records maintained for purposes of operation and maintenance; c, inspect at reasonable times any facilities, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, or operations regulated or required under this permit; d, sample or monitor at reasonable times, for the purposes of assuring permit compliance or as otherwise authorized by the Clean Water Act or Environmental Conservation Law, any substances or parameters at any location; and e. enter upon the property of any contributor of wastewater to the system under authority of the permittee's Sewer Use Ordinance (municipalities) or Regulations. 7. TRANSFER OF PERMIT a. A permit is transferable only with prior written approval of the Department. b. To transfer a permit to a new owner or operator, written application must be made to the Department. Application for Permit Transfer forms can be obtained from, and must be submitted to, the appropriate regional office of the Department's Division of Regulatory Affairs . c. In order for operation of the facility to continue without interruption, application must be made at least 30 days in advance of the transfer. d. If, when the ownership or operation is transferred, the volume or composition of the facility discharge will be altered, a new application for permit may be required. 8. PERMIT RENEWAL, a. Any permittee who wishes to continue to discharge after the expiration date of a permit shall apply for renewal of its permit no later than 180 days prior to the permit's expiration date (unless permission for a later date has been granted by the Department) by submitting any forms, fees, or supplemental information which may be required by the Department. Upon request, the Department shall provide the permittee with specific information concerning the forms, fees, and supplemental information required. b. When a permittee has made timely and sufficient application for the renewal of a permit or a new permit with reference to any activity of a continuing nature, the existing permit does not expire until the application has been finally determined by the Department, and, In case the application is denied or the terms of the new permit limited, until the last day for seeking review of the Department order or a later date fixed by order of the reviewing court, provided that this subdivision shall not affect any valid Department action then in effect summarily suspending such permit. c. A municipality applying for a permit -(renewal) shall submit evidence that it is enforcing an up-to-date enacted Sewer Use Ordinance which was approved by the Department - Page 4 - d. A municipality applying for a permit (renewal) shall have an approved method of residuals disposal in compliance with Part 6-NYCRR 360 and 364. e, A municipality receiving industrial waste shall submit evidence that it is operating (or implementing) its industrial pretreatment program in accordance with Part 6 NYCRR 651 .53(i). 9, SPECIAL PROVISIONS - NEW OR MODIFIED DISPOSAL SYSTEMS OR SERVICE AREAS a . Prior to construction of any new or modified waste disposal system or modification of a facility or service area generating wastewater which could alter the design volume of, or the method or effect of treatment or disposing of the sewage, industrial waste or other wastes, from an existing waste disposal system , the Permittee shall submit to the Department or its designated field office for review, an approvable engineering report, plans, and specifications which have been prepared by a person or firm licensed to practice Professional Engineering in the State of New York. b. The construction of the above new or modified disposal system shall not start until the Permittee receives written approval of the system from the Department or its designated field office. c. The construction of the above new or modified disposal system shall be under the general supervision of a person or firm licensed to practice Professional Engineering in New York State. Upon completion of construction, that person or firm shall certify to the Department or its designated field office that the system has been fully completed in accordance with the approved engineering report, plans and specifications, permit and letter of approval ; and the permittee shall receive written acceptance of such certificate from the Department or designated field agency prior to commencing discharge. d. The Department and its designated field offices review wastewater disposal system reports, plans, and specifications for treatment process capability only, and approval by either office does not constitute approval of the system's structural integrity. 10. MONITORING RECORDING AND REPORTING 10. 1 GENERAL a. The permiffee shall comply with all recording, reporting, monitoring and sampling requirements specified in this permit and such other additional terms, provisions, requirements or conditions that the Department may deem to be reasonably necessary to achieve the purposes of the Environmental Conservation Law, Article 17, the Act, or rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. b. Samples and measurements taken to meet the monitoring requirements specified in this permit shall be representative of the quantity and character of the monitored discharges. Composite samples shall be composed of a minimum of 8 grab samples, collected over the specified collection period, either at a constant sample volume for a constant flow interval or at a flow-proportioned sample volume for a constant time interval , unless otherwise specified in Part I of this permit, For GC/MS Volatile Organic Analysis (VOA), aliquots must be combined in the laboratory immediately before analysis. At least 4 (rather than 8 ) aliquots or grab samples should be collected over the specified collection period. Grab sample means a single sample, taken over a period not exceeding 15 minutes. c. Accessible sampling locations must be provided and maintained. New sampling locations shall be provided if existing locations are deemed unsuitable by the Department or its designated field agency. d. Actual measured values of all positive analytical results obtained above the Practical Quanfitation Limit (PQL)' for all monitored parameters shall be recorded and reported, as required by this permit; except, where parameters are limited in this permit to values below the PQL, actual measured values for all positive analytical results above the Method Detection Limit (MDL)2 shall be reported, i i ( 1 Practical Quan4tatlon Limit PQL is the lowest level that can be measured within s ( ) pacified limits of precision and accuracy during routine laboratory operations an most effluent matrices. 2 Method Detection limit MDl is the level at which the analytical t ) yti procedure referenced is capable of determining with a 99% probability that the substance is present. ?'his value Is determined In distilled water with no interfering substances present. The precision at this level is +/- 1009 . - PageS - i A e. The permittee shall periodically calibrate and perform manufacturer's recommended maintenance procedures on all monitoring and analytical instrumentation to insure accuracy of measurements.. Verification of maintenance shall be logged Into the daily record book(s) of the facility, The permittee shall notify the Department's regional office immediately if any required instrumentation becomes inoperable,. in addition, the permittee shall verify the accuracy of their measuring equipment to the Department's Regional Office annually. f. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit, shall upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $ 10,000 , or by imprisonment for not more than 2 years per violation or by both. If a conviction of such person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment shall be a fine of not more than $20,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or by both. 10.2 SiGNAT©RIE$ AND CERTIFICATION a. All reports required by this permit shall be signed as follows: ( 1 ) for a corporation: by a responsible corporate officer. For the purposes of this section, a responsible corporate officer means: (1) a president, secretary, treasurer, or a vice president of the corporation in charge of a principal business function, or any other person who performs similar policy or decision- making function for the corporation, or (ii) the manager of one or more manufacturing, production, or operating facilities employing more than 250 persons or having grass annual sales or expenditures exceeding $25 million (in second quarter 1980 dollars),if authority to sign documents has been assigned or delegated to the manager in accordance with corporate procedures. (2) for a partnership or sole proprietorship: by a general partner or the proprietor, respectively; or (3) for a municipality, state, federal, or other public agency: by either a principal or executive officer or ranking elected official. For purposes of this section, a principal executive officer of a federal agency includes. ( 1) the chief executive officer of the agency, or (ii) a senior executive officer having responsibility for the overall operations of a principal geographic unit of the agency; or (4) a duly authorized representative of the person described in items ( 1 ), (2) , or (3). A person is a duly authorized representative only if: (1) the authorization is made in writing by a person described in paragraph (a)(1 ), (2), or (3) of this section; (ii) the authorization specifies either an individual or a position having responsibility for the overall operation of the regulated facility or activity such as the position of plant manager, operator of a well or well field, superintendent, position of equivalent responsibility, or an individual or position having overall responsibility for environmental matters for the company. (A duly authorized representative may thus be either a named individual or any individual occupying a named position); and (iii) the written authorization is submitted to the Department. b, Changes to authorization; If an authorization under subparagraph (a)(4) of this section Is no longer accurate because a , different individual or position has responsibility for the overall operation of the facility, a new authorization satisfying the requirements of subparagraph (a)(4) of this section must be submitted to the iDepartment prior to or together with any reports, information, or applications to be signed by an authorized representative. c. Certification: Any person signing a report shall make the following certification: "I certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or supervision, in accordance with a system, designed to assure that qualified personnel property gather and evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the permit or persons Page 6 1 who manage the system, or those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information including the possibility of fine and imprisonment for knowing violations." d. The Clean Water Act provides that any person who knowingly snakes any material false statement, representation, or certification In any application, record, report, plan, or other document fled or required to be maintained under this permit, including monitoring reports or reports of compliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000 , or by imprisonment for not more than 2 years, or by both. If a conviction of such person is for a violation committed after a first conviction of such person under this paragraph, punishment shall be a fine of not more than $20,000 per day of violation, or by imprisonment of not more than 4 years, or by both. 10 .3 RECORDING OF'Mt3NITORING ACTIVITIES AND RESULTS a. The permittee shall retain records of all monitoring Information, including all calibration and maintenance records and all original strip chart recordings for continuous monitoring instrumentation, copies of all reports required by this permit, and records of all data used to complete the application for this permit, for a period of at least 3 years from the Mate of the sample, measurement, report or application . This period may be extended by request of the Department at any time. b. Records of monitoring information shall include. (1 ) the date, exact place, and time of sampling or measurements; (2) the individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements; (3) the date(s) analyses were performed , (4) the individual(s) who performed the analyses; ( ) the analytical techniques or methods used; and ( ) the results of such analyses , 103.4 TEST AND ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES a. Monitoring and analysis must be conducted using test procedures promulgated, pursuant to 40 Cf~R Dart 136, except: (1 ) should the Department require the use of a particular test procedure, such test procedure will be specified in Part I of this permit. (2) should the permittee desire to use a test method not approved herein, prior Department approval I s required, pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section. b. Application for approval of test procedures shall be made to the Department's Regional Permit Administrator (see Part 1 , page 1 for address), and shall contain. (1 ) the name and address of the applicant or the responsible person making the discharge, the DEC permit number and applicable SPDES identification number of the existing or pending permit, name of the permit Issuing agency, name and telephone number of applicant's contact person, (2) the names of the pollutants or parameters for which an alternate testing procedure is being requested, and the monitoring location(s) at which each testing procedure will be utilized; (3) justification for using test procedures, other than those approved in paragraph (a) of this section; and (4) a detailed description of the alternate procedure, together with; (1) references ' to published studies, If any, of the applicability of the alternate test procedure to the effluent in question; (ii) information on known interferences, if any; and - Page 7 - (5) a comparability study, using both approved and the proposed methods, The study shall consist of 8 replicates of 3 samples from a well mixed waste stream for each Outfall if less than 5 outfalls are involved,:, or from 5 outfalls if 5 or more outfalis are involved. Four (4) replicates from each of the samples must be analyzed using a method approved in paragraph (a) of this section, and four of the replicates of each sample must be analyzed using the proposed method. This results in 24 analyses per Outfall up to a maximum of 120 analyses per permit. A statistical analysis of the data must be submitted that shall include , as a minimum: (1) calculated statistical mean and standard deviation; (11) a test for outliers at the mean ± 3 standard deviations level. Where an outlier is detected, an additional sample must be collected and 8 replicates of the sample must be analyzed as specified above; • (iii) a pleat distribution with frequency counts and histogram; (iv) a test for equality among with-in sample standard deviation; (v) a check for equality of pooled with4n sample variance with an F-Test; (vi) a t-Test to determine equality of method means; and copies of all data generated in the study. Additional information can be obtained by contacting the Bureau of Watershed Assessment Research (NYSDEC, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, New York 12233 3502), 11 , I P SAL SYSTEM QPERATION AND QUALITY CONTROL 111 GENERAL a. The disposal system shall not receive or be committed to receive wastes beyond its design capacity as to volume and character of wastes treated; nor shall the system be materially altered as to; type, degree, or capacity of treatment provided; disposal of treated effluent; or treatment and disposal of separated scum, liquids, solids or combination thereof resulting from the treatment process without written approval of the Department of Environmental Conservation or its designated field office. b. The permittee shall, at all times, `properly operate and maintain all facilities and systems of treatment and control (or, related appurtenances) which are installed or used by the permittee to achieve compliance with the conditions of this permit, Proper operation and maintenance also includes as a minimum, the following: 1) A preventive/corrective maintenance program . 2) A site specific action orientated operation and maintenance manual for routine use, training new operators, adequate laboratory controls and appropriate quality assurance procedures. This provision requires the operation of backup or auxiliary facilities or similar systems which are installed by a permittee only when the operation is necessary to achieve compliance with the conditions of the permit. c. When required under Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules and Regulations of the State of New York (6NYCRR 650), sufficient personnel meeting qualifications for operators of sewage treatment works as required therein and additional maintenance personnel shall be employed to satisfactorily operate and maintain the treatment works. d. The permittee shall not discharge floating solids or visible foam . 11 .2 Yl3 PASS a. Definitions: i (1 ) "Bypass" means the intentional or unintentional diversion of waste stream(s) around any portion of a treatment facility for the purpose or having the effect of reducing the degree of treatment intended for the bypassed portion of the treatment facility. (2) "Severe property damage" means substantial damage to property, damage to the treatment facilities which causes them to become inoperable, or substantial and permanent loss of natural resources which would not reasonably be expected to occur in the absence of a bypass. Severe property damage does not mean economic loss caused by delays in production, . page 8 . b. Bypass not exceeding limitations: The permittee may allow any bypass to occur which does not cause effluent limitations to be violated, but only if it also is for essential maintenance, repair or replacement to assure efficient and proper operation. These bypasses are not subject to the provisions of paragraph © and (d) of this section, provided that written: notice is submitted prior to bypass (if anticipated) or as soon as possible after bypass (if unanticipated) , and no public health hazard is created by the bypass. c. Notice: ( 1 ) Anticipated bypass - If the permittee knows in advance of the need for a bypass , it shall submit prior written notice , at least forty five (45) days before the date of the bypass . (2) Unanticipated bypass - The permittee shall submit notice of an unanticipated bypass as required in Section 5, paragraph b . of this Part (24 hour notice). d. Prohibition of bypass: ( 1 ) Bypass is prohibited , and the Department may take enforcement action against a permittee for bypass, unless : (1) bypass was unavoidable ' to prevent loss of life, personal injury, public health hazard , or severe property damage; (ii) there were , no feasible alternatives to the bypass such as the use of auxiliary treatment facilities , retention of untreated wastes , or maintenance during normal period of equipment downtime. This condition is not satisfied if adequate backup equipment should have been installed in .the exercise of reasonable engineering judgment to prevent a bypass which occurred during normal periods of equipment downtime or preventive maintenance or if designed and installed backup equipment which could have prevented or mitigated the impact of the bypass is not operating during the bypass; and (iii) the permittee submitted notices as required under paragraph O of this section and, excepting emergency, conditions, the proposed bypass was accepted by the Department. 11 .3 UPSET a . Definition: "Upset" means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with permit effluent limitations because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the permittee. An upset does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities , lack of preventive maintenance, or careless or improper operation . b. Effect of an upset: An upset constitutes an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with such permit effluent limitations if the requirements of paragraph © of this section are met. No determination made during administrative review of claims that noncompliance was caused by upset, and before an action for noncompliance, i's final administrative action subject to judicial review. c. Conditions necessary for a demonstration of upset: A permittee who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed , contemporaneous operation logs, or other relevant evidence that: ( 1 ) an upset occurred and that the permittee can identify the cause(s) of the upset; (2) the permitt ed facility was at the time being properly operated; and (3) the permittee submitted noticel of the upset as required in Section 5 , paragraph b of this part (24 hour notice) . - Page 9 - (4) the permittee complied with any remedial measures required under Section 5 , paragraph d of this part. d . Burden of proof: In any enforcement proceeding the permittee seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset has the burden of proof. 11 .4 SPECIAL CONDITION - DISPOSAL SYSTEMS WITH SEPTIC TANKS If a septic tank is installed as part of the disposal system, it shall be inspected by the permittee or his agent for scum and sludge accumulation at intervals not to exceed one year's duration, and such accumulation will be removed before the depth of either exceeds one-fourth ( 1 /4) of the liquid depth so that no settleable solids or scum will leave in the septic tank effluent. Such accumulation shall be disposed of in an approved manner. 11 .5 SLUDGE DISPOSAL The storage or disposal; of collected screenings, sludges, other solids , or precipitates separated from the permitted discharges and/or intake or supply water by the permittee shall be done in such a manner as to prevent creation of nuisance conditions or entry of such materials into classified waters or their tributaries , and in a manner approved by the Department. Any live fish, shellfish , or other animals collected or trapped as a result of intake water screening or treatment should be returned to their water body habitat. The permittee shall maintain records of disposal on all effluent screenings , sludges and other solids associated with the discharge(s) herein described. The following data shall be compiled and reported to the Department or its designated field office upon request: a. the sources of the materials to be disposed of; b. the approximate volumes, weights, water content and (if other than sewage sludge) chemical composition; c. the method by which they were removed and transported , including the name and permit number of the waste transporter; and d, their final disposal locations . 12. CONDITIONS APPLICABLE TO A PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS (POTW) 12. 1 GENERAL a. All POTWs must provide adequate notice to the Department of the following : ( 1 ) any new introduction of pollutants into the POTW from an indirect discharger which would be subject to sections 301 or 306 of the Clean Water. Act if it were directly discharging those pollutants; and (2) any substantial change in the volume or character of pollutants being introduced into that POTW by a source introducing pollutants into the POTW at the time of issuance of the permit. (3) For purposes of this paragraph , adequate notice shall include information on: (1) the quality and quantity of effluent introduced into the POTW ; and (ii) any anticipated impact of the change on the quantity or quality of effluent to be discharged from the POTW. b. Dry weather overflows are prohibited . The occurance of any dry weather overflow constitutes a bypass exceeding limitations as defined in Section 11 .2 of this Part and shall be promptly abated and reported to the Department in accord with Section 5 of this Part. The permittee shall inspect all overflow facilities at least twice per year (once each spring and fall) during periods of dry weather flow to ensure they are functioning properly. Records of all inspections shall be maintained for inspection by the Department or its designated representative - Page 10 - c. The permittee shall identify all inflow to the tributary system and remove excessive infiltration/inflow to an extent which is economically feasible . d . The permittee shall enact, maintain and enforce an up-to-date and effective Sewer Use Ordinance which has been approved by the Department. e . New connections to a publicly owned sewer system or a privatized municipal sewer system are prohibited when the° permittee is notified by the Department: ( 1 ) that the discharge(s) regulated by this permit create( s) or is likely to create a public health or potential public health hazard , a contravention of water quality standards or the impairment of the best use of waters, as determined by the Commissioner; or (2) that the discharge(s) regulated by this permit exceeded the permit limit for a specific parameter, including flow, in four of any six consecutive month periods or exceeded a permit limit by 1 .4 ( 1 . 2 for toxics) times the permit limit in two of any six consecutive month periods ; or (3) that the permittee has failed or is likely to fail to carry out, meet or comply with any requirement of this permit, compliance schedule , order of the Department, judicial order, or consent decree. f. The provisions provided for in e. above shall remain in effect until the Permittee can demonstrate to the Department's satisfaction and approval that adequate available capacity exists in the plant and that the facility is in full compliance with all of the effluent limitations required by this permit. 12. 2 NATIONAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS: PROHIBITED DISCHARGES a . General prohibitions : Pollutants introduced into POTW's by a non-domestic source shall not pass through the POTW or Interfere with the operation or performance of the works or disposal of sludge . These general prohibitions and the specific prohibitions in paragraph (b) of this section apply to all non-domestic sources introducing pollutants into a POTW whether or not the source is subject to other National Pretreatment Standards or any national , State , or local Pretreatment Requirements . b. Specific prohibition : In addition, the following pollutants shall not be introduced into a POTW: ( 1 ) pollutants which create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW ; (2) pollutants which will cause corrosive structural damage to the POTW , but in no case discharge with pH lower than 5.0 unless the works is specifically designed to accommodate such discharges ; (3) solid or viscous pollutants in amounts which will cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW resulting in Interference ; (4) any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants (BOD , etc.) released in a Discharge at a flow rate and/or pollutant concentration which will cause Interference with the POTW. (5) heat in amounts which will inhibit biological activity in the POTW resulting in interference, but in no case heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTW Treatment Plant exceeds 40° C ( 104° F) unless the Approval Authority, upon request of the POTW , approves alternate temperature limits . c. When Specific Limits Must be Developed by a POTW: ( 1 ) POTW's developing POTW Pretreatment Programs pursuant to §403. 8 shall develop and enforce specific limits to implement the prohibitions listed in §403.5(a) and (b). (2) All other POTW's shall , in cases where pollutants contributed by User(s) result in Interference or Pass-Through, and such violation is likely to recur, develop and enforce specific effluent limits for Industrial User(s), and all other users, as appropriate , which , together with appropriate changes in the POTW Treatment Plant's Facilities or operation , are necessary to ensure renewed " Page 11 - S and continued compliance with the POTW's SPDES permit or sludge use or disposal practices. ( 3) Specific effluent limits shall not be developed and enforced without individual notice to persons or groups who have requested such notice and an opportunity to respond . d. Local Limits: Where specific prohibitions or limits on pollutants or pollutant parameters are developed by a POTW in accordance with paragraph © above , such limits shall be deemed Pretreatment Standards for the purposes of §307(d) of the Act . e. EPA and State Enforcement Actions: If, within 30 days after notice of an Interference or Pass Through violation has been sent by EPA or DEC to the POTW, and to persons or groups who have requested such notice , the POTW fails to commence appropriate enforcement action to correct the violation , EPA and DEC may take appropriate enforcement action. - Page 12 - NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( SPDES ) DISCHARGE PERMIT Special Conditions (Part 1 ) O l Code: 9999 SPDES Number: NY- 0244741 Discharge Class ( CL) : 01, DEC Number : 7 - 5099- 00009/00001 Toxic Class (TX) : N Effective Date ( EDP) : 3/1 / 1993 Major Drainage Basin : 07 Expiration Date (ExDP) : 3/ 1 /2003 Sub Drainage Basin : 05 'Modification Dates : 5/ 1 /2002 Water Index 'Number: Ont . 12 -66-P296 Attachment(s) : General Conditions ( Part 11 ) Date : 11 /90 Compact area : This SPDES permit is issued in compliance with Title S of Article 177 of the Environmental Conservation Law of New "fork State and in compliance with the Clean Water Act, as amended , ( _ 3 L . S . C. i 1251 et .seq .)(hereinaftcr referred to as " the Act ") . PERMIT'ITGE \ AtN1E AND ADDRESS !dame : Lake Source Cooling Plant Attention : Nlr . Patrick McNally Street: Humphreys Service Building , Cornell City: Ithaca State : NY Zip Code : 14853 is authorized to discharge from the facility described below: FACILITY NA,l1E AND ADDRESS Name : Lake Source Cooling Plant Location (C,T, V): City of Ithaca County: Tompkins Facility .Address : 983 East Shore Drive City: Ithaca State : NY Zip Code : 14850 NYTM -E : \l'T.Nl - N : 4 From Outfall No . : 001 at Latitude : 48 28 ' 15 " & Longitude: 76 3U ' 10 into receiving waters known as : Southern .Basin of Cavuga Lake V Class : A and; ( list other Outfalls, Receiving Waters & Water Classifications) in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements and other conditions set forth in Special Conditions ( Part I) and General Conditions (Part fl) of this permit. DISCHARGE MONITORING REPORT (I)MR) MAILING ADDRESS ltailing ''ame: Lake Source Cooling Plant Street: Humphreys Svc . Built] , Cornell City: Ithaca State : NY 'Zip Code : 14853 Responsible Official or Agent: 'Mr . Patrick i1le ,\ ally Phone : (607) 255- 2304 This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire on midnight of the expiration date shown above and the permittee shall not discharge after the expiration date unless this permit: has been renewed, or extended pursuant to law. To be authorized to discharge beyond the expiration date, the permittee shall apply for permit renewal not less than 180 days prior to the expiration date shown above . DlIzTRIBUTION4 US EPA Region II PemitAdminisuator: Michael Barylski Bureau of Water Permits Region 7 Water Division Address- 1255 Fisher Avenue, Cortland , ,\ Y 13045 - 1090 Tompkins County Health Department Signature: a !j,,1 Date: l/ SPDES No . : NY 024 4741 Part 1 , Page 2 of 9 EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS i During the period beginning EDP I and lasting until EDP + 5 YEARS the discharges from the permitted facility shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below : Minimum Monitoring Requirements Outfall Number & Discharge Limitations Measurement Sample Effluent Parameter Daily Avg . Daily Max . Units Frequency Type Outfall 001 - Noncontact Cooling Water DO Monitor Monitor mg/1 Weekly Grab Flow Monitor 2 . 0 m'/s Continuous Instantaneous PH 6 . 5 - 8 . 5 ( Range ) SU Weekly Grab .Phosphorus; Total Monitor Nlfonitor mg/1 * eekly Grab .Phosphorus , Soluble Reactive Monitor Monitor mg/l Weekly Grab Phosphorus, Total ( ambient.) ' N/A Monitor mg/ I Monthly Grab Phosphorus, Soluble- Reactive ( ambient) ' N/A Monitor mg/ 1 Monthly Grab Temperature (ambient) ' Monitor 'Monitor ' C Daily Grab Temperature (ambient)' Seven day N/A ' C Daily Grab Monitor Temperature (effluent) Monitor 21 . 1 ° C Continuous Instantaneous 1 . Seasonal monitoring , April 1 through October 31 . 2 . Ambient temperature monitoring shall be taken during a time period to accurately represent daily discharge activities . Seasonal Reporting schedule as follows : Monthly April 1 through October 31 . Submission of all .monthly DMRs for months November through March shall be no later than the 20 day of the following April . NOTE : No biocides , algicides or other chemical treatment for biological activity or any other water treatment chemicals may be used without express permission of the Department . • 91 -20-2e (2189) SPDES No . : NY 024 4741 Part 1 , Page 3 of _9 EFINITIONS OF DAILY AVERAGE AND DAILY MAXIMUM The daily average discharge is the total discharge by weight or in other appropriate units as specified herein , during a calendar month divided by the number of days in the month that the production or commercial facility was operating . Where less than daily sampling is required by this permit, the daily average discharge shall be determined by the summation of all the measured daily discharges in appropriate units as specified herein divided by the number of days during the calendar month when measuements were made . The daily maximum discharge means the total discharge by weight or in other appropriate units as specified herein , during any calendar day . MONITORING LOCATIONS The permittee shall take samples and measurements , to comply with the monitoring requirements specified in this permit, at the location (s) indicated below: (show sampling locations and outfalls with sketch or flow diagram as appropriate) I Ur.vE.'�:Y raRSSTeu� — Q of c u� r .•rr_a p p! — 2 W.0 Tw.c —soc +� CUTr7,tt ?•s'S-tiE {r.f8lit�t?iL'� •�7 -i FT l EL• :s+ar .� try �•rCl Lrvru f £L: :a2.�• ur9. C=:..'r+�rr ?wc� i -"s•rn. 1' '`G ^..n /{`.\��^`\ - r:OI FT PC. rT6 rt,cw* I = Gan+ 1 jAar� CJ1 tW r!'D STw ores GLLtQG:tX 4LRVEY C�.rLa ` UKE carry I r Temperature monitoring shall be performed in-lake to assure ambient temperature is unaffected. Ambient temperature, away from the outfall, is also to be recorded and reported. Ambient temperature Is to be monitored at locations agreed to by Cornell LSC and the Department. Ambient phosphorus (SRP and Total) monitoring shall also be conducted and reported to the Department. This is in accordance with the special conditions as attached. Flow measurement shall be from flowmeter. DO, phosphorus (SRP and Total), temperature, pH (unless specified ambient) may be mondored in-lake, or at an upstream sampling tap after the heat xchanger. Design and placement of tap shall be Included in plan submittal for pump house structure. it In-lake monitoring plans should be submitted, in writing, to this Department. Approval of monitoring plans is required before plant start-up. SPDES No . : NY 024 4741 Part 1 , Page 4 of 9 Section 1 : Biological Monitoring , Alysis ll. itigation and Fish Impingement �a.itigation Conditions All plans and submittals in accordance with these conditions shall be submitted in quadruplicate to the Regional N�� ater Engineer, address page 91 1 . A light source shall be included as part of the LSC intake structure :for the purpose of mitigating potential entrainment oflllysis relieta . The light source shall provide sufficient illumination to repel Ak );sis rclicia within a distance of 10 m of the intake . The light source will operate on a continuous basis . A. mechanism .for documenting the operation of the light will be incorporated into the final engineering design . This shall be included in the study workplan %�- hich shall be submitted to the Department for review and approval . Also included shall be a maintenance: schedule and plan for assuring that the light is operational and free of algae , mussels or other biogrowth that could inhibit the performance of the mitigating measure . This shall be submitted no later than six months from the effective date of the permit . 2 . Bionnonitoring of the entrainment of JUysis relicta for a minimum three -year period after the Lake Source Cooling system becomes operational will be required . Within ISO days of the effective date of permit (EDP) , the applicant is required to submit a proposed biomonitoring plan for NYSDEC review and approval . The biomonitoring plan shall be designed to meet the following performance criteria : a . Random entertainment sampling during the annual cycle that reflects the organism ' s life history , Cayuga Lake ' s thermal regime , and the relative volume of water circulated through the LSC intake . Allocation of the number of samples obtained during each time period will be refined as .necessary at the end of each year to reflect the most recent results . b . The number of timing of samples will be sufficient to enable a statistically- valid estimation of an annual entrainment rate . The goal will be to estimate entrainment with a relative error of 10 percent , depending on sampling and operational constraints and the measured variability of the data . C . Additional sampling will be required if the proposed light mitigation becomes temporarily disabled . d . A systematic approach to determining the efficacy of the proposed light mitigation system , based on a statistically-defensible paired sampling program with and without the light mitigation . (Item deleted) 4 . Biomonitoring of the entrainment of Cayuga Lake fishes will be required for a minimum of three years, after the Lake Source Cooling system becomes operational . Within 1. 80 days of the EDP , the applicant is required to submit a proposed biomonitoring plan for NYSDEC review and approval . The biomonitoring plan shall be designed to meet the following performance criteria : a . Random entrainment sampling during the annual cycle that reflects the fishes ' life history , Cayuga Lake ' s thermal regime and the relative volume of water circulated through the LSC intake . 4 Allocation of the number of samples obtained during each time period will be refined as necessary at the end of each year to reflect the most recent. results . SPDES No . : NY 024 4741. Part 1 , Page 5 of 9 4 . b. The number and timing of samples will be sufficient to enable a statistically - valid estimation of an annual entrainment rate . The goal will be to estimate entrainment with a relative error of 10 percent; depending on sampling and operational constraints and the measured variability of the data . C . (Item deleted) d . The proposed biomonitoring program must be able to identify the species of fish entrained and the relative contribution of each species to the annual biomass of entrained :fishes . C . (Item deleted ) 5 . The applicant is required to implement the approved work plans for biomonitoring upon project start-up . 6 . (Item deleted) 76 The applicant must submit a description , including detailed drawings, of the cooling water intake structure for Department review and approval by EDP + 12 months . The intake design mutt clearly show the positioning of all mitigative technologies as described in conditions 1 - 3 . S . (Item deleted ) 1 SPDES N`o . : NY 024 4741 Part 1 , Page 6 of 9 t r This page intentionally left blank . SPDES No . : NY 024 4741 Part 1 , Page 7 of 9 Section 11 : Conditions Related to Permit Issuance, Water Quality and System Maintenance The discharge location for the outfall is defined by 6NYCRR as ' Ont . 66- 12 - P296 . All of lake south of east- west i line through it'[cKinney ' s Point to the end of (Cayuga) lake . ' For this reason . the permit defines the area to be monitored for ' in - lake ' sampling as the same . All submittals in accordance with these conditions shall be submitted in quadruplicate to the Regional Water Engineer, address pale 9 . A . Resource Monitoring In-lake monitoring will be required to show that the levels oftotal phosphorus and chlorophyll -a in the lake segment, as described , have not increased . Additionally , Seechi Disc transparencies shall also be monitored . If i trending shows a statistically significant increasing concentration for total phosphorus over time, the outfall will have to be reevaluated . Reevaluation is discussed in Section C . For chlorophyll - a , results must be presented in a summary report showing comparisons to pre - discharge years . Statistically significant changes will trigger outfal.l reevaluation . Secchi disc data must also be reported . Should clarity show a statistically significant trending decline, the outfall will have to be reevaluated . Cornell. will submit to this Department, within six months of EDP , an approvable monitoring plan for these parameters listed . Monitoring shall cover the entire growing season , from April I. to October 31 . Additionally , temperature shall also be trended with the data collected . Temperature monitoring shall be year round_ All j reports of data collected shall be submitted in a coherent and understandable manner, with cumulative trending of i all data points over the pen-nit life . Monitoring shall be done at least "twice a month , in -lake , in the discharge segment of the lake , as defined above . Additionally , data must be collected from at least two separate locations in - lake, in portion described above . It is encouraged that more are collected and analyzed . An annual report of in -lake monitoring must be submitted to the Department for review and approval by April 1 of the following year. B . Resource Protection In the interest of improving water quality in the discharge area of Cayuga Lake and in conjunction with Cornell ' s role as an institution of higher learning , Cornell agrees to continue to promote , through education and other relevant activities, reduction of nonpoint source nutrient loading to the southern basin of Cayuga Lake . Cornell will accomplish this by : • Publication of an information bulletin or brochure to be distributed through channels such as ; but not limited to : Cooperative Extension , 4 -H , Tompkins County Soil and Water Conservation District , Cornell Center for the Environment . Focus will be to attempt to reach the potential nonpoint source contributors ; • Writing no less than two newspaper articles and radio public service. announcements ; • Holding at least one public workshop within three years of permit issuance ; or equivalent activities . Additionally, each year, for the first five years of implementation , Cornell will create and implement at least one new method per year and evaluate its success level and evaluate if the method should be continued . Methods could be local museum informational exhibits , interactive displays, schools, library materials or whatever Cornell feels is relevant and will have the most impact . This evaluation and subsequent conclusion shall be included in the submitted progress reports . Cornell must design and submit an approvable plan to this Department, and two year progress reports must be submitted to the Regional Water Engineer . Cornell has EDP + six months to submit an approvable plan , and one year from plan approval for implementation . SPDES No . : NY 024 4741 Part. 1 , Page S of 9 C . Outfall Reevaluation Should the water quality of the discharge area of Cayuga Lake be proven to have deteriorated because of the addition of the Cornell LSC outfall , the outfall location and discharge parameters must be reevaluated . Any statistically significant trend of increasing parameters will require reevaluation . If reevaluation of the outfall is required , Cornell has six months to determine causes and present the methods for ceasing further lake detriment and for restoring problems created by the LSC outfall . Possible alternatives would include, but not be limited to , moving the outfall to a location ` over the shelf' of the southern end of the lake or treatment for phosphorus . i 1) . Additionally : 1 . No chemical methods for Zebra/Quagga mussel control will be allowed without express written permission of this Department . Evaluation of mussel control alternatives must be a complete available technology review . 1 2 . The outfall structure must be designed to include a diffuser. This diffuser shall be engineered to meet the applicable requirements of 6NYCRR Part 704 ,, Criteria Governint Thermal Discharges . Final engineering plans and calculations for the outfall structure, and all relevant portions of the intake/heat exchanger must be submitted to this office prior to construction . The Department must be notified of the commencement of construction . 3 . An annual report of scheduled downtime shall be provided to this Department by April 1 for the following twelve months . I A: - SPDES No : NY 024 4741 Part L Page 9 of 9 CORDING, REPORTING .2"\1 ADDITIONAL MONITORING REQUERE INTENTS . J) The permittee shall also refer to the General Conditions (Part TI ) of this permit for additional information concerning monitoring and reporting requirements and conditions . b) The monitoring information required by this permit shall be summarized , signed and retained fora period of three years from the date of the sampling for subsequent inspection by the Department or its designated agent. Also : [X] ( if box is checked) monitoring information required by this permit shall be summarized and reported by submitting completed and signed Discharge Monitoring Report (DNIR) forms for each one month reporting period to the locations specified below . .Blank forms are avai.' able at the Department's Albany office listed below. The first reporting period begins on the effective date of this permit and the reports will be due no later than the 28th day of the month .following the end of each reporting period . Send the original (top sheet) of each Di`9R page to: Send an additional copy of each :D1R page to: Department of Environmental Conservation Town of Ithaca Division of Water Attn : Jonathan Kanter Bureau of Watershed Compliance Programs Director of Planning 625 Broadway 215 N . Tioga Street Albany; New York 12233 Ithaca, New York 14850 Phone : (51 S) 402- 5177 Send the first cow (second sheet) of each DIMR page to : Department: of Environmental Conservation Regional Water Engineer 615 Erie Boulevard West Syracuse, NY 13204 -24,00 Phone : (315-426- 7500 c ) A monthly " Wastewater Facility Operation Report. . . " (form 92 - 15 - 7) shall be submitted ( if box is checked) to the [ ] Regional Water Engineer and/or [ ] County Health Department or Environmental Control Agency listed above. d) Noncompliance with the provisions of this permit shall be reported to the Department as prescribed in the attached General Conditions (Part 17) e) Monitoring must be conducted according to test procedures approved under 40 C'FR Part 136, unless other test procedures have been specified in this permit. f) lithe permittee monitors any pollutant more frequently than required by the permit, using test procedures approved under 40 CFR 'Part 136 or as specified in this permit; the results of this monitoring shall be included in the calculations and recording of the data on the Discharge Monitoring Reports. g) Calculation for all limitations .which require averaging of measurements shall utilize an arithmetic mean unless otherwise specified in this permit. v h) Unless otherwise specified, all information recorded on the Discharge (Monitoring Report shall be based upon measurements and sampling carried out during the most recently completed reporting period . i) Any laboratory test or sample analysis required by this permit .for which the State Commissioner of Health issues certificates of approval pursuant to section five hundred two of the Public Health .Law shall be conducted by a laboratory which has been issued a certificate of approval . Inquiries regarding laboratory certification should be sent to the Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program, New York State Health Department Center for Laboratories and Research, Division of Environmental Sciences , The Nelson A . RockerfeI Empire State Plaza, Albany, New York 12201 . Appendix B Glossary of Technical Terms and Acronyms 0036-001 - 100 REVIEW OF CAYUGA LAKE WATER QUALITY MONITORING RELATED TO THE LSC FACILITY FOR 1998 THROUGH 2003 GLOSSARY OF TECHNICAL TERMS chlorophyll- a - A green pigment present in plants and algae . Chlorophyl)- a is often used as an indicator of the amount of algal life present in a body- of ,\k-ater . fecal eoliform - A bacteria associated Nvith fecal matter that is often used as an indicator that a bode of water is free from aninal Xa-rite and disease- causing organisms . mitigation The decreasing of the intensin . nitrogen nutrient required for plant gro-\vth . non - phyloplankton particles - Particles present in the water that are not associated with suspended microscopic plants outfall ' - The place at Na-hich water is returned to Cayuga Lake from the Lake Source Cooling Facibry . pH - The measurement of the concentration of hydrogen ions in Nvater . Water with a pH of % is considered to be neutral. Water with a pH less than 77 is considered to be acidic . Water -\vith a pH greater than % is considered to be caustic phosphorus — A nutrient that is required for plant growth . phytoplankton - 'Microscopic plants that grow in open water. Secchi disk - A black and white disk used to measure the depth of water clan n7 soluble reactive phosphorus ( SRP) — A form of phosphorus that is dissolved in water and is immediateli- available to support pll toplankton growth . spatial variability - Variations over an area in space . surrogate measure - A substitute means of measuring the same thing. For example , the clarin- of water can be measured using a Secchi disk or rurbidirn can be used as a surrogate or substitute measure for clarin . thermister - An electronic device used to measure temperature . total ammonia (T- NH) — A water quality parameter that is commonly- measured that. includes both ammonium ions (NH , -) and free, un -ionized ammonia NH ; . total dissolved nitrogen (TDN) — A measurement of the ammonium , nitrite , nitrate , and dissolved organic nitrogen concentrations in the wai er . total dissolved phosphorus (TDP) — A soluble form of phosphorus that includes soluble reactive phosphorus . total phosphorus (TP) — Total phosphorus is commonl- used to indicate the biological productivin- of a bode of water . 'Measurement of total phosphorus includes total dissolved phosphorus , soluble reactive phosphorus , and particulate phosphorus . trophic - Related to nutrients , the food chain , and the biological productii-in of a bod-- of xvater . turbidity - A measurement of the scattering of light in a water sample . 0 7 REVIEW OF CAYUGA LAKE WATER QUALITY MONITORING RELATED TO THE LSC FACILITY FOR 1998 THROUGH 2003 ACRONYMS /ABBREVIATIONS • DO - Dissolved Oxygen • EIS - E vironmental Impact Statement. LSC - Lake Source Cooling NYSDEC - NeA' York State Department of Environmental Consen-ation SPDES - State Pollutant Discharge Eliminatvon System SRP - Soluble Reactj* \- e Phosphorus TDN - Total Dissolved Nitrogen TDP Total Dissolved Phosphorus T„ - 1 urbtdin, T- NH3 - Total Nitrogen TP - Total Phosphorus UFI - Upstate l=resh '�avater Institute W`WTP - Wastewater Treatment Plant- e J APPENDIX C 6NYCRR Part 704 Criteria Governing Thermal Discharge 0016-001 - 100 Btz�e �a �i� �rjF � tj rtr 6 NYCRR Part X ( lJl ) ]'age l of 6 6 NYC�R'JR II �C{hapter X J Disclaimer legend Part 1 V `t j 1 / ? j. This regulation became effective in 1969 or before and was last amended September 7991 . Available DEC Guidance: NONE _... This web page was last updated 011152000. Please refer to the Disclaimer and Legend links above. For more information about this posting, contact: The Division of . ... . . . ...... _ .— , PART 704 CRITERIA GOVERNING THERMAL DISCHARGES (Statutory authority : Environmental Conservation § § 15 -03130 17-0301 ) Sec. 704_ 1 Water quality standards for thermal discharges 7042 Criteria governing thermal discharges 704 . 3 Miring zone criteria 704 .4 Additional limitations or modifications 704 . 5 Intake structures 704 .6 Applicability of criteria 704 .7 Severabilily Historical Note Part ( § 1704 . 1 -704 .4 ) filed Aug. 12, 1969; repealed, new filed : April 28, 1972; Sept. 20. 1974 eff. 30 days after filing with the Secretary of State, provided, however, if the application, pursuant to Pans 800 to 941 inclusive of Title 6. of anv provision of Part 704 shall be found to be invalid, the corresponding provision of Part 704 in effect immediately prior to such effective date shall be deemed not to have been repealed and shall remain in effect until such time as the provision, the application of which was found to be invalid, can lawfully be. made applicable. § 704. 1 Mater quality standards for thermal discharges. (a) All thermal discharges to the waters of the State shall assure the protection and propagation of a balanced, indigenous population of shellfish, fish, and wildlife in and on the body of water . (b) The criteria contained in this fart shall apply to all thermal discharges and shall be complied with, except as provided in this fart. Ilistorieal Note Sec. filed Aug. 12, 1969; repealed, new filed: April 28, 197.2 ; Sept. 20. 1974 eff. 30 days after filing with the Secretary of State, provided, however, if the application, pursuant to Parts 800 to 941 inclusive of Title 6, of any provision of Part 704 shall be found to be invalid, the corresponding provision of Part 704 in effect immediately prior to such effective date shall be deemed not to have been repealed and shall remain in effect until such time as the provision, the application of which was found to be invalid, can lawfully be made applicable . § 704.2 Criteria governing thermal discharges. W 6 NYGRR Part X ( I / ] Page 2 of 6 (a) General criteria . The following criteria shall apply to all waters of the State receiving thermal discharges, except as provided in section 704 . 6 of this fart : ( ] ) The natural seasonal cycle shall be retained . (2 ) Annual spring and fall temperature changes shall be gradual . ( 3 ) Large day -today temperature fluctuations due to heat of artificial origin shall be avoided . (4 ) Development or growth of nuisance organisms shall not occur in contravention of water quality standards . ( 5) Discharges which would lower receiving water temperature shall not cause a violation of water quality standards and section 704 . 3 of this Part . ( 6) For the protection of the aquatic biota from severe temperature changes, routine shut down of an entire thermal discharge at any site shall not be scheduled during the period from December through March . (b) .Special criteria. The following criteria shall apply to all uraters of the State receiving thermal discharges. except as provided in section 704 .6 of this Part : ( 1 ) Nontrout waters . (i) The water temperature at the surface of a stream shall not be raised to more than 90 degrees ,— Fahrenheit at any point . (ii ) At least 50 percent of the cross sectional area and/or volume of flow of the stream including a minimum of one-third of the surface as measured from shore to shore shall not be raised to more than five Fahrenheit degrees over the temperature that existed before the addition of .heat of artificial origin or to a maximum of 86 degrees Fahrenheit whichever is less . ( iii ) At least 50 percent of the cross sectional area and/or volume of flow of the stream including a minimum of one-third of the surface as measured from shore to shore shall not be. lowered more than five Fahrenheit degrees from the temperature that existed immediately) prior to such lowering . (2) Trout waters. (i ) No discharge at a temperature over 70 degrees Fahrenheit shall be permitted at any time to ». streams classified for trout . (ii ) From June through September no discharge shall be permitted that will raise the temperature of the stream more than two Fahrenheit degrees over that which existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin . (iii ) From October through May no discharge shall be permitted that will raise the temperature of the stream more than five Fahrenheit degrees over that which existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin or to a maximum of 50 degrees Fahrenheit whichever is less . G N YCRR Part X [ I / l Page 3 of 6 (.iv) From June through September no discharge shall be permitted that will lower tite temperature of the stream more than two Fahrenheit degrees from that which existed immediately prior to such lowering . (3 ) Lakes . (i) The water temperature at the surface of lake shall not be raised more than three Fahrenheit degrees over the temperature that existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin . (ii ) In lakes subject to stratification as defined in Part 652 of this Title, thermal discharges that will raise the temperature of the receiving waters shall be confined to the epilimnion . s (iii ) In lakes subject to stratification as defined in Pan 652 of this Title, thermal discharges that will lower the temperature of the receiving waters shall be discharged to the hypolimmon and shall meet the water quality standards contained in Part 703 of this Title in all respects . ( 4 ) Coastal waters . ( i ) The water temperature at the surface of coastal waters shall not be raised more than four Fahrenheit degrees from October through June nor more than 1 . 5 Fahrenheit degrees from July through September over that which existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin . (ii ) The water temperature at the surface of coastal waters shall not be lowered more than four Fahrenheit degrees from October through .tune nor more than 1 .5 Fahrenheit degrees from July through September from that which existed immediately prior to such lowerine . ( 5 ) Estuaries or portions of estuaries. (i ) The water temperature at the surface of an estuary shall not be raised to more than 90 degrees Fahrenheit at any point . (ii ) At least 50 percent of the cross sectional area and/or volume of the low of the estuary including a minimum of one-third of the surface as measured from water edge to water edge at any stage of tide, shall not be raised to more than four Fahrenheit degrees over the temperature that existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin or a maximum of-83 degrees Fahrenheit whichever is less . (iii) From July through September, if the water temperature at the surface of an estuary before the addition of heat of artificial origin is more than 83 degrees Fahrenheit an increase in temperature not to exceed 1 . 5 Fahrenheit degrees at any point of the estuarine passageway as delineated above. may be permitted . (iv) At least 50 percent of the cross sectional area and/or volume of the flow of the estuary= including a minimum of one-third of the surface as measured from water edge to water edge at any stage of tide. shall not be lowered more than four Fahrenheit degrees from the temperature that existed immediately prior to such lowering . (f) Enclosed bays . No additional temperature change except that which occurs naturally shall be permitted in enclosed bays . I 6 .NYCRR Part X I ! 1 ] ]'age 4 of }historical Note See. filed Aug. 12, 1969; repealed:, new filed : April 28, 1972 ; Sept. 20, 1974 eff. 30 days after filing with the Secretary of State, provided, however, if the application, pursuant to Parts 800 to 941 inclusive of Title 6, of any provision of Part 704 _.. shall be found to be invalid, the corresponding provision of pan 704 in effete immediately prior to such effective date shall be deemed not to have been repealed and shall remain in effect until such time as the provision. the application of which was found to be invalid, can lawfully be made applicable. Amd. filed Aug. 2, 1991 ell. 30 days after filing . _.. . Amended (bX3)(iii ) . 7043 Mixing lone criteria . a_. The fallowing criteria shall apply to all waters of the State receiving, thermal discharges, except as provided in section 704 , 6 of this Pan . (a) The department shall specify definable . numerical limits for all mixing zones (e.g. . linear distances from the point of discharge, surface area involvement, or volume of receiving, water entrained in the thermal plume) . (b) Conditions in the mixing zone shall not be lethal in contravention ofwater quality standards to �- aquatic biota which may enter the zone . (c) The location of mixing zones for thennal discharges shall not interfere with spawning areas . nursery areas and fish migration routes. Historical Note Sec. filed Aug . 12, 1969, repealed, new filed : April 28, 1972 ; Sept. 20, 1974 eff. 30 days after filing with the Secretary of State, provided, however, if the application, pursuant to Parts 800 to 941 inclusive of Title 6, oi' any provision of Pan 704 shall he found to he invalid. the corresponding provision of Part 704 in effect immediately prior to such effective date shall be deemed not to have been repealed and shall remain in effect until such time as the provision, the application of which was found to be invalid, can lawfully be made applicable. 704 .4 Additional limitations or modifications . (a) An applicant may apply for a modification of the criteria set forth in sections 704 . 2 and 704 . 3 of this Pan . (b) Upon receipt of such application, the commissioner shall confer with the U . S . Environmental Protection Agency and shall transmit to that agency information to enable the administrator to fulfill responsibilities under Federal Law. (c) The applicant shall have the burden of establishing to the satisfaction of the commissioner that • `! one or more of the criteria are unnecessarily restrictive as to a panicular project in that a modification of such criterion, or criteria, as the case may be, would assure the protection and propagation of a balanced indigenous population of shellfish , fish, and Nvildlife in and on the body of water into which the discharge is to be made. (d) The applicant shall consult with the Department of Environmental Consenmation to determine appropriate studies which shall be conducted by the applicant_ Prior approval shall be obtained bit the applicant for a program of studies that will determine the impact of any proposed modification . Such studies shall include, but shall not he limited to : ( 1 ) A comparative analysis of environmental effects of the thermal discharge on the receiving 6 NYCRR Part X ( 111 Pape 5 of 6 waters when subject to the stated criteria of this Part, and when subject to the applicant's proposed modification . (2 ) An analysis of the different discharge modes (e. g. , surface or subsurface) and the advantages and disadvantages of each mode with regard to effects on aquatic life. (e ) A public hearing shall be held upon the application . (f) The commissioner may authorize a modification of the stated criteria, which modifications shall Y be conditioned upon pose-operational experience. The commissioner may require additional treatment of, or change in , a thermal discharge in the event that post -operational experience shows a trend toward impairment by the discharge of the quality of the receiving waters for the protection and propagation of balanced indigenous population of shellfish , fish and wildlife in and on the bode of water. Historical Note Sec. filed Aug. 12, 1969, repealed, new filed: April 28, 1972: Sept . 20. 1974 eff. 30 days after filing . -- § 704 .5 Intake structures. The location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structums, in connection Nviih -- point source thermal discharges, shall reflect the best technology available for minimizing, adverse environniental impact . -- 1.1isiorical Note Sec. filed Sept. 20, 1974 efT 30 days after filing, 704.6 Applicabilih, of criteria . (a) In determining that a discharge existing, prior to July 25 , 1969 has violated the standard for thermal discharges , as provided in section 704 . 1 (a) of this Pan, the violation of any of the criteria contained in this Part shall not constitute evidence of a violation of such standard unless it is also sho%Nln that the violation of such criteria has contributed to the violation of the standard . (b) 73te provisions of subdivision (a), subparagraphs ( 1 )(iii), (2 )(iv), (3 )(iii ), (4 )(ii), (5)(iv), and paragraph (b)(6) of section 704 .2 of this Part, and section 704 .3 , shall apply only to thermal discharges which have been brought into existence subsequent to July 31 , 1973 , or to which the criteria contained in this Part were intended to apply pursuant to any certification issued by the M commissioner pursuant to section 401 (d) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act amendments of 1972 . (c) Whenever the commissioner has reason to believe that a thermal discharge, existing prior to the adoption of this Part, does not conform to section 704 . 1 (a) of this Part, he may impose appropriate criteria contained in this Pan upon such thermal discharge, unless, after public hearing , the oNNfrier or operator of any such thermal discharge establishes to the satisfaction of the commissioner that either 4 such thermal discharge does conform to such subdivision (a) or that any such criteria are more stringent than necessary to assure conformance with such subdivision (a) . Historical Note Sec . filed Sept . 20, 1974 off. 30 days after filing . 6 NYC;RR Part X [ lfl ] Page 6 of 6 704.7 gewrability. If any provision of this Part or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be ifivalld . the remainder of this Part and the application of that provision to other persons or circumstances mill not be affected . Historical Note Sep . filed Aug. 2, 1991 efi; 30 days afier filing. •rt° [Top of pag j Go to Pan 705 to continue. O 1 November 15 , 2004 Town Board Meeting ATTACHMENT # 6 TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM TO : TOWN BOARD MEMBERS FROM: JON KANTER, DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DATE . NOVEMBER 4, 2004 RE : CONIFER REALTY SENIOR APARTMENTS — PROPOSED REZONING Enclosed please find materials relating to the proposed Conifer Realty Senior Apartments. This is scheduled for discussion at the November 15 , 2004 Town Board meeting at which the Board is being requested to consider referring the proposal to the Planning Board for a recommendation. The applicant, Conifer Realty, LLC , is proposing to develop the +/- 57 .9 acres of land they own north of Linderman Creek and the Linderman Creek Apartments . Conifer presented an updated sketch plan for the overall future development of these lands to the Planning Board at the October 19, 2004 meeting. The revised overall plan is for construction of 51 single-family detached homes , 47 clustered patio homes , and 72 rental apartments for seniors (age 55 and over) . The development is slated to occur in several phases over a period of years, though each phase will be dependent on the market demand. The first phase, as shown on the enclosed sketch plan drawing, is now proposed to focus on the 72-unit senior apartment building. The land is currently zoned MDR Medium Density Residential, and is proposed to be rezoned to MR Multiple Residence for the senior apartments. Representatives from Conifer Realty, LLC will be attending the November 15a' Town Board meeting to generally discuss the overall sketch plan for the 57 .9 acres, and then specifically focus on the proposed rezoning and development of the senior apartments . A draft resolution is attached for the Board 's consideration, which would refer the proposed rezoning to the Planning Board for a recommendation, as well as request that the Planning Board serve as Lead Agency to coordinate the environmental review of the proposed actions related to the senior apartment project. Some of the issues that were discussed at the October 19u' Planning Board meeting are highlighted below. Roads/Access/Circulation: The overall sketch plan shows a proposed road system to serve the future development phases based around the extension of Conifer Drive, which was shown as a future road on the original approved Linderman Creek Subdivision plat. The next phase of development would be the senior apartments, which would be served by an extension of Conifer Drive to the lower apartment entrance. The applicant also proposes a driveway connection from the senior apartment building to the adjacent Linderman Creek Phase III apartments as a secondary access . The length of this extension of Conifer Drive would be approximately 800 feet from Mecklenburg Road. The sketch plan for future phases of development shows a future 1 access connection to the adjoining property to the west (the site of the proposed Sky Gardens Condominiums). During the previous sketch plan discussion in 2002, the issue of a second access to serve the development was raised as an important issue. While future plans call for Conifer Drive to extend to Bundy Road and for the Town to eventually take over its ownership and maintenance, this is not likely to happen until the large parcel of land north of the Conifer Realty property becomes developed. The distance from Bundy Road to the north property line of Conifer Realty land is approximately 0.4 miles . In the 2002 discussions, it became obvious that a second road access to Oakwood Lane to the east in the City would not be approved by the City of Ithaca because of neighborhood impacts, but that the water line easement in that area (which has a gravel surface) might be able to accommodate pedestrian/bicycle access to the Town Park. The current sketch plan shows this gravel water line easement area as "future emergency access only (gated)", with the intent that it would not be used as a through access for vehicles , but only for emergency purposes. A related question is - when does Conifer Drive become a public road? If the site of the proposed senior apartments is proposed to be conveyed to an entity other than Conifer, then this would require subdivision approval. It appears that this would result in the apartment parcel being landlocked with no frontage on a public road, unless Conifer Drive becomes a public road. However, the Town does not normally accept a road for dedication as a public road if it is serving only as an access to apartments (as would be the case in this proposal until later phases of the residential development occur). Zoning: The applicant will be requesting a rezoning from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Multiple Residence (MR) in conjunction with the senior apartment site. [Note: The applicant indicates in their 9/23/04 memo that a zone change is also required for the 47 .0 acre balance of the site from MDR to a Planned Development Zone (PDZ) . This is not necessarily true. The cluster provisions of the Subdivision Regulations could be applied by the Planning Board to allow the smaller lots , smaller setbacks , and attached units in some areas , as shown on the sketch plan. The plan for future development also shows areas of green space that would be preserved with a trail system that could be considered a rationale to apply the cluster provisions. This would be up to the Planning Board when future development phases are submitted.] The Planned Development Zone (PDZ) is another approach that could be considered, but would normally require the submission of detailed development plans in order to request that zoning change. Another positive element of the PDZ approach would be that it could be tailored to accommodate or even encourage the addition of a small neighborhood-oriented commercial area integrated with the future development phases on the Conifer site. The applicant has not indicated any plans for such a commercial area, but both the Town Board and the Planning Board might want to consider whether this future residential area (together with the adjacent properties that will develop in the future) might be appropriate for a future neighborhood commercial area. Such an area could include small- scale retail and service uses that would serve the immediate needs of the new residential area (e.g. , convenience shopping, restaurant, laundromat, etc.) but not attract customers from a large distance. If this is determined to be a desirable feature, then it could be included as part of a PDZ. However, a straightforward rezoning of a small Neighborhood Commercial zone somewhere along the future Conifer Drive 2 extension might be more appropriate. Based on the discussion of this subject at the October 19th Planning Board meeting, Conifer has indicated interest in exploring the possibility of such a neighborhood-oriented commercial area. Height of Apartment Building: The proposed senior apartment building would be three stories, or approximately 46 feet (as measured on the sketch plan cross-section) . This would exceed the height limits of the MR and MDR Zones (36/38 feet), and would require the granting of a height variance by the Zoning Board of Appeals. The Town Board and Planning Board should consider whether the proposed height would be appropriate for this site, and whether there would be any significant visual impacts because of this height. The environmental review could include a visual impact study showing how views from surrounding areas might be affected. The applicant looked at two- story layouts, and has indicated that the topography of the site makes that more difficult, ending up with more grading and site disturbance. Need/Demand for Senior Apartments : The Planning Board has already requested the submission of a market/needs study to document the need and demand for the proposed senior apartments. Some preliminary information has been provided by the applicant, but more detailed information will be necessary, and can be provided to the Town Board as well as the review progresses. Stormwater: As discussed at the Planning Board sketch Plan meeting, a stormwater management plan for the overall development phases will need to be submitted in conjunction with the senior apartment phase. Stormwater is proposed to be controlled in a number of proposed detention basins around the site, which are situated within green space areas . A detailed drainage analysis, stormwater management plan, and erosion and sedimentation control plan will need to be prepared in conjunction with the senior apartment proposal. Traffic: A traffic study was conducted for the Linderman Creek Phase H and III Apartments. This study did include an analysis of future potential development on the remaining Conifer property. An updated traffic study is recommended that would specifically address the proposed development phases , roads , access and circulation, including updated traffic volume counts on the surrounding road network, and factoring in the nearby development proposals that have recently been discussed with the Planning Board (e.g. , Sky Gardens, Drake Subdivision) . The above information is being provided to the Town Board to put the Senior Apartment proposal and rezoning in an overall context. These are issues that the Planning Board can look at in more detail during the environmental review process if the Town Board decides to refer the requested rezoning to the Planning Board. Please feel free to call if you have any questions. Enc. 3 CARL JAHN & ASSOCIATES LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS ENVIRONME LDEIGNET LINDERMAN CREEK SUBDIVISION / PHASE IV APARTMENTS 2 NARRATIVE (Revised) SEP 7 2004 CJA No . 201327 .00 9/23/04 T OWN OF ITHACA PLANNING , ZONING , ENGINEERING Conifer Realty proposes to continue development of the former Cerache property (tax map nos . 27-01 43 . 12 and 13 . 16) in the Town of Ithaca, New York. Three phases of apartments have been constructed to date on the lands fronting on Mecklenburgh Road and bounded by Linderman Creek to the north. A Conceptual Site Plan dated 9/8/04 for the balance of the property north of Linderman Creek illustrates the overall intended development which includes : Senior Apartments; the next proposed development phase (2006 construction); patio homes; and single family residences. The last two uses are configured as a clustered development in order to preserve green space areas along the creek corridor, easterly perimeter and internal beltways which create visual interest, preserve natural resources and provide pedestrian circulation via a network of trails. Reserving a 7 . 3 acre area for the Senior Apartments, 47 . 0± acres will be utilized for the clustered development. A theoretical development plan dated 2/ 11 /04 for conventional Medium Density Residential (MDR — 15 ,000 SF/lot) zoning indicates maximum potential development of 98 lots. The proposed clustered development plan therefore conforms to this number. The proposed Senior Apartments for low and moderate income residents (anticipated funding from New York State Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program) includes 72 units in a single, three-story, delta wing shaped building immediately to the north of the phase II Apartments toward the west side of the site. Its design will be similar to that of two other successful Conifer Development projects . Although slightly taller than the 36 ' maximum building height allowed by zoning. The building location and 40 ' vertical elevational difference from the adjoining property to the west will mitigate its visual appearance and interruption of views. Architectural character will compliment the local buildings utilizing sloped roofs, and facade relief to diminish mass . Access to the facility will be via an extension of Conifer Drive to the southerly driveway entrance to the Senior Apartments. A road will also be constructed from the phase III apartment area to provide a secondary emergency access. On-site stormwater detention will be provided, likely in the form of wet ponds which will provide additional visual interest and recreational opportunities. As in the previous projects, development will be set back from Linderman Creek to establish a buffer and nature/recreation corridor. Wetland disturbance associated with the Conifer Drive crossing of Linderman Creek is expected to be on the order of 0.08 acres. Appropriate permits will be obtained. Future wetland disturbance associated with 450S, SALINA ST. , P. O. BOX 29, SYRACUSE, NEW YORK 13201 TELEPHONE 315/472-6949 FAX 315/472-7800 development of the balance of the property is anticipated to on the order of 0. 5 acres primarily in the northwest corner of the property. Mitigation will be provided via development of wetlands in the detention basins along the easterly perimeter. This area will also serve as a buffer to adjoining houses in the City of Ithaca to the east and provide a greenbelt connection between the Linderman Creek corridor and the future Town Park in the northeast corner of the site. Per the traffic analysis which was done in conjunction with the previous phases of development and with consideration for future development as illustrated on the Conceptual Site Plan, no adverse impacts were identified and no further improvements to the intersection of Conifer Drive and Mecklenburgh Road are necessary. Utility infrastructure was also previously assessed and determined to be adequate for proposed development. A gravity sanitary sewer system will serve the proposed Senior Apartments and future development up hill to the north and west. Future development in lower situated elevations to the east will utilize a lift station to convey sewerage to the Town metering station at the southeast corner of the site. The proposed projects will require a zone change for the 7 .3 acre Senior Apartment site from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Multiple Residence (MR) . A zone change is also required for the 47 .0 acre balance of the site from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to a Planned Development zone (P) . SEP - 23 - 2004 14 : 33 FROM : CONIFER REALTY 5853240555 TO : 585 324 0555 _�� 1+ )D Linderman Creek Apartments Phase IV is a proposed low to moderate income ousiq ::- - `. ' ;, development financed by utilizing the New York State Low Income Housing Credit ("SLIHC') program A total of 72 units for seniors age 55+ will be developed with a combination of one and two- bedroom apartment floor plans. The building will have an elevator and all units will be handicapped accessible ensuring residents can age in place. The apartments will provide housing for mixed-inoomcs and complements the income-mix already in place at Phases I - III. The units will be available to persons in two select income groups -25% of the units at 51 -60% area median income ("AMr) and 75% of the units at 61 • 90% area median income. The proposed net rents and incomes are follows: Unit tMe AMT Target Gross Rent a Income range 1 bedroom 51 °/090% 56654900 S-$20,701-542 624 2 bedroom 51°/„.90% $750=$ 12000 $.$23,701453,29n The proposed development will increase the availability and fulfill the growing need for affordable senior housing . There is a need for over 2,000 family affordable apartment units in the market area to meet the need of low- and moderate-income households, so that they do not pay more than 30% of their monthly income for housing. The 72 units will roughly require a capture ratio of less than 4% of these households. The market area has virtually no vacancies. Currently, there is no senior affordable housing project, which targets the area's underserved senior market at 6140% of AMI. The project is further supported by the Tompkins County Comprehensive Plan. Excerpts from the plan follow: > Population projedions for Tompkins County indicate that senior populations will increase by 1 .2% between 2000 and 2010. The largest increase will be 24 .4% for those over 85 . BLlwecn 2010 and 2020 the senior population over the age 65 is projected to . increase by 26 .6% with the largest increase in the age 65 to 74 cohort; an increase of 43%. This can be attributed to the aging of the baby boomer population (Tompkins Comp Plan - Dousing, page 1). ➢ As seniors age they am more likely to be renters . Homeownership rates drop from 79. 4% for householders age 65 to 74 down to 53 .7% for householders over age 85 (Tompkins Comp Plan — Housing, page 2). The wait time for Section 8 assistance for low-income adults is increasing due to reduced federal program funding. There may be a need for more subsidized rental units for seniors in the future. They are also likely . to go market rage as the mandatory subsidy periods expire in the next ten years (Tompkins Comp Plan - Housing, page 2). Linderman Creek Apartments Phase N complements the Town of Ithaca's Comprehensive Plan's housing goals : D "To promote: the availability of diverse, high-quality, affordable, and attractive places for people to live" as a goal. The third objective of this goal is to have "Opportunities for affordable housing" (Town Comp Plan, page 111-2). Ie':Wvperty Data%?U91rtanning board 10-17-04 STAHC degaiptiooAoC �e � f�11■! �l�ai� i • ►� ��� ♦ ♦ rq t�tT� id show Ica MIN N as 0341 mv�p�A A .. mm Muff num Clild sm°��� ��� � - ate° ; ■ rA IN �� Or III � , . ... , �► s • • 1 IIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL ��IIII "iifi' i'iii i'iiili'liii' �`rl rQ � •y nlnl im1 miuw;,a �� i�l�_��a, t;, ; ,i , IIIIIIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII;,�l;�ll�lllllllf . - � � , .. - IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII l��.,,��I�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII = _ ,� r �IE�� I I � Ililllll!!IIII!!IIIIII t • ,. --?i11 \ y ^�: r I! _ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII a � _ �� r� , u � • �1 iLi.l y - � � � =�'!'�'��� II�►Illlllllllllulll ;I� lllllllllllll � � r x IIIIIIIII Jill = - ,4�, �ngllll► I IIIII � .��IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII illlllll!I!!!!I!Il!!!Ilf!I! - IIII ,�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII ' = : � IIl�II!!!!!III.II!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII = �. ' I I lilies . NOW u Id IF - �� � . �� ; �� �!� _ Imo►, � I , . �I _•._ f i • • • Y It n , ' e 1 yA �y M gyp L. tic _ ` i Ow I + e r Atb f 7r-07? Wills ILL I_ ,�f do ht ASk x s ek. { cif t . 1 t, .. 4y pp 1 I , Ay 1 �• Noo.,y took 406-7911 � ' J q '� . � .ft'L I�, 1'• A 1i X15-��� NIL to O V t LI A> � ,� � ` F Y � ✓ It e No i•.,L : A for yi p N V it to I C3 IJ ab Pit N fat util EUM OL d �-b —�' ° Ft �I " 1 ji 1 IYl1 •1 l It © It IV FILn ig ll� O I SIF a� 8� En t, t X � EEO ya p]Jr o eO' mZ D D � nrn ® �# . a vC t ILL, I m Nil 0 " 1 1 Ot f f 1 ,-i z z LJ ER LO o _ `� F w 33 a fFfl� ] 1 1r,F pt 11 4 OR b rn ; `l � � ® • . . II ' � a, " � , ter: , ,ir, ' or Fit MM Mill It r � '- I ��' y1. , i.li� I. , ` \) 1� , 7 '�1'.• • _J• qtr li N c 'i r i' (� '. t 5"Y, fit IL 0. 4 i{,( I n = j spa •I i Y-: a �t At LL � � � • S II� �F�r �tP r — I x at Ilia n 1 1 4 •'T9 l [SiiA fL! i1 = 7 •f •� 'Y g �ttI IIU LIP It ILL LLC to CC (�� r_ y' l Ifl � � 2 y � S• ILI 'CeI 'd A }l 5; } ILL ILI Ill G17D 6, (J COLD s, ..;( •, � Oct. 't-; i i fWM�4111 _ All—1 s tr IT , r�l I ILL CD (') r T Town Board Meeting November 15 , 2004 Page 1 of 1 ATTACHMENT # 7 Gail Kroll = From : Mike Kenneally [MKenneally @nytowns . org] Sent: Wednesday, September 29 , 2004 2 :08 PM To : Publicworks @town . ithaca. ny. us Subject: Creating Dept. of Public Works Fred- In response to your question about how a town can establish a department of public works, I have attached a copy of Comptrollers Opinion 80-251 , which provides a good overview on the subject. If you have any questions arising from this opinion , please feel free to contact me. Mike mexad 9. zewAt4. A. Associate Counsel Association of Towns of the State of New York 146 State Street Albany, New York 12207 9/29/2004 1980 WL 8025 ( N . Y . St . Cptr . ) Page 1 Opns St Comp , 1980 No .---80 --251 , 1980 WL 8025 ( N . Y . St . Cptr . ) - ( Cite as : 1980 WL 8025 ( N . Y . St . Cptr . ) ) New York State Comptroller * 1 August 26 , 1980 TO : LEWIS C . DI STASI , JR . , ESQ . , ATTORNEY AT LAW TOWN OF LLOYD Town Law , § 32 ( 1 ) Municipal Home Rule Law , § 10 ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( a ) ( 1 ) 1 . SUPERINTENDENT OF HIGHWAYS - - POWERS AND DUTIES - -ASSIGNMENT OF ADDITIONAL DUTIES 2 . LOCAL LAWS - - ABOLITION AND CREATION OF MUNICIPAL POSITIONS AND DEPARTMENTS - - TOWN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS A town board may , by local law , establish a department of public works to be headed by the town superintendent of highways , and assign him the responsibility of supervising the town dump , town highways , and town water and sewer districts , provided that there is no impairment of , or interference with , his statutory duties as superintendent . ( This is in reply to your letter in which you ask whether a town board may , by local law , establish a department of public works to be headed by the town ' s elective superintendent of highways and assign to him the responsibility of supervising the town dump , town highways and the town water and sewer district . Alternatively , you ask whether the town board may have the superintendent supervise the water and sewer district , and the dump , in addition to his duties with respect to town highways . His salary would be increased commensurately . The town possesses broad local law powers to prescribe the duties and fix the compensation of its officers and employees , and to create or discontinue departments of its government ( Municipal Home Rule Law , § 10 ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( a ) ( 1 ) ) , provided only that such local laws not be inconsistent with the provisions of the State constitution and general State statutes ( Municipal Home Rule Law , § 2 ( 5 ) ) . In addition , Town Law , § 32 ( 1 ) expressly authorizes a town board to require the superintendent to perform duties in addition to those imposed by statute , so long as they are not inconsistent with law . It is our opinion that the town board may , by local law , establish a department of public works , constitute the superintendent of highways as head of the department and assign to the department ( or the superintendent ) the responsibility for the administration and supervision of town highways , the town dump and the water and sewer districts , provided that there is no interference with , or diminution or impairment of , the statutory powers , duties and functions of the superintendent ( Opns St Comp , 1972 , No . 72 - 995 , unreported ; 0pns St Comp , 1976 , No . 76 - 333 , unreported ) . Alternately , in lieu of establishing a department of public works , the town board , by simple resolution adopted pursuant to Town Law , § 32 ( 1 ) , or by local law , could confer upon the superintendent responsibility for the supervision of the dump and the sewer and water districts , subject to the caveat mentioned above . We' " nom—in passing , 'that—t the -hi way is 9 Y properly chargeable for expenses Copr . © 2004 West . No Claim to Orig . U . S . Govt . Works . 1980 WL 8025 ( N . Y . St . Cptr . ) Page 2 Opns St Comp , 1980 No . 80 - 251 , 1980 WL 8025 ( N . Y . St . Cptr . ) ( Cite as : 1980 WL 8025 (N . Y . St . Cptr . ) ) attributable to highway department - giersdnnel and equipment only in connection with- - those functions within the contemplation of Highway law , § 141 . The cost of maintaining the landfill and the special districts , to the extent performed by such personnel and equipment and paid from the highway fund , should be charged back to the proper general fund accounts ( including special district accounts , as the case may be ) ( Opns St Comp , 1976 , No . 76 - 1145 unreported ; Opns St Comp , 1976 , No . 76 - 333 , supra ) . * 2 Finally , with respect to increasing the compensation of the superintendent of highways , we point out that any salary increase during the fiscal year in excess of the amount specified in the notice of hearing on the preliminary budget for that year must be by local law adopted pursuant to the Municipal Home Rule Law ( Town Law , § 27 ( 1 ) ; Opns St Comp , 1977 , No . 77 - 860 , unreported ) . The local law would be subject to a permissive referendum ( Municipal Home Rule Law , § 24 ( 2 ) ( h ) ) . Opns St Comp , 1980 No , 80 - 251 1980 WL 8025 END OF DOCUMENT f Copr . © 2004 West , No Claim to Orig . U . S . Govt . Works . s MCKINNEY'S CONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW YORK ANNOTATED TOWN LAW CHAPTER 62 OF THE CONSOLIDATED LAWS ARTICLE 4--TOWN BOARDS -► § 64. General powers of town boards Subject to law and the provisions of this chapter, the town board of every town: . . . (editors note: paragraphs 1-21 omitted) 21 -a. Establishment of department of public works in certain towns. 1 . The town board of any town of the first class or of any town having a population of ten thousand or more as shown by the latest federal census, and in which town the office of town superintendent of highways is an appointive office, may adopt a resolution establishing a department of public works, and may appoint and fix the salary of a commissioner of public works, who shall be the administrative head of the department. 2. The commissioner of public works shall be appointed on the basis of his administrative experience and qualifications for the duties of the office. Such commissioner of public works shall hold office until the first day of January next succeeding the first bi-annual town election held after his appointment and thereafter such commissioner of public works shall hold office for the term of two years. 2-a. The town board of any town in Suffolk county in which the office of the town superintendent of highways is an elective or appointive office may adopt a resolution establishing a department of pub works and providing that the town superintendent of highways shall be the administrative head thereof. li 3 . Upon the establishment of a department of public works, as above provided, the town board by appropriate resolution may transfer to said department the functions of one or more of the departments, bureaus, improvement districts and services that are now or may hereafter come under the jurisdiction of the town board, and such other duties in the nature of public works as may be prescribed by law or the town board may determine, not inconsistent with law. All costs and expenses incurred by the department or its officers, agents and employees on behalf of a special improvement district, shall be charged against such district and paid from the funds duly appropriated for the purpose of such district. 4 . Whenever such town board shall transfer to a department of public works any department, bureau, improvement district or service as in this section provided, the employees of such department, bureau, improvement district or service shall be continued as employees in the department of public works, with the same classification, pensions and retirement rights and privileges as they had immediately prior to such transfer, provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall deprive the town board of any power it now has with respect to any such employees. 5 . Nothing herein contained shall be construed to delegate or transfer any power of the town board contained in sections sixty-one, sixty-four and. articles twelve, fourteen and fifteen of this chapter. Copr. © 2004 West. No Claim to Orig. U.S . Govt. Works. Page 1 of 1 Gail Kroll r From : Mike Kenneally [MKenneally @nytowns .org] Sent: Monday, October 04, 2004 11 :33 AM To : Publicworks @town . ithaca. ny. us Subject: Department of Public Works Hi Fred- Attached are copies of Town Law s . 64 (21 -a) and Attorney General's Opinion 94-43 , which outline the procedure for creating a Department of Public Works in towns with over 10 , 000 in population and an appointive Highway Superintendent. It would appear that under this section , the town board can either create a DPW that includes the functions of the Highway Department, or keep the entities separate. In the event that the departments are consolidated , the town board would appoint the Commissioner of Public Works , which may or may not be the Highway Superintendent. In the event the two departments are kept separate, each department would have its own administrative head , which cannot be the same individual . If you have any questions whatsoever, do not hesitate to contact me . md4d 54 zaxea4t &, Associate Counsel Association of Towns of the State of New York 46 State Street / lbany, New York 12207 1 10/4/2004 i R y es Y 1994 N . Y . Op . Atty , Gen . Page 1 1994 N . Y . Op , Atty . Gen- ._ ( Inf . ) 1076 , 1994 WL 687568 ( N . Y . A . G . ) . ._ ( Cite as : 1994 WL 687568 ( N . Y . A . G . ) ) Office of the Attorney General State of New York * 1 Informal Opinion No . 94 - 43 October 18 , 1994 MUNICIPAL HOME RULE LAW § § 10 ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( a ) ( 1 ) and ( d ) ( 3 ) , 22 ; TOWN LAW § 64 ( 21 - a ) A town may make its elected superintendent of highways the administrative head of the department of public works . Jeffrey C . D ' Angelo , Esq . Town Attorney Town of Wheatland P . 0 . Box 88 Caledonia , NY 14423 Dear Mr , D ' Angelo : You have asked whether it is proper in a town for an elected superintendent of highways to also hold the office of superintendent of public works which carries an additional salary of $ 2 , 000 annually . First , we note that section 64 ( 21 - a ) of the Town Law provides that towns of the first class or any town having a population of 10 , 000 or more , in which the office of superintendent of highways is appointive , may adopt a resolution establishing a department of public works and may appoint and fix the salary of a commissioner of public works to be the administrative head of the department . Town Law § 64 ( 21 - a ) ( 1 ) , It appears that this subdivision contemplates that in such towns the department of public works could include within it the highway function supervised by the appointive superintendent of highways . Id . , § 64 ( 21 - a ) ( 3 ) , ( 4 ) . Section 64 ( 21 - a ) specifically authorizes any town in Suffolk County , whether the office of superintendent of highways is elective or appointive , to adopt a resolution establishing a department of public works headed by the town superintendent of highways . While the town superintendent of highways is elective in the Town of Wheatland , and the town is not located in Suffolk County , we believe that the town board may enact a local law authorizing the establishment of a department of public works headed by the elected superintendent of highways . This may be accomplished using the authority of a town to enact a local law amending or superseding provisions of the Town Law dealing with subjects that are within the scope of its home rule authority . Municipal Home Rule Law § 10 ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( d ) ( 3 ) . Towns possess authority to enact local laws relating to the powers , duties , qualifications , etc . , of its officers and employees . Id . , § 10 ( 1 ) ( ii ) ( a ) ( 1 ) . Thus , in our view , the Town of Wheatland may amend section 64 ( 21a ) of the Town Law to authorize its elected superintendent of highways to be the administrative head of the department of publi works . In amending the Town Law , the town board should be careful to comply with section 22 of the Municipal Home Rule Law . This is one option that the town might Copr . © 2004 West . No Claim to Orig . U . S . Govt . Works . 1 ? _ MCKINNEY'S CONSOLIDATED LAWS OF NEW YORK ANNOTATED TOWN LAW - i CHAPTER 62 OF THE CONSOLIDATED LAWS ARTICLE 4-40WN BOARDS -1 § 64. General powers of town boards Subject to law and the provisions of this chapter, the town board of every town: . . . (editors note: paragraphs 1-21 omitted) 21 -a. Establishment of department of public works in certain towns. 1 . The town board of any town of the first class or of any town having a population of ten thousand or more as shown by the latest federal census, and in which town the office of town superintendent of highways is an appointive office, may adopt a resolution establishing a department of public works, and may appoint and fix the salary of a commissioner of public works, who shall be the administrative head of the department. 2. The commissioner of public works shall be appointed on the basis of his administrative experience and qualifications for the duties of the office. Such commissioner of public works shall hold office until the first day of January next succeeding the first bi-annual town election held after his appointment and thereafter such commissioner of public works shall hold office for the term of two years. 2-a. The town board of any town in Suffolk county in which the office of the town superintendent of highways is an elective or appointive office may adopt a resolution establishing a department of public works and providing that the town superintendent of highways shall be the administrative head thereof. 3 . Upon the establishment of a department of public works, as above provided, the town board by appropriate resolution may transfer to said department the functions of one or more of the departments, bureaus, improvement districts and services that are now or may hereafter come under the jurisdiction of the town board, and such other duties in the nature of public works as may be prescribed by law or the town board may determine, not inconsistent with law. All costs and expenses incurred by the department or its officers, agents and employees on behalf of a special improvement district, shall be charged against such district and paid from the funds duly appropriated for the purpose of such district. 4. Whenever such town board shall transfer to a department of public works any department, bureau, improvement district or service as in this section provided, the employees of such department, bureau, improvement district or service shall be continued as employees in the department of public works, with the same classification, pensions and retirement rights and privileges as they had immediately prior to such transfer, provided, however, that nothing herein contained shall deprive the town board of any power it now has with respect to any such employees. 5 . Nothing herein contained shall be construed to delegate or transfer any power of the town board contained in sections sixty-one, sixty-four and articles twelve, fourteen and fifteen of this chapter. Copr. 0 2004 West. No Claim to Orig. U.S . Govt. Works. ' ssaooad aqj olul Indui aneq Minn pae08 9q1 pue 0u11u9len josinaadnS ' pjeoq aqj waojui Illnn INsnnouewo�j 'aw ` uodn papioap si ssaooad eqj se uoos sy ' ssaooad aq} aol palsenbaa aq Minn AeuolN ' awes aqj op Minn Aj! o aqj pue ani}ejuasaidai s, unnol aqj se ajeu6lsap II !nn oulluWA aoslniadnS Apogawos apnloui Algegoad Ilion sigl 86uiuueld ol6aleils 941 }gels of aa}}iwwoo a do 6ui:49s uo unnol aqj pue App) aqj uaanqaq suollellnsuoo aq pinonn aiagj suinjai aq se uoos se Inq ' aneal leoipaw uo Ino Al}uaiino si jalgo aqj pauleldxa iNsnouewoH 'jW quelInsuo a arnq eqj pinon ao aa}}Iwwoo (q auop q na 1egl JI paNse Nueging uewllounoo ssaooad 6uiuueld oi6a}eils papuawwooaa s, uoissiwwoo aqj 6ulpae6a�j - :podai uoissiwwoo aii j AIgjuow slq peal pue pieog aqj ajolaq pajeadde i� snnouewoU clog }ao aj ua}}lann — lo# �uaw43MV saauolsslwwo3 aai � bo o ab — g • oN wail epua d ' uoissas anilnoexe ao uoissas uado ui aaijew aqj q}lnn leap of juenn Aaqj }I aploap 01 peau Ilion pieog aql -ja:4ew lauuosiad a ssnosip of aNll pinonn oulluelen josinaadnS N011laad d4N30V W - e 00:6 X 5002 `Z k yoaeyv o4 panow ueaq seq Ilawoo jo juepisaad a yl qpm Bggeaw 4sej)leaaq agl -nlj et/1 seq eys esneoeq paeoq ayp aaojaq Buueedde eq jou p1noM `angejuesaadaa younoo uowwoj Ajio eyl `aaagaoy4 uigod pieog eq4 plo4 ogqueleA aos!n.iadnS S1N3W30Nn0NNd * 93uei6911d 10 96pald agj ui 96elgwesse aq} pal pue ' w ' d 0£ : 5 le aapio of 6uilaaw aqj palleo ouljualen aosuuadnS 0213a210 Ol I "ldO ' p�j nnalnq}aoN 9Zl- ` oloedaa golH 'aolelsi6al Ajunoo ' 010ad NueJJ 'Jauoislwwoo 09111 ' i� snnouewoH qo8 ' unnol ag} jol A9ujo:4V ' Aaujeg ugof D1N3S321d SM3H10 6uiuoz pue 6uipling jo joloaaia `}soi j Apuy 'jabeueW saojnosaH uewnH ' aNead Apnr 'jaogo 196png ` Iluueo Id ' 6uiuueld 10 a0109ala 'ialueN uegleuor 'juepualuuadng Aenng61H ` woog910N p9aJ ' 6u1aa9ui6u310 J0109JI (I 'aa)lieM uea ' Naalo unnol 'jajunH uuy-99i m1N3S3Md =11 =11d1S uewbu3 uewliounoo ` uia}S uewliounoo ' uew6u3 uewllounoo ' noJ061J0 uewonnllouno :D ` Nuegang uewliounoo `jassal uewl !ounoo ' na061J0 uewonnllounoo ' oulIuale^ aosln.iednS N1N3S3Md 3S0H1 098K AN ' eoeW 'IS e150114VoN 91, Z wd 0£ 09 ;e VOOZ ' 96 aagwanoN 'AepuoW paeo8 unnol e3e4 411 94310 BuijeoW aelnBaa SOOZ `f I ,raquiaaaQ paAodddV OutlaaW preog unno j SOOZ ` S i i3gw3noN TOWN CLERK' S MONTHLY REPORT A G E R D-A # n q TOWN OF ITHACA, NEW YORK OCTOBER, 2004 I eHE SUPERVISOR: November 15 , 2004 Town Boare Meeting ATTACPI WF 18 - ant to Section 27, Subd 1 of the Town Law, I hereby make the following statement of all fees and moneys received in connection with my office during the month stated above, excepting only such fees and moneys the application ayment of which are otherwise provided for by Law: A1255 6 MARRIAGE LICENSES NO. 04129 TO 04134 105 . 00 6 MISC. COPIES 10 .20 5 ZONING ORDINANCE 66.60 2 TAX SEARCH 15 .00 4 RETURNED CHECK- W&S 20 .00 4 MARRIAGE TRANSCRIPT 70 .00 TOTAL TOWN CLERK FEES 286.80 A2544 DOG LICENSES 718 .68 TOTAL A2544 718.68 B2110 12 BUILDING PERMIT 13680.00 2 BUILDING PERMIT EXTENSIN 100.00 4 ZBA AREA & USE VARIANCES 400.00 TOTAL B2110 29180.00 5 1 SUBDV. REV. INITIAL APL. 100.00 1 SUBDV. REV. FINAL PLAT 140.00 1 SITE PLAN PRELIM. PLAN 23970 .00 TOTAL B2115 39210.00 TOWN CLERK' S MONTHLY REPORT OCTOBER, 2004 page 2 DISBURSEMENTS PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR GENERAL FUND 1 ,005 .48 PAID TO SUPERVISOR FOR PART TOWN FUND 55390.00 PAID TO COUNTY TREASURER FOR DOG LICENSES 144. 32 PAID TO AG & MARKETS FOR DOG LICENSES 36 .00 PAID TO NYS HEALTH DEPT FOR MARRIAGE LICENSES 135 .00 TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS 69710.80 A dl NOVEMBER 1 , 2004 C4)EI u-v c SUPERVISOR STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF TOMPKINS, TOWN OF ITHACA I, TEE-ANN HUNTER, being duly sworn, says that I am the Clerk of the TOWN OF ITHACA that the foregoing is a full and true statement of all Fees and moneys received by me during the month above stated, excepting only such Fees the application and payment of which are otherwise provided for by law. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4 Town Clerk �—' day of r L 20 Notary Public CARRIE WHITMORE Idotary No , OIWH6052877 York Tioga County Commisslon Expires December 2� OWN ENGINEERS REPORT 11 / 15/2004 ings Way Water Improvement Plans and specifications have been completed and an agreement has been reached with the developer of the Westview Subdivision to install the water main with the Town providing the materials. This project has been approved by the Town Board and construction will start in December. . SEWER PROJECTS South woods Subdivision Force Main The Developer has completed the installation of the sewer system for phase I of the development and the pump station and force main are operational . Final transfer of the property to the Town is pending. IAWWTF Phosphorus Removal Project Pile driving for the foundation has been completed and the tank bases have been formed and reinforcing installed. Concrete will be poured when the design mix is approved. Joint Interceptor Sewer Projects f e Town Engineering staff is continuing to work on a capital improvement plan with the City Water and wer Division for improving the interceptor sewers that are jointly used by the Town and City. No major nstruction is planned before 2005 . Town Engineer's Report November 15, 2004 Daniel R. Walker Page 2 11 /10/2004 OWN ENGINEERS REPORT 11 / 15/2004 STORM WATER MANAGEMENT Northeast The engineering staff and engineering interns have been surveying drainage systems in the northeast area of the Town to prepare a watershed evaluation and Stormwater management plan for the area. Development of the drainage plan is scheduled for this winter. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW LINDERMAN CREEK PHASE THREE Linderman Creek Phase Three is nearing completion. The Town Engineering staff is inspecting the site periodically to ensure compliance with the approved site plan. CAYUGA MEDICAL CENTER Site work for the Emergency Room addition has begun with construction of storm water management acilities, utility relocation and new parking lot construction. Engineering staff is inspecting the water and sewer relocation work and are monitoring the sediment and erosion control practices . WEIDERMEIR SUBDIVISION Construction of the driveway improvements and water and sewer facilities is substantially complete on this five-lot subdivision at the intersection of Slaterville Road and Burns Road. Sediment and erosion controls are being monitored. SOUTHWOODS Construction of phase II improvements is underway with Town staff inspecting water main, sewer main and road construction and also monitoring storm water management practices. Town Engineer's Report November 15, 2004 Daniel R. Walker Page 3 11 /10/2004 TOWN OF 9'➢'HACA REPORT OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED FOR THE MONTH OF OCTOBEIg8 fth DA � I1 MONTH YEAR TO DATE ICES PERMIT YEAR # OF PERMITS AMOUNT # AMOUNT AMILY 2004 3 630,000 33 633543536 - - 2003 3 58500 23 4, 1981818 2004 0 0 1 149,700 TWO FAMILY RESIDENCES 2003 0 0 4 8203000 2004 2 63,892 16 403 ,792 RENOVATIONS 2003 5 78,500 22 454,299 2004 0 0 6 207,300 CONVERSIONS OF USE 2003 0 0 4 1192500 2004 3 101 ,400 20 1 ,4533150 ADDITIONS TO FOOTPRINT 2003 4 73,300 16 487,757 2004 0 0 0 0 MULTIPLE RESIDENCES 2003 3 15630,800 5 15854,760 2004 1 43800 9 330783500 BUSINESS 2003 1 32400,000 10 9,250,000 2004 0 0 2 39,000 AGRICULTURAL. 2003 0 0 1 2,500 2004 0 0 0 0 INDUSTRIAL 2003 0 0 0 0 1 Cornell University 2 athletic fields and site work 718,000 1 Cornell University Baker Institute modify animal holding area 18,000 1 Cornell University office renovations at East Hill Plaza 80,000 2004 3 81600 23 55142,462 ED ZONAL 2003 1 18000 15 1 ,058,000 1 Construct carport 2,000 1 Tutelo Park comfort station and park structures 50,000 1 Roof repair 13,300 MISCELLANEOUS 2004 3 651300 28 29206 CONSTRUCTION 2003 3 62,000 39 394,386 TOTAL NUMBER OF 2004 15 1 ,681 ,392 138 173121 ,326 PERMITS ISSUED 2003 20 67009,600 139 1040,020 TOTAL, FEES 2004 115 3,230 138 305510 RECEIVED 12003 20 6,920 139 25,985 Date Prepared: November 1 , 2004 Dani L. Holford October 2004, Page 2 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY ISSUED THIS MONTH - 20 1 . 209 Eldridge Circle - new single-family home with attached garage. 2. 112 Roat Street - bedroom and bath addition. 3 . 309 St. Catherine Circle - replace windows and bridge. 4. 812 Elmira Road - repair main bam. 5. 107 Vera Circle - recreational deck construction. 6. 812 Elmira Road - repair tobacco barn. 7 . 1070 Danby Road (Italian Carry Out) - retail food store/take out - final. 8 . 17 Renwick Heights Road - kitchen remodel. 9. 197 Christopher Lane - replace rear deck. 10. 183 King Road East - 4 bedroom, single-family home with attached garage. 1 1 . 23 Saunders Road - new 3 bedroom, single-family home with attached garage. 12. 1151 Danby Road - garage/accessory building. 13 . 1229 Trumansburg Road (Lakeside) - replace overhead garage door with passage door. 14. 1229 Trumansburg Road (Lakeside) - wood trellis over main entrance. 15 . 1229 Trumansburg Road (Lakeside) - gardens with storage shed. 16. 163 Snyder Hill Road - repair fire damage and convert from two-family to single-family home. 17. 101 Harris B. Dates Drive (CMC) - walking path. 18 . 657 Sheffield Road - new four bedroom home. 19. 9 Pheasant Lane - add windows to south wall of house. 20. 206 Eldridge Circle - single-family residence. TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 176 TOTAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY YEAR TO DATE, 2003 - 198 INQUIRIES/COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED THIS MONTH - l 1 . 118 Pine Tree Road - occupancy - pending 7/1 /05 abatement date. From September 2004: 1 . 104 Compton Road - property maintenance - abated. 2. 112 Compton Road - property maintenance - abated. From August 2004: 1 . 203 Muriel Street- property maintenance - pending. 2. 891 Taughannock Boulevard - building code - pending. 3 . 312 Salem Drive - building code - pending From June 2004: 1 . 1519 Slaterville Road - property maintenance - pending. 2. Rachel Carson Way - E-911 addresses - pending. From May 1995 : 1 . 1152 Danby Road - zoning and building code - Building Permit applied for corrections - issuance of anew permit pending plan revisions. TOTAL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 32 TOTAL COMPLAINTS INVESTIGATED YEAR TO DATE, 2003 - 45 October 2004, Page 3 AL FIELD VISITS THIS MONTH - 88 form Building Code -56 I Law ind Zoning Inspections - 16 Fire Safety - 14 (Businesses) Fire Safety Reinspections - 2 (Businesses) Fire/Emergency Occurrences - 0 Fire Occurrence Reinspections - 0 TOTAL FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 855 TOTAL: FIELD VISITS YEAR TO DATE, 2003 - 830 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS THIS MONTH - 0 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2004 - 4 TOTAL SIGN PERMITS YEAR TO DATE, 2003 - 5 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IMEETING, 4 CASES, AGENDA ATTACHED TOWN OF ITHACA ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS MONDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2004 7 : 00 P.M. By direction of the Chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Public Hearings will be held by the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Ithaca on Monday, October 25 , 2004, in Town Hall, 215 North Tioga Street, Tioga Street Entrance, Ithaca, NY, COMMENCING AT 7 :00 P .M. , on the following matters: APPEAL of John Mount, Appellant, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article VI, Section 270-32(3 ) of Granted the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to construct a two-story detached garage with a building height of 25 feet (only single-story garages allowed) and with a building setback of 15 feet, at 262 Hayts Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 24- 1 -34 . 3 , Agricultural Zone. APPEAL of William Farrell, Appellant, requesting variances from the requirements of Article VIII, Sections 270-60 and 270-62 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to create by subdivision, building lots with lot widths of 100 + to Granted 103 + feet ( 150 feet required at the maximum front yard setback) and with existing residences having side yard building setbacks of 23 + to 26 + feet (40 foot setbacks required). Said subdivision is to take place at 669 Coddington Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcels No. 48- 1 -5 .2, Low Density Residential Zone. APPEAL of Deirdre Anderson, Appellant, Jason Demarest, Agent, requesting a variance from the requirements of Article XXV, Sections 270-205 of the Town of Ithaca Zoning Ordinance, to be permitted to enlarge a non-conforming Granted building/lot with a building addition, located at 20 Renwick Heights Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No . 17-3 -30, Medium Density Residential Zone. Said addition will be located 10 + feet from the front yard property line While the existing home already encroaches within the 25 foot required front yard setback, a variance from the requirements of Article IX, Section 270-71 of said Ordinance may also be requested. APPEAL of Helen DeGraff, Owner, David Mountin, Agent, requesting variances from the requirements of Article IV, Section 270-73 to create, by subdivision, building lots with lot widths being less than the required 100 foot width, on Adjourned lands fronting on Elm St Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28- 1 -28 .22, Medium Density Residential Zone. Lots designated as parcels B, C, D, and F require the variances. Said Zoning Board of Appeals will at said time, 7 :00 p.m. , and said place, hear all persons in support of such matters or objections thereto . Persons may appear by agent or in person. Individuals with visual or hearing impairments or other special needs, as appropriate, will be provided with assistance, as necessary, upon request. Persons desiring assistance must make such a request not less than 48 hours prior to the time of the public hearing. Andrew S . Frost Director of Building and Zoning 273 - 1783 Dated: October 14, 2004 Published: October 18, 2004 File Edt Viers Favorites Tools He l wn of Ithacan , NY zu - - Network/Record Specialist Report November 49 2004 Sept & Oct Web Site Visits ❑ Sept ❑ 6ct 1400 1200 1000 `° 800 y •� tom; ® 600 t 400 200 � � iA 0 ITO Home Gov't Services Information Community Pages Websi to o New pages : Sample Ballot for November 2 General Election "Site of the Month" . . . This month : Hospicare of Tompkins County "Did You Know" . . . section on Homepage that highlights a different page each month. This month : Meeting Minutes Future pages : 2005 Town Budget Ne Ik Installed computer at Highway for Vehicle Inspection equipment. Start Cacheman Inbox Microsoft Outlook Towrl of Ithaca - Micr.., i� o 0 F 1 T� _ 0L TOWN OF ITHACA to zl 4� 215 N. Tioga Street, Ithaca, N.Y. 14850 www.town. ithacamy. us TOWN CLERK 273- 1721 HIGHWAY (Roads, Parks, Trails, Water &Sewer) 273- 1656 ENGINEERING 273- 1747 PLANNING 273-1747 ZONING 273- 1783 FAX (607) 273- 1704 To : Cathy Valentino, Supervisor Town Of Ithaca Sandy Gittelman, Chair Recreation & Human Services Committee Will Burbank, Councilperson Peter Stein, Councilperson Carolyn Grigorov, Councilperson William Lesser, Councilperson From : Mamie Kirchgessner, Recreation and Youth Coordinator October 2004 The Town budget process, which sets policy priorities continued in October but in a more passive way for my position. Supervisor Valentino ask me to consider program options for the community. With the Town' s continued financial commitment for continuing past contracted services and with limited resources this will require a lot of creativity. As planning tool I have been reviewing all of the survey documents as returned. Formal statistical analysis of this information will be completed by a graduate class of Cindy Van Es at Cornell assuring if my impressions of the information are accurate. Approximately 160 completed documents have been photocopied and sent to Professor Van Es for analysis. I have responded to individual requests for information where requested. The scenario of continued financial commitment for continuing past contracted services also appears to impact funding for proposals submitted to the Joint Youth Commission (JYC) . Although this process is not complete new proposals are competing with past program components. I have been actively work with Karen Coleman of the county Youth Services Division to determine how and if new, innovative program proposals can be accommodated given the over all proposed budget cuts . Supervisor Valentino has recommended the JYC prioritize it' s recommendations and Ms. Coleman has been very innovative about trying to determine other funding options for some of the new dynamic programs that fit into the JYC ' s continuum of services concept. No recommendations were considered at the last meeting due to lack of quorum. The meeting was held at Town Hall to acquaint JTC members to our facility. The proposals will be discussed by the JYC at their November meeting, prioritized, and recommendations sent to the Town for action. On October 18 , 2004 I attended a program offered by the Tompkins County Youth Services Department entitled Fight Crime, Invest in Kids. It was a significant presentation by Meredith Wiley, Director NYS Fight Crime, Invest in Kids . Ms. Wiley provided information on programs for youth that are proven to be effective in changing anti-social behaviors in youth therefore have a direct benefit to the broader community. Tompkins Road Work TOWN OF ITHACA Highway Department's MontY�ly Board Report October 2004 for the November 18, 2004 Meeting In October we hot patched various roads around Town to make sure the roads were ready for the winter driving season. We also continued work on our ditching maintenance. Cleaning ditches on Vera Circle, Westview Lane, and Christopher Lane where we also had to change a culvert pipe were completed in October. In October we arranged for our neighboring Towns and ourselves to put down shoulders. We started in the Town of Ulysses, moved to the Town of Enfxeld, then to the Town of Newfield, Town of Danby, Town of Caroline, and then back to the Town of Ithaca. We have coordinated this effort the last several years using our shoulder machine, roller, broom, and equipment trailer with the other Towns providing the trucking. We continue to work with Tompkins County, the Village of Cayuga Heights, and New York State DOT sharing equipment and work whenever possible. e completed the turn around on Chase Lane so that would be ready for the winter snow and we lll no longer need to use Dr. Weitsman's driveway to turn the plow trucks around. e did a couple of tree removals in cooperation with NYSEG that were mutually beneficial. In ctober we completed our semi-annual brush pick up and at the end of October we started gearing up for leaf pickup. We put leaf boxes on some trucks and took the leaf vacuum out to pick up leaves that were on the shoulders of the roads that were giving pedestrians and bicyclists problems. We also removed debris from many of our storm water structures to prepare for the winter season. To prepare for the elections in November, as the Public W�rks Facility is a polling place, we had a streetlight moved closer to the Public Works Facility building and a brighter light put out at the end of the driveway. It can be very dark when coming into the Public Works Facility at night and this change has helped tremendously. Voting machines and signs were put out at the end of October for the November election. Parks Work We completed the top soiling, seeding, fertilizing, and mulching of the ball field at Tutelo Park. Electric and water lines were run underground to the futu:re pavilion site. We installed silt fencing and hydro-seeded the fill site at our future park by Saunders Road on East 'ng Road. A chain was installed to prevent unauthorized fill being dumped at the site. 11 grounds maintenance was performed at all mowing sites. Leaves were removed or blown off ns and trails, all ball fields and new lawns were fertilized and final mowing was competed at all tes. A tree was planted at Hungerford Heights Park for the annual environmental award given by the Towri s Conservation Board to honor the work of Betsy Darlington. Several play structures were sealed and repairs where made to the Grandview Park structure. Water and Sewer Work October was a very busy month for our Engineering Techrticians. They were running everyday with the large number of Dig Safely New York (DSNY) mark outs being requested. The large number of mark out requests was due to the frantic activity of many contractors trying to complete projects before winter set in after a very raining construction season. Our Engineering Techs were also kept busy with the inspection of the South Hi11 Transmission Main. They also assisted Bolton Point and worked with the contractor to finish the relocation of the water and sewer mains for the hospital project. We conducted two inspection tours in October. One was the quarterly inspection of the pressure relief valves (PRV) around Town. There are several that are in pits so we are required to have a confined space entry team at those sites. The other inspection was for equipment in the sewer pump stations. This is conducted in conjunction with ITT Flyght. Together with them we check the condition of our pumps and controls to make sure they are functioning and hopefully to make us aware of any problems that may crop up before it becomes an emergency. We cleaned the sewer lines at East Hill Plaza to help prevent another blockage. We also had emergency water main repairs on Stone Quarry Road and Salem Drive. The underground (water) pump station at Woolf Lane wa� removed and is now ready for sale. Woolf Lane was repaired and that section repaved. November Projects 1. Semi-annual leaf collection—week of November 8, 2004. 2. Continue inspection of utility installation at Southwoods. 3. Continue working at Tutelo Park site. 4. Continue working on William and Hannah Pew Trail. 5. Inspections for South Hill Water Transmission Main. 6. Cleaning ditches. 7. Snow Removal as necessary. � � � �T �� TOWN OF ITHACA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 215 NORTH TIOGA STREET, ITHACA, N.Y.14850 Jonathan Kanter, A.I.C.P. Director of Planning (607) 273-1747 FAX (607) 273-1704 Planning Director's Report for November 15, 2004 Town Board Meeting DEVELOPMENT REVIEW October 19, 2004 Meetin�: The Inn at City Lights, 1319 Mecklenburg Road: The Planning Board granted a Special Permit for The Inn at City Lights located at 1319 Mecklenburg Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1- 26.6, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes expanding within the existing bed and breakfast structure from the current 3 bedrooms to 5 bedrooms. No construction or renovation is proposed to use these additional2 rooms. Colleen Shuler, Owner/Applicant. Mountin 6-Lot Subdivision, Elm Street Extension and West Haven Road: The Planning Board considered an application for Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 6-lot subdivision located on Elm Street Extension and West Haven Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 28-1-28.22, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes subdividing the +/- 33.3-acre parcel into four residential building lots (between +/- 4.0 acre and +/- 5.6 acre lots) along Elm Street Extension and one +/- 1.7-acre narrow strip parcel to be consolidated with the adjacent EcoVillage at Ithaca property. The proposal also includes a+/- 12.6-acre parcel to be donated to the Town of Ithaca for a park and trail site with access from West Haven Road and Elm Street Extension. Helen DeGraff, Owner; David Mountin, Applicant. The Planning Board postponed further action pending receipt of a revised survey with updated information regarding the lots in question and specific information regarding access to the park and trail areas. Country Inn & Suites Hotel, Danby Road and West Kimg Road: The Planning Board considered Preliminary Subdivision Approval, Preliminary Site Plan Approval, and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel located at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37-1-17.1, Business District "C". The proposal involves subdividing off a+/- 2.74-acre parcel from the +/- 4.82-acre parcel for the construction of a 58-room hotel at the intersection. The proposal also includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David Auble, Owner; Trowbridge & Wolf, LLP for Jay Bramhandkar, Applicant; Peter J. Trowbridge, Agent. The applicant requested postponement of the environmental determination until there is a likelihood of full membership of the Board being present at a meeting. Linderman Creek Subdivision and Senior Apartments, Conifer Drive: The Planning Board considered a Sketch Plan for the proposed Linderman Cxeek Subdivision and Senior Apartments located north of the existing Linderman Creek Apartments off of Conifer Drive, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 27-1-13.12 and 27-1-13.162, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes four phases of residential subdivision for 98 single-family residences and patio homes and a 72 unit, three-story senior apartment building. The proposal also includes several new roads, stormwater facilities, and walking trails. Conifer Realty, LLC; Owner/Applicant; John H. Fennessey, Agent. November 2, 2004 Meetin�: Ruoff/Todd 2-Lot Subdivision, 216 & 217 Texas Lane: The Planning Board granted Preliminary and Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed 2-lot subdivision located at 216 and 217 Texas Lane, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No.'s 71-1-3 and 71-1-4, Medium Density Residential Zone. The proposal is to subdivide off a 0.04 +/- acre parcel from 217 Texas Lane to be consolidated with 216 Texas Lane. Michael J. and Marina B. Todd, Owner; Arthur L. and Enid S. Ruoff, Applicant. La Tourelle Country Inn Addition, 1152 Danby Road: The Planning Board granted Preliminary Site Plan Approval and issued an affirmative recommendation to the Town Board regarding a Zoning Amendment for the proposed addition to the La Tourelle Country Inn located at 1152 Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 36-1-4.2, Planned Development Zone No. 1. The proposal involves construction of a three level addition on the west side of the existing Inn which would include 19 new rooms, a spa, an elevator, and an exercise room. The proposal also includes additional parking and new landscaping. An amendment to the Planned Development Zone No. 1 is required to allow the spa. Walter J. Wiggins, Owner/Applicant. Country Inn & Suites Hotel, Danby Road and West King Road: The Planning Board continued consideration of Preliminary Subdivision Approval, Freliminary Site Plan Approval, and a recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval for the proposed Country Inn & Suites Hotel located at the southwest corner of West King Road and Danby Road (NYS Route 96B), Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 37-1-17.1, Business District "C". The proposal involves subdividing off a+/- 2.74-acre parcel from the +/- 4.82-acre parcel for the construction of a 58-room hotel at the intersection. The proposal also includes 61 parking spaces, sidewalks, signage, landscaping, and lighting. David Auble 'I'he Planning Board issued a Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance, granted �reliminary Subdivision Approval and Preliminary Site Plan Approval, and issued an affirmative recommendation to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding Special Approval. Heritage Park Townhouses 7-Lot 5ubdivision, Troy Road and East King Road: The Planning Board considered a Sketch Plan review for the proposed 7-lot subdivision located on the northeast corner of Troy Road and East King Road, Town of Ithaca Tax Parcel No. 49-1�26.2 (portion ofl, Low Density Residential Zone. The proposal includes subdividing the +/- 6.4-acre parcel into 71ots for residential construction. Heritage Park Townhouses, Tnc., Owner/Applicant; George R. Frantz, AICP, Agent. CURRENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECTS/FUNCTIONS The following have been accomplished over the past month. SEQR Reviews for Zoning Board: Two SEQR reviews for the Zoning Board were done since the � , October report: (1) request for height variance to construct a two-story detached garage with a building height of 25 feet (only single-story garages allowed), located at 262 Hayts Road, Agricultural Zone, John Mount, Appellant; and (2) reques� for variance to enlarge a non-conforming building/lot by constructing an addition on an existing home, located at 20 Renwick Heights Road, Medium Density Residential Zone, Deidre Anderson, Appellant. Codes and Ordinances Committee (COC): The Committee met on October 20, 2004, and continued discussions regarding proposed amendments to the telecommunications regulations in the Zoning Code and a proposed draft stream buffer ordinance. �'he next COC meeting is scheduled for November 17, 2004, which will tentatively include continuation of discussions regarding the proposed stream buffer ordinance, draft zoning amendments regarding agricultural activities in certain zones, and draft revised Environmental Review Law. Transportation Committee: The Committee met on October 21, 2004. The agenda included an update on Sheriff patrols in the Town, confirming the statement of responsibilities of the Committee, discussion regarding planning and design considerations for the Hanshaw Road and Coddington Road projects being planned by the County, a brief discussion regarding an updated Official Highway Map, and a review of traffic modeling done by the Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council. The next meeting is scheduled for Thursday, November 18, 2004 at 2:00 p.m. and will include discussions regarding revised goals and objectives in the Transportation Plan, continuation of discussion regarding the updated Official Highway Map, and discussion regarding potential problem intersections that may need additional analysis in the Transportation Plan. ITCTC Policy Committee: The ITCTC (Ithaca-Tompkins County Transportation Council) Policy Committee met on October 19, 2004. The Policy Committee approved a major TIP amendment to regarding the revised Thurston Avenue Bridge project in the City of Ithaca, which is now estimated to cost a total of $8.2 million. The TIP Update will be initiated later this fall. The Planning Committee is scheduled to meet on November 16, 2004. Conservation Board: The Board met on October 7, 20Q4. Discussion items included reports of the various committees, continuation of discussions of the draft revised Environmental Review Law, a proposed project by Richard Fischer regarding the Chimney Swift and the study of the deer population. The next meeting is scheduled for November 4, 2004. MOA Plannin� Coalition: The Coalition met on October 27, 2004 to discuss the City of Ithaca Transportation Demand Management Study. The next meeting of the Coalition is tentatively scheduled for December 1, 2004 at 4:30 p.m. Inter-municipal Trail Committee: The Committee met on October 25, 2004. The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 8, 2004 at 3:00 p.m. and will involve a site visit to the Gateway Bridge and possible trail approaches. Meetin with Cit and Town of Ithaca and Tom kins Count Planners Re ardin West Hill Develonment and Inter-municipal Plannin I�ssues: As a follow-up to the meeting of City, Town and County elected officials, planners from the City, Town and County met for the second time on Thursday, October 21, 2004. Discussions focused an a draft report containing suggested approaches to minimize impacts of future development on West Hill and in the Southwest 3 Development Area/Route 13 corridor. Possible approaches could include park-and-ride lots, transportation demand management, concentrating development, enhanced public transit, making development more friendly for pedestrian and bicycle use, among others. Another meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 8, 2004. American Plannin� Association Upstate Chapter Conference, Rochester, NY: The Director of Planning attended the APA Upstate Chapter Conference from October 27�' through October 29`�, 2004. Workshop subjects included revitalization efforts in the City of Rochester, "place making" in the suburbs (examples of New Urbanist developments), saving open spaces (examples of open space preservation efforts in the greater Rochester area), a presentation by the Rochester Regional Community Design Center (focusing on charette-based community design efforts in the Rochester area), and a tour and presentation of the revdevelopment af the Port of Rochester facilities and the high speed ferry service between Rochester and Toronto. Conference materials are available in the Planning Department. Agricultural Land Preservation Committee: The Committee met on November 1, 2004 to discuss the recently submitted grant application for the PDR program, the relationship between the Agriculture Cornmittee and the Ag. Land Preservation C�mmittee, how to pursue other properties for the PDR program, and other protection options for the 'Cown and farmers. A future meeting will be scheduled around February 2005 (after hearing the results of the grant application). � J . Town En�ineer's Report for 11/15/2004 Town Board Meetin� ENERAL �Disaster Hazard Mitigation Plan The Plan has been submitted to FEMA for final comments. EARTH FILL PERMITS No fill permits were issued in November. WATER PROJECTS SCLIWC Office Addition Construction is moving ahead on the office addition at the Bolton Point Water Plant. Interior framing and sheetrock on the addition are substantially in place and electrical and mechanical systems are all roughed in. The Project is at least 30 days behind schedule. Water SCADA System The Town Engineering staff has been working with Bolton Point staff to complete the first phase of the wireless Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to improve operation of the SCLIWC water system, which includes the Town of Ithaca water system. The radio system has been installed and tested �nd the Bolton Point staff is working on are programming the system. Hill Transmission Main and Storage Tank The Town Engineering staff has completed the Final Design for a proposed transmission main on Ellis Hollow Road from Summerhill Lane to the proposed SCLIWC 3 million-gallon tank on Cornell University Hungerford Hill Road property. The Town Engineer is continuing to work with the Bolton Point General Manager to acquire a permanent easement for the tank site. The project will be constructed under two contracts, one for the water main construction, and one for the Tank construction. The Commission has approved the capital project, which will be presented to the Town Board for approval. South Hill Transmission Main Construction of the Transmission main is on schedule nearing substantial completion with only a short section of water main to be installed between Pennsylvania Ave. and Coddington Road. Coy Glen Pump Station and Water Main � The Pump station is operational. Full utilization of the pump station will not be possible until the remainder of the South Hill Transmission main is completed. - Emergency Power Supply The staff is in the process of installing the appropriate transfer switchgear and generator connections at the Pearsall Place, Coddington Road, Troy Road, Coy Glen Road, Oakwood Lane and Christopher Lane pump